Derailment and fire in Quebec

[highpeak]

The Honourable Virgil Moshansky took something like two years and wrote over 1,100 pages when analysing the crash of a plane at Dryden ON. I keep going back to that because I think it was a meticulous inquiry into all the contributing causes, including regulatory failures, that led to the crash. Volume III is at http://lessonslearned.faa.gov/Fokker/001301.pdf

 

Megantic deserves (and I would argue, the rail industry needs) something similar, because the further you step back, the wider the view and the more factors come into play.

[stock_2007]

Please don't take this the wrong way, I know the derailment and fire was horrific with people being killed, but after 17 pages just what do you all find to talk about?

[Talltim]

Well, for example, until the last day or so it wasn't even clear (to us) what sort of loco caught fire. We aren't going to make any difference to anything by talking about it here, but this is a a rail interest forum

[highpeak]

I think this topic has aroused a lot of interest for a number of reasons. A primary reason is the significant difference between operating practices in North America and the UK, and we are lucky to have people like Dave1905 and Stationmaster to give us insight into those practices, other reasons are the complex interplay between all sorts of factors that led to such a tragedy.

 

I do not for one second believe anybody is looking at this for prurient or sensational reasons. You would have to be an extraordinary person though not to have experienced an emotional reaction when you stop and consider the impact this has had on a community and on individuals like the engineer, Tom Harding, the CEO Ed Burkhardt and so on.

 

This has been a lively but extremely courteous discussion. I've been following threads on a pilot's message board relating to a couple of recent incidents in aviation, and the level of debate has at times been like a school playground!

 

I'll grant you this may not be of much use from a modelling perspective, but I would think it's informative for those with any interest in North American railroading.

[trisonic]

I'm just hoping that something good and useful will come out of the tragedy.....

(No knee jerk reactions, for example).

 

Best, Pete.

[Gerald Henriksen]

MMA has laid off 25% of their Quebec workforce:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/railway-involved-in-lac-megantic-disaster-lays-off-quarter-of-quebec-staff/article13278540/

[dibber25]

To answer Stock 2007 I would say that my reason for taking an interest in this (apart from the fact that I have family and friends in Canada) is that, as a journalist, I want to learn. I've been studying accident reports since the 1960s - Ian Allan Ltd used to receive the printed reports direct from both HMRI and the NTSB. They are usually compelling reading in both understanding how railways work (and sometimes don't work) and in the skill of the investigative work. Back in the 1980s I wrote a feature for Modern Transport magazine, taken from NTSB accident reports. I consider it one of my best pieces of work. Ironically it was about hazchem accidents in the US. Despite 50 years of writing about railways - mostly British - there is still plenty to learn and to understand and what we have going here is a three-way conversation between the UK, Canada and the USA, and I suspect we're all learning from each other. I see things about North American operations that I don't understand or which are completely alien to me. Someone explains the 'why' and the 'how' and I know that the next stuff I write will have a little more depth and a little more authority. It is important, too, that ideas and methods are exchanged - isn't that what this method of communication is all about? The sum of railway knowledge that's available through this and other forums is vast. In addition to what appears on here, I don't suppose I'm alone in reading up a huge amount of information on this and many other accidents. It broadens my understanding, my knowledge of operations, and all too often gives one a real appreciation of human fallibility and how easy it is to make a mistake. To me, there's more interest and more 'value' in these 17 pages than in 105 pages about the Dapol 'Western'.

CHRIS LEIGH

[highpeak]

Further layoffs in Maine: http://www.pressherald.com/news/Some-MMA-workers-in-Maine-may-face-temporary-layoffs.html
 

It's understandable that the company would have to do this, I would think that their revenue is looking pretty meagre and will probably stay that way for a while.

[Gerald Henriksen]

To answer Stock 2007 I would say that my reason for taking an interest in this (apart from the fact that I have family and friends in Canada) is that, as a journalist, I want to learn. 

 

Here's another bit of info for you.

 

I have mentioned that one of the issues the railways over here have is paying property tax, which thus encourages them to do whatever they can to pay as little as possible.

 

Well, I can actually give an example with an amount.

 

When CP abandoned what remained of the Owen Sound sub in 2000, the town of Orangeville bought the line as they had several industries that relied on it.

 

Thus was born the Orangeville-Brampton Railway, which despite its name actually runs from Orangeville to Mississauga (Streetsville) for a distance of 55km.  This shortline is entirely single track (over the years it has averaged a train to and from Streetsville about twice a week, with occasional tourist trains) and a handful of sidings/customers along its length.

 

In 2008 the town of Orangville decided they could no longer afford to run a railway, and they found a company willing to buy it, though the deal fell through last fall (the company in question was attempting to open a massive aggregate quarry north of Orangeville, community opposition managed to kill it).

 

The reason for the attempted sale?  That 55km single track railway has to pay $500,000 a year in property taxes, and the town of Orangeville has been paying that because the railway can't afford to.

 

http://www.citizen.on.ca/news/2008-04-17/front_page/002.html

Edited July 18, 2013 by Gerald Henriksen

[davknigh]

Here's another bit of info for you.

 

I have mentioned that one of the issues the railways over here have is paying property tax, which thus encourages them to do whatever they can to pay as little as possible.

 

Well, I can actually give an example with an amount.

 

When CP abandoned what remained of the Owen Sound sub in 2000, the town of Orangeville bought the line as they had several industries that relied on it.

 

Thus was born the Orangeville-Brampton Railway, which despite its name actually runs from Orangeville to Mississauga (Streetsville) for a distance of 55km.  This shortline is entirely single track (over the years it has averaged a train to and from Streetsville about twice a week, with occasional tourist trains) and a handful of sidings/customers along its length.

 

In 2008 the town of Orangville decided they could no longer afford to run a railway, and they found a company willing to buy it, though the deal fell through last fall (the company in question was attempting to open a massive aggregate quarry north of Orangeville, community opposition managed to kill it).

 

The reason for the attempted sale?  That 55km single track railway has to pay $500,000 a year in property taxes, and the town of Orangeville has been paying that because the railway can't afford to.

 

http://www.citizen.on.ca/news/2008-04-17/front_page/002.html

 

An interesting sidebar to this comes up when trucks and the 'Just In Time' maunufacturing process get brought into the picture. The trucking industry in Ontario, and I imagine a fair few other places as well, is howling for more highways to be built so that they will encounter fewer delays. This effectively turns public highways into rolling warehouses at taxpayer expense. Meanwhile rail lines are underutilized- go figure...

 

Cheers,

 

David

[highpeak]

If the Moosehead Subdivision were entirely within the state of Maine you might be able to see a future where the state owned the rails and selected an operator. That's what happened to quite a bit of mileage that MM&A found unremunerative.

Unfortunately I don't think there are too many Maine-based shippers on the Moosehead sub. Irving oil would probably like to see it continue because it is probably the most direct route, at least for Bakken crude that originates on the CP. And from the news stories, there's at least one big shipper (relative terms here) in Megantic that needs the connection, presumably westbound.

If (and that's an if of an unknown size at the moment) MM&A is financially incapable of continuing, you would think that JD Irving might be interested in expanding through one of their subsidiaries, they did scoop up some of the Aroostook lines that MM&A relinquished (probably to the chagrin on Rail World who did tender to be the designated operator after selling the track to the state).

Whether the Province of Quebec would do what Maine might do, whether some sort of cross-border cooperation is possible (the economies of places like Megantic, Jackman, Brownville Jct etc really transcend national boundaries somewhat like Ozexpatriot pointed out in the Pacific Northwest a lot of posts ago) all remains to be seen.

From a modelling perspective, if you are modelling a make-believe US operation and you can't come up with a back story, well....

[Ozexpatriate]

This effectively turns public highways into rolling warehouses at taxpayer expense. Meanwhile rail lines are underutilized- go figure...

And has been the case in the US ever since the Eisenhower administration authorized the Interstate Highway system. It wasn't just airplanes that killed passenger trains in the US.

 

Fortunately there are still massive economies of scale in long-haul unit train freight in the US where railroads can compete even with the burden of owning the infrastructure.

 

The Motorways have done their part to destroy freight by rail in the UK.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Ozexpatriate

[dibber25]

The Motorways have done their part to destroy freight by rail in the UK.

 

.....and that simple fact has led to the roads that feed the motorways being dreadfully overburdened. I live on the A605, a one lane each way rural road. The route for trucks between the Midlands and the east and north-east is intended to be the A14 and the A1 (both dual-lane divided highways) and the A1M section upgraded to motorway standard. They form two sides of a triangle. The problem is that the A605 forms the third side of that triangle and enables the trucks to cut off a 20 or 30 mile 'corner'. So a road that was never intended or engineered to take that kind of traffic has a constant stream of artics. (too much traffic on a route not engineered for it......sound familiar?) The real irony is that I live in an old station, and two miles of the A605 here is actually ON the route of a double-track railway (the rest of the railway paralleled the road). The A14 is also partly built on a former rail route.

[Budgie]

An interesting sidebar to this comes up when trucks and the 'Just In Time' maunufacturing process get brought into the picture. The trucking industry in Ontario, and I imagine a fair few other places as well, is howling for more highways to be built so that they will encounter fewer delays. This effectively turns public highways into rolling warehouses at taxpayer expense. Meanwhile rail lines are underutilized- go figure...

So the province builds the highways, and charges the trucks the full economic price for using them. Or rather the province promises to build the highways, and threatens/promises to charge the trucks the full economic price for using them.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Budgie

[Budgie]

The Motorways have done their part to destroy freight by rail in the UK.

 

.....and that simple fact has led to the roads that feed the motorways being dreadfully overburdened. I live on the A605, a one lane each way rural road. The route for trucks between the Midlands and the east and north-east is intended to be the A14 and the A1 (both dual-lane divided highways) and the A1M section upgraded to motorway standard. They form two sides of a triangle. The problem is that the A605 forms the third side of that triangle and enables the trucks to cut off a 20 or 30 mile 'corner'. So a road that was never intended or engineered to take that kind of traffic has a constant stream of artics. (too much traffic on a route not engineered for it......sound familiar?) The real irony is that I live in an old station, and two miles of the A605 here is actually ON the route of a double-track railway (the rest of the railway paralleled the road). The A14 is also partly built on a former rail route.

Of course "they" (the highways agency) could reduce the frequency with which they dig up the A605 for repair as part of the cuts that this country is currently going through. If the road I live on is only repaired once every twenty years, why shouldn't the A605 be?

[dibber25]

Of course "they" (the highways agency) could reduce the frequency with which they dig up the A605 for repair as part of the cuts that this country is currently going through. If the road I live on is only repaired once every twenty years, why shouldn't the A605 be?

Given the traffic that uses it, the A605 would fall to bits in 20 years! The potholes after each winter require careful negotiation to avoid damaging your car. I have two very quiet weekends ahead as it is to be completely closed for repairs, for the second time in two years. Sorry this is  off topic.

[JT42CWRDriver]

Interesting summary at: http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2013/07/na0713_lac-magentic_c-rjweb2400f.jpg

 

Apologies if it's been mentioned before.

 

Peter.

[Ozexpatriate]

Apologies if it's been mentioned before.

It has, but no matter. It's an excellent graphic with very few omissions and quite thorough. The caboose behind the lead locomotive (for RC control) is one.

[Gerald Henriksen]

CN and CP are making changes to their safety rules:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/07/18/business-cp-cn-rules.html

[Gerald Henriksen]

4 more bodies found, bringing the official count to 42.

 

36 of the rail cars have been removed from the scene.

 

Irving Oil and Dakota Holdings have been added to the lawsuit:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/07/18/business-lac-megantic-suit.html

[Ozexpatriate]

Irving Oil and Dakota Holdings have been added to the lawsuit:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/07/18/business-lac-megantic-suit.html

That was inevitable.

[Gerald Henriksen]

President Obama has expressed his condolences, both in a phone call to they Mayor of Lac-Megantic and in a letter to the Canadian Prime Minister (letter in sidebar of this article):

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/07/18/quebec-lac-megantic-relief-fund-charity.html

[Budgie]

Given the traffic that uses it, the A605 would fall to bits in 20 years!

That's the whole point. Perhaps it might then force haulage companies to think about how they should pay to keep the infrastructure their lorries damage in good condition. I don't see why the average taxpayer should continue to subsidise them.

[Glorious NSE]

We're getting well off topic here (although i've also suffered the A605!)...

 

I don't see why the average taxpayer should continue to subsidise them.

 

They would likely point out that the average taxpayer likes to (for instance) be able to buy things when they visit shops, things which for the most part get there via a truck...a dramatic rise in the costs for the hauliers would be passed on to their customers in the retail trade, that rise in costs to the retail trade would then simply become a rise in the cost of things we buy - it wouldn't be 'subsidising it', but we'd still end up paying...

 

Back to topic - Interesting that CN and CP have both pre-empted any reccomendations by moving beyond 'expected industry practice'.

[davknigh]

The link between trucking and railways is less tenuous than you may think. The 'one man, one vehicle' model for truckers is the new model for those cutting costs in the railways except it's 'one man one train' with lower wages as an added benefit- for the owners. MM&A was following this idea no doubt with encouragement from Irving who don't have the shiniest reputation in labour circles.

 

Cheers,

 

David