Derailment in Veazie 07-03-2013

Tim Mullins wrote:Pan Am continues to push it's luck with deferred maintenance...What just happened in Canada,even though we don't know the cause, could happen on P/A with the same horrible result....It will unfortunately catch up with them.

newpylong wrote:If history is to be believed it should have happened already. Their maintenance has left much to be desired for years and they haven't had a catastrophic derailment. At 10 mph the likelihood is low.

Even the best-maintained railroads can have horrible disasters. Typically the biggest and most-horrific rail disasters have happened on big high-speed heavy-duty mainlines operated by Class I roads.

Yes they do but the subject was on Pan Am...Thats why I mentioned it....The big roads put alot of money into track and equipment thus their trains run faster...P/A has a make do with what you have policy and thats what bothers me...They have been very fortunately not to have a disaster....It also bothers me when those big roads do have an accident because of the amount of money and work effort they put into their equipment...Hauling freight is their bread and butter....Speeds are important because time is money to them.
Fink (SR.) was quoted in an article that "he did'nt mind doing 10 and 25 mph " and because of that you do'nt have to spend money on track work and engines so when you are going slow and something does happen, you minimize the amount of damage

There must be a point at which case it makes more financial sense to invest enough to bring speeds up and maintain as such. If not, every other railroad in the US would be doing it, but they aren't. The Class I's move a lot of freight and as such want the higher speeds for a more fluid system. You have to wonder what those numbers are and how far Pan Am is away from that. Obviously some bean counter up the street from me in N. Billerica decided years ago it was cheaper to clean up messes than maintain. Either there isn't as much money to be made and they are barely getting by or their business logic defies common sense. It is mindboggling to see a 40 mph railroad go back to 10 and 25 within 3 years after someone else pumped $87 million into the property, much of that into track.

newpylong wrote:There must be a point at which case it makes more financial sense to invest enough to bring speeds up and maintain as such. If not, every other railroad in the US would be doing it, but they aren't. The Class I's move a lot of freight and as such want the higher speeds for a more fluid system. You have to wonder what those numbers are and how far Pan Am is away from that. Obviously some bean counter up the street from me in N. Billerica decided years ago it was cheaper to clean up messes than maintain. Either there isn't as much money to be made and they are barely getting by or their business logic defies common sense. It is mindboggling to see a 40 mph railroad go back to 10 and 25 within 3 years after someone else pumped $87 million into the property, much of that into track.

When's the last time you visited this spot of the RR? It was in surprisingly good shape. Good ties, ballast and CWR.

What is "this spot"? I am referring to all of Pan Am, more specifically Pan Am Southern, arguably going off topic to make a point.

I can make out the 424 milepost sign from my old bedroom window and I am there quite often.

This derailment happened in Veazie. (Yes, I know I'm stating the obvious.)

The track couldn't be that good, I got 10 mph from MP48 to Waterworks MP 56.50 in the last speedo I have. Veazie is 54-56

newpylong wrote:The track couldn't be that good, I got 10 mph from MP48 to Waterworks MP 56.50 in the last speedo I have. Veazie is 54-56

The current speedo says the same but that stretch is good for 25. Point is don't pass judgment on the track you don't regularly visit There are other things that could have occurred to cause this derailment (Which now seems minor compared to recent nearby events...)

No offense, but are you in the track department and have working knowledge of this section of track to be able to make that call? Have you walked the track with a gauge bar or seen the defect reports? If it was 10 mph, there is a reason it was 10 mph, and those reasons aren't always visible to the naked eye. Sometimes the section foreman will forget to raise the speeds after a defect is fixed, but that is usually caught within days and are rare cases. This stretch has been 10 for the last decade.

Both the current and yesterday's speedo (#190 and 189 respectively) actually show 5 mph MP 55 to 56, I assume account of the derailment.

Update: this derailment was caused by track. Big surprise.

newpylong wrote:No offense, but are you in the track department and have working knowledge of this section of track to be able to make that call? Have you walked the track with a gauge bar or seen the defect reports? If it was 10 mph, there is a reason it was 10 mph, and those reasons aren't always visible to the naked eye. Sometimes the section foreman will forget to raise the speeds after a defect is fixed, but that is usually caught within days and are rare cases. This stretch has been 10 for the last decade.

Both the current and yesterday's speedo (#190 and 189 respectively) actually show 5 mph MP 55 to 56, I assume account of the derailment.

I have done none of these things.