Canadian petrol train crash

I looked but didn't see a thread about this. I'm amazed at how little TV coverage this has received in the US. I guess the 4th weekend, G.Z. trial and the Sharknado were just too much for everyone to take in one week.

The extent of the devastation from 72 tankers derailing into a small town in the early Saturday morning hours a week ago is immeasurable. 28 confirmed dead and another 30 or so still missing and thought to have been vaporized in the explosion.

Story here.

How it happened.

From the pictures it looked like the fuel ran towards the lake and basically destroyed everything South of the RR tracks.

the engineer reported to railroad managers that he set 11 hand brakes on the train cars before they broke away from their engines, but "I think it's questionable whether he did."

I have a set of active rail bringing crude and all kinds of chemicals like ammonia and chlorine within a quarter mile of my house and it goes right thru town. I am surprised that US media isn't fanning the panic flames with a whole "Do you know what deadly killer lurks behind your children's playground? Is all around you while you sleep in bed at night? Shocking revelations, next on 20/20!".

Yes, it's been a bit crazy.

What is confusing is that they keep seeing crude. Crude doesn't explode. And this crude was actually coming from North Dakota, not oilsands.

So it's a bit of a mystery as to why this happened. At most, there should have been a big fire, but as is usual, the media is providing little USEFUL information.

I just feel terrible for the families affected though, it's basically like a bomb went off. On top of that, it may come down to just being an accident (or railroad safety, which is another topic. Apparently trains do not use the air to release the brakes, but use it to apply the brakes, which makes no sense from a safety standpoint).

On trains, air pressure releases the brakes. Lose air, they apply. By that logic, this scenario appears very hard to believe.

cwh wrote: On trains, air pressure releases the brakes. Lose air, they apply. By that logic, this scenario appears very hard to believe.

That's not what friends with CN and CP said, of course, they pointed out that this was on OLD trains. New equipment is different from what I understand.

cwh wrote: On trains, air pressure releases the brakes. Lose air, they apply. By that logic, this scenario appears very hard to believe.

It's a little more complex than that, but the loss of line pressure is supposed to release pressure form the accumulators to apply the brakes. But there are valves in the system that allow the line to be uncoupled and not set the brakes. Otherwise you could not move cars without an engine attached like going over "the hump" in a sorting yard.

And as HT said crude does not explode so something else triggered the fire.

I thought I had heard there were some propane cars mixed in there too, but that could be false. Any way you look at it, its a hell of a mess.

I'll be interested to see how the anti-pipeline people react to this.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: I am surprised that US media isn't fanning the panic flames with a whole "Do you know what deadly killer lurks behind your children's playground? Is all around you while you sleep in bed at night? Shocking revelations, next on 20/20!".

But it's good ol' fossil fuels, the safest and cuddliest source of energy! Nothing to see here, move along.

It's been on MSN.com since it happened, so I've heard about it. I don't get regular tv so I've no idea how well its been covered otherwise. The brake thing confused me as well. I thought they were air-released as well, but having them the other way around makes sense now that its mentioned. IIRC, they'll send cars around the yard moving purely on momentum, so yeah... they'd need to roll freely.

A tragic cluster**** for sure that'll go down in the books as one of those engineering/human error disasters similar to thw SFO crash.

Ian F wrote: A tragic cluster**** for sure that'll go down in the books as one of those engineering/human error disasters similar to thw SFO crash.

2nd worst railroad accident in Canadian history

Sorry to hear of the crash. Down here we had our own version a few years back: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graniteville,_South_Carolina_train_crash

NPR and PBS both have been covering quite a bit

GameboyRMH wrote: But it's good ol' fossil fuels, the safest and cuddliest source of energy! Nothing to see here, move along.

Good thing we didn't build a pipeline eh? Imagine what would have happened if a whole pipeline derailed?

Some dumb twit called in to a talk radio program questioning why railroads are allowed to be run through cities in the first place.

The host couldn't hear me yelling at the radio "Towns grow up AROUND the railroad you bloody idiot!"

Wow, I had not heard of this. What a horrible tragedy.

Some of the locals from that town called in to the Jason Ellis show on SiriusXM and their stories were pretty horrifying.

Wow, that's terrible. I didn't realize crude could burn that easily.

Who else was playing "what car?" in their heads during this photo?

Tom Suddard wrote: Wow, that's terrible. I didn't realize crude could burn that easily. Who else was playing "what car?" in their heads during this photo?

I'll admit to it. The one in back is an Aztek.

They look like most stanced VWs in the Miami area.

I've been following this story on a railfan forum and (barring sabotage) it sounds like Murphy's Law had a field day on this wreck. About 1-2 hours before Lac-Megantic's center was annihilated, the lead locomotive (of 5 total) caught fire. This locomotive was the only one that was operating as the rest were shut down awaiting a crew change. One engine is all that is needed to keep the air brakes applied on the rest of the train. It's possible the firefighters, or the railroad's maintenance man who came out to assist them, shut the locomotive down and didn't turn on one of the others to keep the air brakes applied. Of course, the air brakes SHOULD have stayed applied since they activate on loss of air pressure, but it sounds like this particular consist of oil tankers was pretty old. I live near a competing railroad's main line, who also carry oil to the refinery in New Brunswick where this doomed train was headed, and most of their oil tank cars are brand spankin' new.

It's sounding like there was only one crew member instead of the typical two, which combined with fatigue might have meant he didn't apply enough handbrakes to hold the train on the hill before it caught fire. Combine that with the heavy oil loads and you have a recipe for a runaway. The alternative is sabotage- someone shut down the locomotive themselves and/or released some of the handbrakes.

As for what caused the explosion, it could have been a BLEVE. There were also eyewitness reports of propane tank cars being parked in town that were ignited by a fire caused by the crude tank car crash (overheated brakes?).

Finally, as to why so little coverage in the States? 1) The SF airliner crash and 2) It didn't happen in the US. It doesn't matter that Lac-Megantic is within spitting distance of Maine, nor that the railroad company is American and the crude is from North Dakota. The crash didn't happen IN Maine, so it's supposedly of little interest to Americans.

It was on the news in NY for a few days, usually the story after the plane crash.

We posted this a few days ago...

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=81581