Large Scale Central

CN and CP railways snippets

It is quite unreal … another day, another CN derailment and fire in Northern Ontario. Approx 23 miles from last month’s derailment.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cn-train-with-crude-oil-derails-catches-fire-in-northern-ontario/article23350695/

Humm, wonder what’s going on with the CN lately? After all is said and done, I wonder how many of these derailments are considered ‘human factor’ derailments? CN is starting to sound like the MILW in the years before MILW went belly up. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)

Is the communications person at CN a bit of a twit(ter)? Good thing the press keeps tabs.

http://www.timminstimes.com/2015/03/08/cns-only-statement-on-train-wreck-is-twitting

CN is benefiting from Hunter’s cuts in maintenance crews and spending…Think of how much they save by not running trains!

We who ‘enjoyed’ CN taking over the BC Rail line got to see at least three derailments within months of his ‘lease’ of BC Rail ten years ago, cutting crews and experience does save money in not running trains…minor fines and pollution are just the cost of doing business aren’t they?

Myron Claridge said:

CN is benefiting from Hunter’s cuts in maintenance crews and spending…Think of how much they save by not running trains!

We who ‘enjoyed’ CN taking over the BC Rail line got to see at least three derailments within months of his ‘lease’ of BC Rail ten years ago, cutting crews and experience does save money in not running trains…minor fines and pollution are just the cost of doing business aren’t they?

Yeeees, it’s a sad state of affairs. If “the Hunter” ever gets to put his crazy scheme of “100% traffic fullfillment operated by management crews” in case of a work stoppage into action - I sincerly hope he retires before then! - it could be a real big disaster.

(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-yell.gif)(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-yell.gif)

How the shippers see the matter

.

http://www.leaderpost.com/business/Railway+cost+review+needed+says+report/10879510/story.html

And then there are the many derailments and incedents that have people doing some calculations of actual and projected costs

.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/03/11/cost-of-another-rail-catastrophe-could-outstrip-compensation-fund.html

The fire is out and a bypass around the site is to be built

.

http://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=567114

Along the “They won’t tell us, so we do our own checking” line — what is in those tanker cars?

.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Toxic+trains+pose+risk+White+Rock+Crescent+Beach/10878326/story.html

With all of these oil train derailments, a comment was raised by a rail that train handling techniques have changed over the years. Instead of being able to use the train brakes, many of the class I’s are encouraging the use of dynamics and throttle modulation, thus potentionally creating more slack, more frequently in the train line, thus leading to more sloshing of liquids in tankcars. I’ll have to find the article but it’s an interesting dynamic to look at. This is my opinion as engineer who was taught how to run with air only.

Edit. Here’s the article. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/09/exploding-trains-and-crude-oil/

WOW! Now that is a very interesting link! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)

When I learned how to run in 2005, I was at the end of the ‘airbrake era’ and the beginning of the ‘only use dynamics’. The reason that Class I’s want to use dynamics more than air is a simple cost savings, less wear and tear on brake shoes, etc. But dynamic brakes produce a whole different set of problems from simple train control (slack runs in and out a lot more!), increased stress on rail and subroadbed structures, etc. But the Class I’s (at least BNSF) saw it as ‘fuel savings’. They didn’t care if you go slammed by slack, or knuckles were broken as long as you didn’t power and stretch brake. Power braking being in throttle about notch 4, with a minimum set, Stretch braking, below notch 4, with a minimum set. These new hogheads aren’t even given the opportunity to learn how to properly handle a train with air alone. I was taught how to bring a 10,000 ton train down a 2.2% grade without dynamics. You power brake! It’s simple, but it takes skills that aren’t taught. A 10,000 ton stack train has a totally different set up of in-train forces than say a 10,000 train of tankcars. I never had the opportunity to run a tank train, but I spotted plenty of tank cars in the yard. When you switch, you don’t use air. At times with only a handful of full Corn Syrup cars, the slack and sloshing of the cars could drag a SW1500 backwards after you can to a complete stop. Now times that by a bigger tank car, and 100+ cars and I think it’s a recipe for disaster!

Someone with a PhD in fluid dynamics needs to take this and make a study up! It sure would be interesting to find out what the scientific results of these two different methods of train handling produce!

ANOTHER ONE…

CN has had another derailment. This time on the Rivers Sub, just West of “Winterpeg”. It happened around 18:00 on Wednesday March 11th. So far no information on how bad it is, or what type of train.

UPDATE: This latest derailment is at Gregg Manitoba, about 50km East of Brandon Manitoba…

Fr.Fred

Time will tell how much good the new standards will do. With the tank car producers being fully booked for a long time it will be interesting to see how and when these new standards actually gain some traction (pun fully intended).

http://www.bnn.ca/News/2015/3/12/Canadian-rail-tankers-to-face-tougher-safety-requirements.aspx

In the wishful thinking category …

.

http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/322217539.shtml

And this one could be called “show me” on a weekly basis.

.

http://www.world-grain.com/articles/news_home/World_Grain_News/2015/03/NGFA_supports_proposal_to_make.aspx?ID={6B059253-57FB-4FFB-9A83-0642A027BD51}&cck=1

This is a discussion in a few communities, not just Sudbury, Ont.

http://www.thesudburystar.com/2015/03/14/sudbury-pov-time-to-move-tracks-from-the-downtown

And how do they propose to move the railroad? I can’t imagine the environmental impact statements of trying to move a mainline? That would take years and years…

Craig Townsend said:

And how do they propose to move the railroad? I can’t imagine the environmental impact statements of trying to move a mainline? That would take years and years…

Quite right, but that isn’t a consideration when these “projects/wishes” are floated.(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-sealed.gif)

This showed up under the CP rubric, nice to see that checking happens and results are reported.

http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/230824/latest-inspection-turns-up-railroad-tanker-defects/