Canadian Railroads > CP seeks relief from hand brake Order

The Globe and Mail newspaper reports
that CP is seeking relief from the hand brake Order issued by the Minister of Transport
after the tragic runaway of a CP train on February 4.

The Globe and Mail reports that at a recent meeting convened by Transport Canada,
which included other railway companies, railway unions and others,
"CP presented alternative measures to the time-consuming task of manually setting handbrakes."

Transport Canada was unmoved.
“The ministerial order will stay in place at least until the TSB’s investigation is complete
and we get all the answers needed to inform next steps,” said Delphine Denis,
spokeswoman for Mr. Garneau (Minister of Transport).

The Globe and Mail did not have details of CP's alternatives,
and CP would not comment.

The Globe and Mail reports that the Ministerial Order
requires that a "sufficient" number of hand brakes be applied
to a train stopped in emergency on a mountain grade.
The minimum number of handbrakes is identical to the number required for unattended equipment,
as given by the Canadian Rail Operating Rules,
shown on page 46 at the link below.

https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/railsafety/CROR_English_May_18_2018_Web_Services.pdf

For example,
a 15,000 trailing ton train, on a 2.2 % grade, would require hand brakes on a minimum of 98 cars.


The Globe and Mail article is behind a pay wall.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-canadian-pacific-railway-resists-transport-canada-handbrake-orders/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/19 19:26 by Marcus.

"Sufficient number of hand brakes" seems like an easy hurdle.

Set them, test them, if they hold, fine. If not, tie a few more.

But it they slip later, GOTCHA.

Posted from Android

On a similar size grain train going down the Tehachapi mountains BNSF use a minimum of 9 locomotives in a 4x3x2 configuration to safely get this monster over the road. So CP common sense should tell you 3 locomotives ain't getting it done safely.

Posted from Android

All I can say is "WOW!"....  I guess the death of three employees on a runaway train on a steep mountain grade isn't enough to realize that they need to do something different to keep it happening again.

For a start, I'd say make sure the damn equipment and train is operating properly before it gets to the mountains (ie not having air troubles like this one did even earlier in its trip)!!!  And how about not trying to maximize every thing to the point of failure (including the crews).  Those alone would cut down on the number of times trains have problems and have to tie their trains down on a severe mountain grade.

Requiring the crew to remain aboard until the recrew on mountain grades would be a plus.

These folks would prefer to pull a two man crew (maybe $150) and put millions of dollars at risk.

Cheap. Stupid.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Requiring the crew to remain aboard until the
> recrew on mountain grades would be a plus.
>
> These folks would prefer to pull a two man crew
> (maybe $150) and put millions of dollars at risk.
>
> Cheap. Stupid.

I would think that the crew being relieved would have been at least present  since the crew van bringing the relief crew is probably the same one to transport the relieved crew to Field.

SOO6617 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Requiring the crew to remain aboard until the
> > recrew on mountain grades would be a plus.
> >
> > These folks would prefer to pull a two man crew
> > (maybe $150) and put millions of dollars at
> risk.
> >
> > Cheap. Stupid.
>
> I would think that the crew being relieved would
> have been at least present  since the crew van
> bringing the relief crew is probably the same one
> to transport the relieved crew to Field.

Wasn't there a two hour gap in the fatal Spiral Tunnel derailment recrew?

Posted from Android

spwolfmtn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All I can say is "WOW!"....  I guess the death of
> three employees on a runaway train on a steep
> mountain grade isn't enough to realize that they
> need to do something different to keep it
> happening again.

That's what happens when all the shots are being called by some soul-less hedge fund.

 

Will MacKenzie
Dundas, ON

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Sufficient number of hand brakes" seems like an
> easy hurdle.
>
> Set them, test them, if they hold, fine. If not,
> tie a few more.
>
> But it they slip later, GOTCHA.
>
> Posted from Android

Not possible for trains in emergency.

portlander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Sufficient number of hand brakes" seems like
> an
> > easy hurdle.
> >
> > Set them, test them, if they hold, fine. If
> not,
> > tie a few more.
> >
> > But it they slip later, GOTCHA.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Not possible for trains in emergency.

Right. But that's not what the rule covers.

I'm going to wait for the TSB report to attempt to understand why Partridge siding was used as a change off location.

Difficult to access from the nearby highway, Partridge is also all on a steep downgrade.

There are many locations east of there where there are good highway access, and the engine brakes are enough to hold the train.
 
It has been reported that the train had been experiencing "mechanical problems" between Calgary and Partridge, and the train had taken at least 10 hours to cover a run which usually takes six.

Another crew out in the territory noted that talk of recrewing the train was first mentioned around Banff, roughly half way from Calgary to Field.

Who chose Partridge as the change off location and why?

A possible guess. West of Lake Louise, whatever had been causing delays to this train happened again and it became apparent that the train could not attain Field before the crew hours expired.  Even so, there were still locations to recrew the train without having to secure many handbrakes or retainers. Ideally, a crew change off at the summit of the Kicking Horse Pass would have allowed the train to fully recover the air brake system before descending the hill.

There was eastbound traffic approaching Field and it was planned the trains would meet at Partridge.

 

I saw posted somewhere, and it may have been speculation, that the train was placed in emergency for reaching 5 mph over the speed limit, in accordance with the special instructions for Field Hill. That explains why the train was sitting there in emergency, but not why the hand brakes weren't tied.

My speculation is that following that emergency application, the expiring crew was unable to recover the air, and used that time to set retainers. Somewhere around that time it was decided to trade off where the train sat, rather than a normal location. Due to the cold the air leaked out of the brake cylinders, in spite of the retainers, causing the train to start rolling. The new crew (who perished) would have had a half mile to realize the train was moving before entering the upper Spiral tunnel. By the time they exited the tunnel they were too fast to jump. I presume the engineer did everything he could to recover the air and get some DB under it, but even if they had closed the angle cock to the train (assuming remarkable situational awareness that DB was the only hope with a zero psi brake pipe) it probably would have taken too long for the DB to have significant effect.

I'm not a railroader, so anyone with more airbrake knowledge is more than welcome to clarify or rebut my speculation.

Posted from Android

Darren Boes
Lethbridge, AB
Southern Alberta Railfan

At least 40 years ago, a heavy train ran away from Partridge. The engineer realized that it was out of control, and told the other crew members to jump while the train was still moving slowly.

Somehow, he managed to get the train stopped between the spirals without any cars derailing.

None of the crew that had jumped were injured and in time, they walked downhill via the old hobo trails and after tying down the train and pumping off the brakes, they continued down to Field.

I was on a freight switching in Field yard, and got to hear the dialogue on the radio.

Sounds like he had functional dynamics at least, and the curve resistance and lesser grade within the tunnel was enough to get stopped. The brothers on February 4 unfortunately didn't have that option because of the weather.

Posted from Android

Darren Boes
Lethbridge, AB
Southern Alberta Railfan

eminence_grise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm going to wait for the TSB report to attempt to
> understand why Partridge siding was used as a
> change off location.
>
> Difficult to access from the nearby highway,
> Partridge is also all on a steep downgrade.

Do modern-day dispatchers know any thing like that? Is it even nominally required even if not practiced?

TAW

TAW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Do modern-day dispatchers know any thing like
> that? Is it even nominally required even if not
> practiced?
>
> TAW
The Calgary-Field CP Laggan Subdivision climbs gradually all the way from Calgary to Divide AB/Stephen BC, about 120 rail miles.
It is a fast portion of track, with a grade separated two track portion between Lake Louise and Stephen.

West of the summit, the downgrade is gradual and finally there is a dip and a brief upgrade before level track along Lake Wapta.

At the west outlet of the lake is Redemption Curve, which marks the beginning of the original 4.4% grade, now the Trans-Canada highway and also the beginning of the 2.2% grade using the Spiral Tunnels.

Partridge is the CTC controlled siding at the top of the spirals, Yoho is a storage track between the two spirals, and Cathedral is a CTC siding at the base of the spirals. Field is the end of the subdivision five miles west of Cathedral.

Crews and train dispatchers have always respected the Big Hill and often they work together to coordinate eastbound and westbound traffic on the hill so that the loaded westbound trains are not delayed.

Sometimes trains slow down or stop on either side of steep grade to allow traffic to clear in the sidings on the hill. 

This is also standard practice on the adjacent Mountain Subdivision.

Had rail traffic control chosen to change crews at Lake Louise or even Stephen/Divide, the outgoing crew would have had the opportunity to prepare the air brake and control systems prior to descending the steep grade.

If CP had chosen retain Hector , the siding along Wapta Lake eliminated when CTC was applied in the 1960's, they would have had a siding where loaded trains could safely recharge their braking systems before tackling the steep grade.

Partridge and Cathedral sidings are useful for keeping traffic fluid on the hill. Ideally, train crews time the meets so the loaded westbounds don't have to stop.  In these cases , there are often radio conversations which include the rail traffic controllers into what is happening.

I have to wonder what happened at the time the tragedy occured.  Since it is known that the grain train had "mechanical problems" and was also running out of crew time, why wasn't it held at a location not on a steep downgrade where the crew could make possible repairs?



 



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/19 08:28 by eminence_grise.