Tied-Down Trains (was: unattended)

My road did tie up trains when the crew was going to expire ("die") under Hours of Service; however those train's lading was largely comprised of agricultural products - not exactly HAZMAT (grain: if something derails, well; you just sweep it up).

However I've been gone from the railroad industry for over thirty one years, and so much more of what the traffic handled is comprised of HAZMAT.

In view of the events at Megantic that have been publicly disclosed, roads will obviously be taking a closer look at the practice as it prevails today. My question is simple; to what extent is this practice prevalent today.

Every day.....

and every night..

Maybe a little more comment: There's a lot involved in the practice of tie-down trains. Manpower and spacing are probably two of the bigger considerations. Most trains have a few HAZMAT cars. Some are basically HAZMAT trains and, as a result, railroads have an incentive for those trains to get over the road. KEY trains get extra precautions, but I doubt that the key train status prevents them from being tied down. I would say that crew availability is the prime reason.

I would also say that crude oil is not a product we consider exactly a dangerous commodity. Of course, the incident in Canada might change that perception, although it is amazing to me the lack of attention that it has received.

So, we still tie down trains, and they get left unattended for hours,.... days. Sometimes, there are HAZMATs involved, some times not. I bet the practice gets more attention now.

Three years ago I was getting on a train with my crew on a railroad in New Mexico. The train had sat overnight in the yard, tied down with the power shut down.

I noticed a county sheriff car parked by my ground crew, a young female deputy asking questions. I called down from the cab and asked what the problem was.

"I got a call to go investigate an abandoned train in the railroad yard", she said.

"It's a railroad yard," I replied. "What would you expect to find here?"

I knew some of the people in the sheriff's department who were jokers who would send a rookie on a fool's errand.
"Who sent you here?" I asked. "Was it xxxx, or xxxx?"

She wouldn't say who sent her. Embarrassed, she said,"well, I had to go check it out."

Les

There is little doubt that the July 6 runaway incident at Megantic QC will result in changes to Rule Books and any other instructions regarding tying down trains.

Discussions over at topics related to Megantic have established that the runaway train was tied down in accordance with Rules, but obviously those Rules were, indeed, weak.

I'm wondering what changes, if any, do the participants here, especially those who either do or have done 'this stuff for a living', believe will move forth.

The immediate, knee-jerk reaction will be to shut down the railroad. This has already been done. That oughta teach 'em.

Obviously, the rule to tie sufficient handbrakes to prevent the equipment from rolling was not followed.

But: how can you prevent a passer-by from knocking off the brakes, just to see what would happen? Lockable handbrakes? Portable derails that can be locked to the track?

Cost of those options would be time and money spent modifying the cars; cost and portability of lockable derails; personal injury accidents resulting from carrying and setting these derails; derailments from inadvertently shoving cars over them.

Les

Looks like the first reaction is to not leave trains "unattended" or to have a procedure in place to secure unattended trains by adding on paperwork. But, only for "key" trains. "Key" trains, for the uninformed, basically is a train having a certain number and type of haz mat cars. Ther should not be any problems as long as things are running smoothly, trains get over the road, and there's plenty of manpower,

Adding on paperwork will only result in....more paperwork.

Paperwork will not prevent any accident, it will only aid in assigning blame after the accident. Too often, that is the whole point.

Les

Desertdweller wrote:Three years ago I was getting on a train with my crew on a railroad in New Mexico. The train had sat overnight in the yard, tied down with the power shut down.

I noticed a county sheriff car parked by my ground crew, a young female deputy asking questions. I called down from the cab and asked what the problem was.

"I got a call to go investigate an abandoned train in the railroad yard", she said.

"It's a railroad yard," I replied. "What would you expect to find here?"

I knew some of the people in the sheriff's department who were jokers who would send a rookie on a fool's errand.
"Who sent you here?" I asked. "Was it xxxx, or xxxx?"

She wouldn't say who sent her. Embarrassed, she said,"well, I had to go check it out."

Les

Thats hilarious.

With my understanding of airbrakes, I'm a bit puzzled at what happened, if someone would like to help me out.

I thought, air brakes were fail safe because to be released, they need air in the system. So, why did the engineer have an engine running to keep the air brakes on? Did he need to keep air in the main res?

Also, I think a big part of it is the fact that it was a one man crew. Running a train puts a lot on a mans noggin. I really think he needed a conductor/brakeman to worry about handbrakes.

GE45tonner wrote:With my understanding of airbrakes, I'm a bit puzzled at what happened, if someone would like to help me out.

I thought, air brakes were fail safe because to be released, they need air in the system. So, why did the engineer have an engine running to keep the air brakes on? Did he need to keep air in the main res?

Also, I think a big part of it is the fact that it was a one man crew. Running a train puts a lot on a mans noggin. I really think he needed a conductor/brakeman to worry about handbrakes.

The air will bleed off if the engine is not running to keep the compressor going and the system charged, if the air bleeds off.. Brakes release, train rolls away.

So it's not in common practice to let the res empty and wait to charge? I know it can take awhile but still...

GE45,

Yes, that is how it is supposed to work. The cars are cut off with the train line open. The train line pressure exhausts and the brakes apply. Sufficient hand brakes are then tied to prevent rolling. A better method is to tie the hand brakes before the cars are cut off, with the engine brakes released, too, to ensure the hand brakes are sufficient to hold everything. This latter method is required in some yards where a cut of cars may roll due to grade.

The key is, if you apply hand brakes with train brakes applied, you are estimating how many you need to prevent rolling. Some railroads have a set number of brakes in relation to number of cars left standing.

The problem is, it is too easy to release hand brakes. It is possible to release hand brakes on many cars without even climbing on them. It is also easy to bleed off air from cars with air brakes set. Cars are designed this way so they can be quickly handled by ground men in yard operations. It makes them vulnerable to passersby wishing to do mischief.

Les

Thanks for clearing that up guys.