home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]

 Message 2989 
 Wolfgang Keller to All 
 Re: Lac Megantic -- my thoughts... 
 22 Aug 14 13:34:14 
 
From: feliphil@gmx.net

> The following is excerpted from the report, pages 1 and 2:
> [[ At around 2250, the train arrived at Nantes, was brought
> to a stop using the automatic brakes, and was parked for the
> night on a descending grade on the main track.

You never do that.

*NEVER*.

*N-E-V-E-R*.

No catch points, descending track - that means *asking* for disaster.

No, in fact it means *begging* for disaster. On your knees.

What criminally irresponsible moron allowed that kind of operating
procedure?

Examples for parked rail vehicles, whether individual or groups
of waggons, locomotives or entire trainsets that "run away on their own"
are *legion*. Even vehicles with automatic spring-applied parking
brakes, such as EMUs do it all the time. It happens everywhere (where
there are railways with sloped tracks) each and every year.

Why do they *refuse* to learn?

> Critical factor that caused the disaster:
> AFTER CONDUCTING THE "RELEASE TEST" (even though it was not
> properly tested), THE ENGINEMAN LEFT THE AUTOMATIC AIR BRAKE
> (TRAIN AIR BRAKES) IN THE "RELEASE" POSITION.
> HE NEVER RE-APPLIED THE TRAIN AIR BRAKES USING THE AUTOMATIC
> BRAKE VALVE BEFORE HE LEFT THE TRAIN.
> (I will delve more into this below)

That's not a *root* cause analysis. That barely scratches at the bark
of the fault tree.

The critical factor was *way* before that.

The point of *safe* operating procedures is exactly to *avoid* such
situations where simple trivial mistakes by individual operators can
cause havoc.

You *never* make the operator in the field the *last* safety barrier.

> The question is:
> Why didn't he re-apply them?

Because humans do make mistakes. Especially at the end of their working
shift, when they're tired and exhausted.

Again: That's what safe operating procedures are there for. For
providing safety barriers. That are *independent* (as far as
possible) from simple mistakes by operators.

> But again, a terrible mistake.

Disaster manufactured by managers.

By eliminating safety barriers.

As *always*.

And the poor guy in the field will not only be left with that huge load
of guilt on his conscience, but will also get slaughetered as a
scapegoat in court.

While the actually responsible pondscum will take their golden
parachute and get away with it.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Reliability and safety engineer by education.

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]

(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca