Indian Pacific hits freight train
Paul Turtle
persons taken to hospital.
Must be Sydney bound service somewhere between Broken Hill and Parkes.
Regards
Paul Turtle
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please visit 'Paul Turtle's Railway Page of New South Wales'
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~pturtle
----------------------------------------------------------------
face...@my-deja.com
ptu...@ozemail.com.au (Paul Turtle) wrote:
> Just on Channel Nine news break, Indian Pacific has hit freight train,
15
> persons taken to hospital.
>
> Must be Sydney bound service somewhere between Broken Hill and Parkes.
I heard it was near Kalgoorlie.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Grahame Ferguson
face...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7pe8lt$prn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
Channel 10 News 2304hrs EST: It occurred at Coonana at low speed, no further
details.
Henry's Cat
Grahame Ferguson <grah...@users.mcmedia.com.au> wrote in message
news:37babc46@nap-ns1...
>
> Channel 10 News 2304hrs EST: It occurred at Coonana at low speed, no
further
> details.
Please don't tell me it was another 'We knew it was illegal but we've always
done it this way' Hines Hill-type crossing "accidents".
cheers
Neil
casey-joe
now? It feels like a lifetime to me.
If the way they act at my workplace is an example of the
abilities and type of person they use to be Train
Controllers, all I can say is I am amazed that any trains
get to Perth at all, much less return!
Local Crews and Train Movements have almost come to a stand,
as these bigheaded, gutless arseholes, delay and refuse us
access to our own tracks, for some Interstate Train that
invariably arrives many minutes past the due times.Our own
train Controllers allowed a shunt with 5 mins extra
time.These arseholes want our 30 min shunt time plus
another 30 mins.Our shifts are long enough without this
crap. I would hate to be influenced by them for thirty
hours on a train to Perth, A lot of Crew Fatigue can be
contributed to lousy opperations.
They refuse to answer their Radios, and sit over there in
Adelaide, probably wanking themselves off in their own self
importance! Yes legends in their own little minds!
Bet you that we will now have a big cover up..Bet you a
lousy Train Controller scurries back into his rats nest.
Arseholes.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
< Tell >
Sounds like you have a problem pal.!
----Terry Burton
Alice Springs NT
Maurie Daly
>From: tel...@OZozemail.com.au (< Tell >)
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train
>Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 09:58:15 GMT
>casey-joe <ber...@bigpond.com> wrote:
Does anyone know just who precisely will investigate this accident.
One of the major problems of a horizontally integrated railway regime where
there are multiple players like this one , is that in the case of accidents
its absolutely imperative that the accident be investigated by an impartial
body that has no vested interest in the outcome ,and more importantly can make
recommendations that dont get ignored, ie there is some legislative backing.
AFAIK we still dont have this in Rail yet.
BASI could possibly investigate the accident, but like beresfield have no
power to enforce change if that is what is needed.
MD
Dave Malcolm
>From: mau...@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train
>In article <37bdd532...@news.ozemail.com.au> tel...@OZozemail.com.au (<
>Tell >) writes:
>>From: tel...@OZozemail.com.au (< Tell >)
>>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train
>>Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 09:58:15 GMT
>>casey-joe <ber...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>Sounds like you have a problem pal.!
>>----Terry Burton
>>Alice Springs NT
>Does anyone know just who precisely will investigate this accident.
>One of the major problems of a horizontally integrated railway regime where
>there are multiple players like this one , is that in the case of accidents
>its absolutely imperative that the accident be investigated by an impartial
>body that has no vested interest in the outcome ,and more importantly can make
>recommendations that dont get ignored, ie there is some legislative backing.
>AFAIK we still dont have this in Rail yet.
>BASI could possibly investigate the accident, but like beresfield have no
>power to enforce change if that is what is needed.
>MD
There was a proposal to bring in an Australian standard for accident
investigation procedures, I don't know how far it's got though.
Dave Malcolm
It wasn't me
I didn't do it
I wasn't there
Grahame Ferguson
Maurie Daly wrote in message ...
>In article <37bdd532...@news.ozemail.com.au> tel...@OZozemail.com.au
(< >Does anyone know just who precisely will investigate this accident.
>One of the major problems of a horizontally integrated railway regime where
>there are multiple players like this one , is that in the case of accidents
>its absolutely imperative that the accident be investigated by an impartial
>body that has no vested interest in the outcome ,and more importantly can
make
>recommendations that dont get ignored, ie there is some legislative
backing.
>AFAIK we still dont have this in Rail yet.
>BASI could possibly investigate the accident, but like beresfield have no
>power to enforce change if that is what is needed.
>
>MD
Yes Maurie, this time I am whole heartedly agreeing with you. Is it the
ARTC who are the body who own and control the lines safe working,
responsible to investigate and act? Is it the Commonwealth Department of
Transport, as the TAR is Commonwealth property and the ARTC is a
Commonwealth body? For that matter does the Australian Federal Police have
jurisdiction over incidents on Commonwealth land?
Since the WA Government's Department of Transport are in charge of Rail
Safety Accreditation in that State are they the controlling authority?
Maybe it is the NRC, who were in control of both locomotives at the time of
the crash?? Will GSR even get a guernsey? Are there any other takers??
If there was a fatality it would be the WA Coroner who would have the power
to investigate, but he could only make recommendations, and still would have
no power to enforce change. Even if he could legally enforce change, it
would only be binding in WA. If on Commonwealth property can all aspects of
WA law be enforced. If the Commonwealth did voluntarily comply, the
safeworking practices for the same line in SA would not be effected.
It seems like either everyone will have their fingers in the pie, but which
one of these, is the one authority legally responsible to act on, and
discipline, who or what was the cause of the crash? Who has the power to
change bad practices or remedy faulty technology, and prosecute if
necessary?
If it was the ARTC, then as the owner and controller of the track, it is not
removed from the incident, therefore not a totally independent body. I am
not implying that the ARTC can not act objectively, however these days a
totally removed body is what the Public expects.
In the US, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is the Authority
given the power to investigate, prosecute, and enforce the necessary
changes. The NTSB is a part of the Federal Department of Transport, and
acts independently of any railroad operator or owner.
Besides all this does anyone know was Zanthus fitted with self restoring
points with colour light point indicators? If so, for the interest of
myself and others, what do the signal indications show and mean?
Does the locomotive crew of a train in a loop, which has pulled up short of
the points, before an opposing train has arrived, have to verify that they
are set correctly for the opposing train?
After saying all this, what was the conclusion as to the cause of the Mt
Christie collision?
It appears that confusion is the authority under which we answer to.
So we now enter the new railway age, with more questions than answers!
But regardless, the Railway is still the Safe way.
regards, GF
David V. Mills
kei...@happy.dca.gov.au says...
>
> There was a proposal to bring in an Australian standard for accident
> investigation procedures, I don't know how far it's got though.
>
Have a look at http://www.atsb.gov.au
They started July 1 and include BASI (Bureau of Air Safety
Investigation), FORS (Federal Office of Road Safety), MIIU (Marine
Incident Investigation Unit) and a new Rail Safety Unit.
Cheers,
David.
--
David V. Mills d...@bigpond.com d...@onaustralia.com.au
Exnarc
> So we now enter the new railway age, with more questions than answers!
> But regardless, the Railway is still the Safe way.
>
> regards, GF
>
No Safeway(s) is a supermarket chain, (Woolworths to you crow eaters).
It funny (well not really), but all these accidents and the arguements of
who is responsible seem to be come to the fore since the introduction of
Open Access.
I've been in this industry for 36 years, we had our accident in the past,
but the frequency has increased (well I think so) enormously since the
opening up of the rail industry to the private players!!!
Why is this so????
Cost cutting, increased work loads, longer hours (read crew fatigue), profit
taking????????????????????????????????
I don't know, but what I do know is that: Its going to get worse before it
gets better!!!!
But then I'm sure the Grince Vhamams's of this world have done a "Risk
analyses" to prove its cost effective and anyway its the crews who are out
there working under these conditions not the managers, so its quite safe.
Bob.
Notagunzel
> Besides all this does anyone know was Zanthus fitted with self restoring
> points with colour light point indicators? If so, for the interest of
> myself and others, what do the signal indications show and mean?
> Does the locomotive crew of a train in a loop, which has pulled up short
of
> the points, before an opposing train has arrived, have to verify that
they
> are set correctly for the opposing train?
The turnouts into all the loops are operated by Dual Control Point
Machines, and they are configured for self-restoration. When a Driver
arrives at a loop and needs to take the loop, the train stops short of the
points, driver presses a button on the side of the equipment hut, and the
points run reverse. When the train is in clear, the points self-restore.
Exiting from the other end is the same.
The Equipment Hut has on the roof a Searchlight pointing in each direction,
the aspects are Flashing Green - points normal, Flashing Yellow - points
reverse & Flashing Red - points not detected.
I'm still unsure how the turnout at the far end of the loop is indicated at
this end, any Pt Augusta Drivers lurking out there??
Some further info is at:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/9412/tar_loop.html
--
Mr Notagunzel.
Rail Transportation Connoisseur.
notag...@bigfoot.com
(Waiting for the next move at http://www.bigfoot.com/~notagunzel)
Peter
wrote:
>
>> So we now enter the new railway age, with more questions than answers!
>> But regardless, the Railway is still the Safe way.
>>
>> regards, GF
>>
>
>No Safeway(s) is a supermarket chain, (Woolworths to you crow eaters).
>
>It funny (well not really), but all these accidents and the arguements of
>who is responsible seem to be come to the fore since the introduction of
>Open Access.
>
>I've been in this industry for 36 years, we had our accident in the past,
>but the frequency has increased (well I think so) enormously since the
>opening up of the rail industry to the private players!!!
>
>Why is this so????
>
>Cost cutting, increased work loads, longer hours (read crew fatigue), profit
>taking????????????????????????????????
>
crews haven't followed the safeworking. NRC crews run long distance
and long hours that go with the long distance, with little or no
chance for relief, so they appear not to be to concerned with doing
the right thing, just getting to their destination. Of course no NRC
employee would criticize NRC, because if they di they would be
ostracized by his so called work mates.
Dave Malcolm
>From: pb...@lisp.com.au (Peter)
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Investigating body?
>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 03:33:28 GMT
>On Sat, 21 Aug 1999 00:15:38 +1000, "Exnarc" <gw...@netspace.net.au>
>wrote:
>Here in NSW in the area that I'm in we have had two cases where NRC
>crews haven't followed the safeworking. NRC crews run long distance
>and long hours that go with the long distance, with little or no
>chance for relief, so they appear not to be to concerned with doing
>the right thing, just getting to their destination. Of course no NRC
>employee would criticize NRC, because if they di they would be
>ostracized by his so called work mates.
I wouldn't pick on NRC crews for not following safeworking rules. I have seen
SRA crews do the same thing.
Dave Malcolm
Exnarc
Dave Malcolm <kei...@happy.dca.gov.au> wrote in message
news:keithm.30...@happy.dca.gov.au...
HEAR HEAR Dave!!!!!!
Its very easy to make broad statements.
Some people who for whatever reason seem to have a chip on their shoulder
about NRC.
Maybe they missed out on job sellection? Many did!!!
Maybe they lost their jobs due to NRC taking over their work in 1993-4?
Or maybe its just sour grapes???
But NRC sure has it detracters, I personally have no time for NRC
management, I think they lack moral integrity, they were and still are loose
with the truth when it come to their employees, most of all I think they are
incompetent, they have no idea where they want the company to go, changing
direction almost weekly, closing depots only to reopen them (Brokenhill),
making 50+ drivers redundant, only to start recruiting within 5 months,
senior management expects infact have got blood out of a stone at the
expence of their employees.
Having said all this, I will not stand by and see the professional Enginemen
employeed by NRC attacked by people who for their own reasons have an axe to
grind with NRC.
These guys in NRC are the same blokes who 4 and 5 years ago worked along
side many of the people who are attacking them now, they haven't changed,
they still eat, sleep and breath the same air, they have just changed the
colour of their uniform and their employer.
No matter what the group of workers, there will always be the ones who break
the rules, take short cuts, just get off NRC's back and grow up.
Bob.
Peter
>
>>Here in NSW in the area that I'm in we have had two cases where NRC
>>crews haven't followed the safeworking. NRC crews run long distance
>>and long hours that go with the long distance, with little or no
>>chance for relief, so they appear not to be to concerned with doing
>>the right thing, just getting to their destination. Of course no NRC
>>employee would criticize NRC, because if they di they would be
>>ostracized by his so called work mates.
>
>I wouldn't pick on NRC crews for not following safeworking rules. I have seen
>SRA crews do the same thing.
Well Dave it has only been the last tewlve to 18 months the NRC crews
have been running in our area, and from what I have seen of them they
aren't real crash hot. Not to say that SRA crews are perfect, just
that NRC crews run long distance which means long hours and no relief
when things go wrong. Trust me delays happen and these NRC crews don't
like beging delayed, their go go go, no matter what.
Peter
Peter
>
>HEAR HEAR Dave!!!!!!
>
>Its very easy to make broad statements.
So eay it is!!!
>Some people who for whatever reason seem to have a chip on their shoulder
>about NRC.
Prehaps, i'd like to stay alive.
>Maybe they missed out on job sellection? Many did!!!
Didn't apply, didn't want to, didn't like the way that it was setup!
>Maybe they lost their jobs due to NRC taking over their work in 1993-4?
No
>Or maybe its just sour grapes???
For what?
>But NRC sure has it detracters, I personally have no time for NRC
>management, I think they lack moral integrity, they were and still are loose
>with the truth when it come to their employees, most of all I think they are
>incompetent, they have no idea where they want the company to go, changing
>direction almost weekly, closing depots only to reopen them (Brokenhill),
>making 50+ drivers redundant, only to start recruiting within 5 months,
>senior management expects infact have got blood out of a stone at the
>expence of their employees.
Prehaps this is what I'm talking about, Management getting their blood
out of the stone.
>Having said all this, I will not stand by and see the professional Enginemen
>employeed by NRC attacked by people who for their own reasons have an axe to
>grind with NRC.
Are you one? are they that professional that when they come to an
unattended staff station, they don't know how to work their train
thrugh it?
>These guys in NRC are the same blokes who 4 and 5 years ago worked along
>side many of the people who are attacking them now, they haven't changed,
>they still eat, sleep and breath the same air, they have just changed the
>colour of their uniform and their employer.
So they may be, now working under a different set of conditions, which
they aggreed to accept.
>No matter what the group of workers, there will always be the ones who break
>the rules, take short cuts, just get off NRC's back and grow up.
Getting a bit testy here aren't we!
Peter
>> But regardless, the Railway is still the Safe way.
>>
>> regards, GF
>>
>
>No Safeway(s) is a supermarket chain, (Woolworths to you crow eaters).
>
>It funny (well not really), but all these accidents and the arguements of
>who is responsible seem to be come to the fore since the introduction of
>Open Access.
>
>I've been in this industry for 36 years, we had our accident in the past,
>but the frequency has increased (well I think so) enormously since the
>opening up of the rail industry to the private players!!!
>
>Why is this so????
>
>Cost cutting, increased work loads, longer hours (read crew fatigue), profit
>taking????????????????????????????????
Beging cost effective is the catch cry of the new system, saftey
does't rate.
In NSW (in the area where I'm at) we have had two incidences with NRC
Trains. Both reported and the word from the DOT was there had to be an
accident before any action would be taken. These crews run such long
distance and long hours to do the distance, with little if any
consideration for delays and no relief if the are on long hours. They
start to neglect safe working procedures, it would be of no suprise if
this is what has happened. Of course no NRC driver would criticise NRC
because his work mates would ostracize him.
Dave Malcolm
>From: pb...@lisp.com.au (Peter)
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Investigating body?
I wasn't doubting they do take short cuts, but so does evey one else.
Dave Malcolm
gonoN...@bigpond.com
<trai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Exnarc wrote:
>
>> What caused that derailment of the Tangara on the North Shore a few months
>> ago?? Speed I would assume, that wasn't an NRC crew was it!!!
>
>In all accidents, there a number of contributing factors. The Tangara (which
>was on the main North, not the North Shore) was doing just under the track speed
>for the section. The driver was then faced with a turnout signal that he was
>not expecting for a number of reasons. It should all be in the report.
>
>> likewise the
>> prang with 3801 a few years ago wasn't a NRC crew either.
>
>This was not crew error. That was caused by too much sand on the track and the
>signalling system not being able to cope with it.
>
>The majority of NRC crews are very professional and do an excellent job under
>trying conditions. There are, however, a few cowboys who give the rest a bad
>name.
Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
story was to appease the press!!!
regards Paul Johnston (MNRC)
Exnarc
Peter <pb...@lisp.com.au> wrote in message
news:37c49056...@news.ozemail.com.au...
NO!!!!!
> >These guys in NRC are the same blokes who 4 and 5 years ago worked along
> >side many of the people who are attacking them now, they haven't changed,
> >they still eat, sleep and breath the same air, they have just changed the
> >colour of their uniform and their employer.
> So they may be, now working under a different set of conditions, which
> they aggreed to accept.
SO ARE WE ALL!!!!
>
> >No matter what the group of workers, there will always be the ones who
break
> >the rules, take short cuts, just get off NRC's back and grow up.
>
> Getting a bit testy here aren't we!
NO JUST SICK OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE CHIPS ON THEIR SHOULDERS!!!!!
MAYBE IN YOUR CASE ITS A WHOLE LOG?????
Bob
Exnarc
>
> >
> >>Here in NSW in the area that I'm in we have had two cases where NRC
> >>crews haven't followed the safeworking. NRC crews run long distance
> >>and long hours that go with the long distance, with little or no
> >>chance for relief, so they appear not to be to concerned with doing
> >>the right thing, just getting to their destination. Of course no NRC
> >>employee would criticize NRC, because if they di they would be
> >>ostracized by his so called work mates.
> >
> >I wouldn't pick on NRC crews for not following safeworking rules. I have
seen
> >SRA crews do the same thing.
>
> Well Dave it has only been the last tewlve to 18 months the NRC crews
> have been running in our area, and from what I have seen of them they
> aren't real crash hot. Not to say that SRA crews are perfect, just
> that NRC crews run long distance which means long hours and no relief
> when things go wrong. Trust me delays happen and these NRC crews don't
> like beging delayed, their go go go, no matter what.
> Peter
Taken your work have they???????
Bob.
Exnarc
> In article <37c38e5b...@news.ozemail.com.au> pb...@lisp.com.au
(Peter) writes:
> >From: pb...@lisp.com.au (Peter)
> >Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
> >Investigating body?
> >Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 06:40:33 GMT
>
>
> >>
> >>>crews haven't followed the safeworking. NRC crews run long distance
> >>>and long hours that go with the long distance, with little or no
> >>>chance for relief, so they appear not to be to concerned with doing
> >>>the right thing, just getting to their destination. Of course no NRC
> >>>employee would criticize NRC, because if they di they would be
> >>>ostracized by his so called work mates.
> >>
> >>I wouldn't pick on NRC crews for not following safeworking rules. I have
seen
> >>SRA crews do the same thing.
>
> >Well Dave it has only been the last tewlve to 18 months the NRC crews
> >have been running in our area, and from what I have seen of them they
> >aren't real crash hot. Not to say that SRA crews are perfect, just
> >that NRC crews run long distance which means long hours and no relief
> >when things go wrong. Trust me delays happen and these NRC crews don't
> >like beging delayed, their go go go, no matter what.
> >Peter
>
>
> Dave Malcolm
Dave,
Some sanity at last.
This whole privitisation has put pressure on everyone, the problem with rail
in Australia is that its got no proper regulation (unlike the UK and USA),
something went wrong at Zanthus and if the crews are at fault they will have
to answer for it, but I could probably (if I had time) come up with rule and
speed breaches for any of the rail operators in Australia.
What caused that derailment of the Tangara on the North Shore a few months
ago?? Speed I would assume, that wasn't an NRC crew was it!!! likewise the
prang with 3801 a few years ago wasn't a NRC crew either.
I do agree with Peter on one point, NRC do push their crews to hard, as do
ASR (they are the worse operators in the country when it comes to over
working crews) but unfortunately this is the future, until we have an
independant regulator like the FRA we will see hours increase and crew
fatigue become the norm.
Freight Corp will also go this way, as pressure to make profits (or at least
cover costs) will force management to make crews to do more and do it for
longer shift.
Bob.
David Johnson
> What caused that derailment of the Tangara on the North Shore a few months
> ago?? Speed I would assume, that wasn't an NRC crew was it!!!
In all accidents, there a number of contributing factors. The Tangara (which
was on the main North, not the North Shore) was doing just under the track speed
for the section. The driver was then faced with a turnout signal that he was
not expecting for a number of reasons. It should all be in the report.
> likewise the
> prang with 3801 a few years ago wasn't a NRC crew either.
This was not crew error. That was caused by too much sand on the track and the
signalling system not being able to cope with it.
The majority of NRC crews are very professional and do an excellent job under
trying conditions. There are, however, a few cowboys who give the rest a bad
name.
--
David Johnson
trai...@ozemail.com.au
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
Michael Roebuck
I don't know the background to this one, as I wasn't lurking here when
it happened, but I can tell you that a freight train load of salt
which derailed near Preston, England, two years ago did indeed knock
out all the track circuits, and the London - Glasgow main line was in
chaos for days because of it.
regards
--
Mike Roebuck, Riehen, Switzerland icq#7018252
'53 M Y* L-- KQ+ C c++ B11 Sh11 FCYork SSWFC R(Basle)
Reply To: mike(dot)roebuck(at)datacomm(dot)ch
Dave McL
> I don't know the background to this one, as I wasn't lurking here when
> it happened,
Good heavens, you Ulygan types sure get around!
David McLoughlin
Auckland New Zealand
Dave Malcolm
>From: gonoN...@bigpond.com
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Investigating body?
>On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 02:07:02 +1000, David Johnson
><trai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
>not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
>track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
>story was to appease the press!!!
>regards Paul Johnston (MNRC)
Hear hear, no one seems to take into account the chances of an entire train of
somewhere around 42 axles (2 of which are infront of the sand pipes) being
isolated from the track circuit. I dont care what the inquiry findings were
logic says it's not going to happen.
Dave Malcolm
Peter
>
>NO JUST SICK OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE CHIPS ON THEIR SHOULDERS!!!!!
>
>MAYBE IN YOUR CASE ITS A WHOLE LOG?????
My, my aren't we a happy camper.
Peter
>I do agree with Peter on one point, NRC do push their crews to hard, as do
>ASR (they are the worse operators in the country when it comes to over
>working crews) but unfortunately this is the future, until we have an
>independant regulator like the FRA we will see hours increase and crew
>fatigue become the norm.
>
>Freight Corp will also go this way, as pressure to make profits (or at least
>cover costs) will force management to make crews to do more and do it for
>longer shift.
One thing we do agree on, and prehaps the point of my post!
Peter
Michael
Regards
Michael :)
Exnarc said on 26/08/1999 in <7q0v67$cnj$1...@otis.netspace.net.au>:
>
>NO!!!!!
>
<snipepptydoodah>
>
>SO ARE WE ALL!!!!
>
<snippetydah>
Exnarc
>
> >
> >NO JUST SICK OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE CHIPS ON THEIR SHOULDERS!!!!!
> >
> >MAYBE IN YOUR CASE ITS A WHOLE LOG?????
>
No I'm straight actually!!!!!!!!
Bob.
Exnarc
I see.
There was a point to your post.<g>
Bob.
Exnarc
Bob
Michael <m...@netstra.com.au> wrote in message
news:8E2EAFE82t...@vic.news.telstra.net...
> My my, I think my eyes are going deaf from all this shouting...
>
>
>
> Regards
> Michael :)
>
>
> Exnarc said on 26/08/1999 in <7q0v67$cnj$1...@otis.netspace.net.au>:
>
> >
> >NO!!!!!
> >
> <snipepptydoodah>
> >
> >SO ARE WE ALL!!!!
> >
> <snippetydah>
> >
Michael Kurkowski
Im over here dad!
rgds
michael
Exnarc said in message <7q3d22$oot$1...@otis.netspace.net.au>, I therefore
quote:
David Langley
> not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
> track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
> story was to appease the press!!!
> regards Paul Johnston (MNRC)
Me thinks that you have not had much experience with audio frequency track circuits.
Sand was a real issue although not necessarily the only issue. As we have learnt from
experience over the years, all "incidents" are generally caused by more than one
break down in proper working.
David.
Maurie Daly
>Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 01:48:45 +1000
>From: David Johnson <trai...@ozemail.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Investigating body?
>gonoN...@bigpond.com wrote:
>> Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
>> not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
>> track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
>> story was to appease the press!!!
>I believe it. I was like you until I read the report and saw some photos of the
>accident scene, including a photo of the wheels of the rear carriage completely
>coated in sand. It can happen. Nothing is impossible.
>--
>David Johnson
>trai...@ozemail.com.au
>http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
Noeone will even know what really happened , but one question that is left
begging is that if we accept that sand can insulate wheels from a track cct it
doesnt in any way alter what the function of the track cct is,ie if a train
goes into a track section and doesnt come out the other end , then its still
in there , no matter what the continuity between the rails is ,and the signals
should reflect the last known state.
Since this accident has the interlocking been modified to operate on a train
in / train out basis , ie we dont now rely on continuity between the rails .
If as I suspect is the case , no modifications have been made then we can take
for granted that sand wasnt the original problem as to admit that this is the
case and then do nothing about correcting the problem (AFAIK locos still carry
sand and use it on the Cowan Bank) would be negligence in the extreme.
MD
David Johnson
> Hear hear, no one seems to take into account the chances of an entire train of
> somewhere around 42 axles (2 of which are infront of the sand pipes) being
> isolated from the track circuit. I dont care what the inquiry findings were
> logic says it's not going to happen.
This train was re-enacted at Chullora and on the Royal National Park line, and did
drop of the track circuit a number of times. The two axles in front of the sand
pipes are all well and good... except when the train set back slightly when trying to
lift the load. Not to mention the residue sand left on the tracks by preceding
freight trains. If you were not at the accident scene, or you have not read the
report, you are in no position to make "informed" comments. Sand is a good
insulator. It WILL make a train drop off the track circuit in older track circuiting
systems under the right circumstances. To refuse to believe this is foolish.
David Johnson
> Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
> not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
> track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
> story was to appease the press!!!
I believe it. I was like you until I read the report and saw some photos of the
accident scene, including a photo of the wheels of the rear carriage completely
coated in sand. It can happen. Nothing is impossible.
--
Exnarc
David Johnson <trai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:37C56132...@ozemail.com.au...
David/Peter.
Well, we have established that sand caused the 3801 prang?
Plenty of sand at Zanthus, but very little track circuiting.
In other words, lets not make "informed" comments (about NRC crews) until we
have read the report!!!
Bob.
Exnarc
> Exnarc wrote:
>
> > What caused that derailment of the Tangara on the North Shore a few
months
> > ago?? Speed I would assume, that wasn't an NRC crew was it!!!
>
> In all accidents, there a number of contributing factors. The Tangara
(which
> was on the main North, not the North Shore) was doing just under the track
speed
> for the section. The driver was then faced with a turnout signal that he
was
> not expecting for a number of reasons. It should all be in the report.
>
> > likewise the
> > prang with 3801 a few years ago wasn't a NRC crew either.
>
> This was not crew error. That was caused by too much sand on the track
and the
> signalling system not being able to cope with it.
>
> The majority of NRC crews are very professional and do an excellent job
under
> trying conditions. There are, however, a few cowboys who give the rest a
bad
> name.
Very true I'm sure, but wouldn't this also apply to CityRail, Country Link,
and Freight Corp? Or is this (Cowboy element) just restricted to NRC???
Bob
Exnarc
David Langley <d...@ancc.com.au> wrote in message
news:37C5403E...@ancc.com.au...
> > Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
> > not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
> > track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
> > story was to appease the press!!!
>
> Me thinks that you have not had much experience with audio frequency track
circuits.
> Sand was a real issue although not necessarily the only issue. As we have
learnt from
> experience over the years, all "incidents" are generally caused by more
than one
> break down in proper working.
>
> David.
>
fitter), but whilst I'm not questioning your knowledge on the subject as I
know your background is in the field, I find it hard to understand how this
problem only became an issue in NSW, (on accident does seem to highlight
such things) surely this problem would have been known (for example) by VR
S&C, yet in my 37 years as an enginemen this is the only time I've heard of
such an problem, we were never for example told to avoid sanding because of
this problem.
Bob.
WhaleOilBeefHooked
>Well, we have established that sand caused the 3801 prang?
>
>Plenty of sand at Zanthus, but very little track circuiting.
The reason 3801 was brought up was because it was alleged that there were
shoddy practices.
>In other words, lets not make "informed" comments (about NRC crews) until
we
>have read the report!!!
Weren't you the one who raised 3801 and Hornsby, in an effort to show that
all rail staff break the rules at times?
DaveP
Ummm, w
WhaleOilBeefHooked
>Very true I'm sure, but wouldn't this also apply to CityRail, Country Link,
>and Freight Corp? Or is this (Cowboy element) just restricted to NRC???
Methinks he doth protest too much!
DaveP
Dave Malcolm
>From: mau...@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Investigating body?
>>Having an insulator between the wheel and the rail is usually fatal for any
>>form of track circuit.
>>Reading the above I think there is some confusion as to how a track circuit
>>operates. In it's most basic form (Steady DC), the sections are broken up
>>by insulated joints. At one end of the section, the voltage is fed to the
>>track, and at the other end the track relay is between the rails. So the
>>circuit goes:
>>B2 (positive side of battery), feed resistor, one leg of the track circuit
>>(rail), relay, other leg of the track circuit (rail), N2 (negative side of
>>battery).
>>So the relay picks up when the track is unoccupied, and drops away when a
>>train enters the section. This is because the trains wheels act as a short
>>circuit. The relay will also drop, simulating the presence of a train, if
>>you use a piece of wire to short the rails, (kids living near level
>>crossings find this out annoyingly regularly), or if the bonding between
>>consecutive rails breaks, or the rail itself breaks, or a track lead is
>>broken, or if the ballast resistance falls due to heavy rain, or if the
>>mains power fails and the track battery goes flat.
>>So if a train is either lightweight (Victorian Sprinter), or is sanding
>>VERY heavily (alleged to be 3801), the trainshunt (resistance of the axles
>>of the train) can rise until its not enough to shunt enough current to drop
>>the relay (Ohms law etc...).
>>Therefore, a train drops the relay, and if it drops a lot of sand or goes
>>high resistive, it 'disappears'. This is what I understand to have
>>happened on Cowan Bank, and with the Sprinters.
>>European railways I believe have an arrangement where the track circuit
>>will not pick up until the next track in sequence is down, apparently due
>>to European ideas on proving relay operation. This has the effect of
>>ensuring that a train 'dissapearing' off a track circuit doesn't actually
>>cause false operation of signals, points, level crossings, etc... I
>>remember reading that one of the recent resignallings somewhere in NSW will
>>actually generate some sort of alarm whenever 'non sequentual' operation
>>occurs, this may be what you are alluding to.
>>Why can't this 'sequential testing' be used in Australia, I hear you ask?
>>Well British, American and Australian railways have always used a different
>>philosophy when designing anything vital within a signalling system, i.e.,
>>if you open a contact with a vital relay in a vital circuit, you can
>>usually assume that the relay will drop, whereas the Europeans almost
>>always want to prove that the relay actually dropped. When applied to
>>track circuits, this philosophy goes that if you design a track circuit,
>>then it must drop whenever a train enter the section. If we started
>>proving sequential operation, it would create problems if a track circuit
>>drops, then it needs the next track down to pick up, which leaves problems
>>if there is an intermittent fault, instead of self clearing, it would then
>>get stuck down. This then raises several problems, excessively unreliable
>>tracks then mean more caution orders, hand throwing of points, continuously
>>operating level crossings, all of which mean a reduction in safety anyway.
>>Why bother, when you can put the effort into ensuring that the tracks work
>>properly in the first place(i.e. avoid crummy low voltage circuits)?
>>--
>>Mr Notagunzel.
>>Rail Transportation Connoisseur.
>>notag...@bigfoot.com
>>(Waiting for the next move at http://www.bigfoot.com/~notagunzel)
>Fair enuf on all the above.
>The thrust of my argument is that Railway Safeworking systems are supposed to
>be fail safe , ie if they fail its in the safe mode and not a dangerous mode
>where multiple trains are allowed to occupy a single track section.
>The provision of sand across the rails is , if we beleive the 3801 explanation
>a failure of the track ccts in the dangerous mode.
>If the Rail Authority knows that sand can cause this effect then they have
>only a small number of choices.
>1/ Hi voltage track ccts that can break down the insulating material.
>2/ Entry / exit track ccts which are sequential , as you have explained above.
>3/ Axle counting instead of track ccts altogether.
>4/ Banning sanding wherever low voltage track ccts are used.
>5/ Instituting absolute block working where locos that carry sand run over the
>track circuited terrain.
>
>If however , the Rail Authority has done none of these, then they are
>expecting us to beleive that sanding from a steam loco can make the track ccts
>fail in a dangerous mode , but not sand from diesels or electrics.
>Hardly beleivable one would think.
>Prior to the 3801 incident had the SRA , or indeed any other Railway in this
>country issued warnings about sanding in track circuited terrain?
>MD
Desanding equipment is now fitted to most if not all locos which use sand
steam and diesel.
Dave Malcolm
PETer and susAN
>gonoN...@bigpond.com wrote:
>
>> Come on David the sand on Cowan bank thing was a major cop out i do
>> not believe for one second the whole train was insulated from the
>> track circuit the probability of that would be infinitesimal that
>> story was to appease the press!!!
>
>I believe it. I was like you until I read the report and saw some photos of the
>accident scene, including a photo of the wheels of the rear carriage completely
>coated in sand. It can happen. Nothing is impossible.
>
>--
>David Johnson
>trai...@ozemail.com.au
>http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
>
In the past, during the steam era, sand was a problem for track circuits as the following material I
found in the NSWRTM publication "AD60" P.124 will show.
The AD60 book mentions the scrubber car that used to be hauled over the tracks at Woy Woy tunnel
and Cowan bank as well as the Lithgow Zig Zag areas. It had a metal scrubbing device to clean the
sand off the rails to prevent sand causing interference with the track circuits.
Cheers
Peter Cokley
http://homepages.msn.com/PicnicPl/petan-oz
Dave McL
>
> On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:34:50 +1200, Dave McL
> <davemcl@AXE*THISiprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >Michael Roebuck wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know the background to this one, as I wasn't lurking here when
> >> it happened,
> >
> >Good heavens, you Ulygan types sure get around!
>
>
The Net is certainly a small world!
David Langley
>
> Me think Paul would have a real idea how track circuits work (but not as a
> fitter), but whilst I'm not questioning your knowledge on the subject as I
> know your background is in the field, I find it hard to understand how this
> problem only became an issue in NSW, (on accident does seem to highlight
> such things) surely this problem would have been known (for example) by VR
> S&C, yet in my 37 years as an enginemen this is the only time I've heard of
> such an problem, we were never for example told to avoid sanding because of
> this problem.
The problems of Cowan bank surely have no parallel in Victoria and thus the
problem would not arise.
David.
David Langley
> >Having an insulator between the wheel and the rail is usually fatal for any
> >form of track circuit.
>
> If however , the Rail Authority has done none of these, then they are
> expecting us to beleive that sanding from a steam loco can make the track ccts
> fail in a dangerous mode , but not sand from diesels or electrics.
> Hardly beleivable one would think.
> Prior to the 3801 incident had the SRA , or indeed any other Railway in this
> country issued warnings about sanding in track circuited terrain?
The problems of Cowan Bank are surely unique and warrant their own rules, the
rules re sanding would be quite OK anywhere else. The poms of course have their
annual problem in autumn - leaf fall season and have gone to great lengths and
huge expenditure to overcome the problem of trains unable to brake to a stand at
stations or red signals, or to lift the load once stopped. The problems of rail
insulation are not new, just caused by different situations.
A question now for the NSW people, what happened in the days of the plodding
standard goods loco climbing Cowan Bank and dropping all their sand etc. Electric
signals with track circuits existed then so did they have any problems way back
then.
David.
Exnarc
> Exnarc wrote:
>
> > Very true I'm sure, but wouldn't this also apply to CityRail, Country
Link,
> > and Freight Corp? Or is this (Cowboy element) just restricted to NRC???
>
excepted, of
> course).Great to see your not biased David. <G>
Bob.
Exnarc
WhaleOilBeefHooked <dap...@spambait.umpires.com> wrote in message
news:7q4iu7$7ir$1...@news1.mpx.com.au...
Actually I did, but not to prove all railway staff break rule, to the
contrary, to try to prove some staff from all railway systems break rules,
not just NRC.
My example of 3801 was because I doubted the official view that it was
caused by sand, however I will accept the view of the technical experts on
the list, that sand was the cause.
Bob.
Exnarc
Link,
> >and Freight Corp? Or is this (Cowboy element) just restricted to NRC???
>
>
> DaveP
>
Bob
Maurie Daly
>From: David Langley <d...@ancc.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>Maurie Daly wrote:
>David.
I cant see why Cowan Bank is unique.
Any severe grade in NSW where heavy freight trains are hauled by diesel or
electric locos would also apply.
If we contend that the problem is sand and AC track ccts , ie we are in
electrified territory, then also the climb up the blue mtns (1:33) worse than
Cowan, or Como bank on the Illawarra would also be candidates.
If there is no exclusion , ie DC or AC track ccts cause the problem then there
are dozens of track cct 1:40 grades where sanding would not be uncommon.
In relation to the claim that all NSW locos are fitted with de-sanding
brushes does this also apply to NRs or DLs or indeed any non NSW locos that
have to operate over these sections of track?
MD
PETer and susAN
>Maurie Daly wrote:
>
>> >Having an insulator between the wheel and the rail is usually fatal for any
>> >form of track circuit.
>>
>> If however , the Rail Authority has done none of these, then they are
>> expecting us to beleive that sanding from a steam loco can make the track ccts
>> fail in a dangerous mode , but not sand from diesels or electrics.
>> Hardly beleivable one would think.
>> Prior to the 3801 incident had the SRA , or indeed any other Railway in this
>> country issued warnings about sanding in track circuited terrain?
>
>The problems of Cowan Bank are surely unique and warrant their own rules, the
>rules re sanding would be quite OK anywhere else. The poms of course have their
>annual problem in autumn - leaf fall season and have gone to great lengths and
>huge expenditure to overcome the problem of trains unable to brake to a stand at
>stations or red signals, or to lift the load once stopped. The problems of rail
>insulation are not new, just caused by different situations.
>
>A question now for the NSW people, what happened in the days of the plodding
>standard goods loco climbing Cowan Bank and dropping all their sand etc. Electric
>signals with track circuits existed then so did they have any problems way back
>then.
>
>David.
>
See the answer in my post in the other "Indian Pacific hits freight train" thread on this newsgroup.
I quoted from the RTM's AD60 book.
Cheers
Peter Cokley
PETer and susAN
>In article <37C67888...@ancc.com.au> David Langley <d...@ancc.com.au> writes:
>>From: David Langley <d...@ancc.com.au>
>>Subject: Re: Indian Pacific hits freight train - Who's the Responsible
>>Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 21:37:44 +1000
>
>>Maurie Daly wrote:
>
>>> >Having an insulator between the wheel and the rail is usually fatal for any
>>> >form of track circuit.
>>>
>>> If however , the Rail Authority has done none of these, then they are
>>> expecting us to beleive that sanding from a steam loco can make the track ccts
>>> fail in a dangerous mode , but not sand from diesels or electrics.
>>> Hardly beleivable one would think.
>>> Prior to the 3801 incident had the SRA , or indeed any other Railway in this
>>> country issued warnings about sanding in track circuited terrain?
>
>>The problems of Cowan Bank are surely unique and warrant their own rules, the
>>rules re sanding would be quite OK anywhere else. The poms of course have their
>>annual problem in autumn - leaf fall season and have gone to great lengths and
>>huge expenditure to overcome the problem of trains unable to brake to a stand at
>>stations or red signals, or to lift the load once stopped. The problems of rail
>>insulation are not new, just caused by different situations.
>
>>A question now for the NSW people, what happened in the days of the plodding
>>standard goods loco climbing Cowan Bank and dropping all their sand etc. Electric
>>signals with track circuits existed then so did they have any problems way back
>>then.
>
>>David.
>
>I cant see why Cowan Bank is unique.
>Any severe grade in NSW where heavy freight trains are hauled by diesel or
>electric locos would also apply.
>If we contend that the problem is sand and AC track ccts , ie we are in
>electrified territory, then also the climb up the blue mtns (1:33) worse than
>Cowan, or Como bank on the Illawarra would also be candidates.
>If there is no exclusion , ie DC or AC track ccts cause the problem then there
>are dozens of track cct 1:40 grades where sanding would not be uncommon.
> In relation to the claim that all NSW locos are fitted with de-sanding
>brushes does this also apply to NRs or DLs or indeed any non NSW locos that
>have to operate over these sections of track?
>
>MD
>
Can anyone please supply the sand capacity of the mainline steam locos as well as the diesels. Could
these figures either be in cubic feet or cubic inches or the metric equivalent or the time in
minutes that sand would last for if applied in a continuous manner.
The AD 60 was allowed 34 minutes Hawkesbury River to Cowan so the sand supply would have had to be
large as sand was also used on earlier grades on the trip south from Broadmeadow. On the Cowan bank
the assistant steamer usually went against the guard's van and not in front of the AD60 so the
assistant loco could not sand for the AD60.
What is the sand capacity of the NR class? Would it be greater or less than the earlier diesels such
as the 44 or 42 class?
Thanks
Peter Cokley
gonoN...@bigpond.com
wrote:
>Exnarc wrote:
Are you saying that there are no hills in victoria that require the
use of sand in adverse conditions????
Regards Paul Johnston
gonoN...@bigpond.com
Maurie all locos that lead in NSW have to be fitted with operational
desanding equipment which consists of an air nozzle facing forward on
the trailing bogie which is supposed to remove the excess sand
On the NR class they serve a dual purpose in that the trailing one is
a desanding nozzle (controlled by the sanding equipment)
and the leading one is a millipede blower ( controlled by a toggle
switch on the switch panel)
any loco not fitted with desanding equipment must have the sanders cut
out or trail behind a loco with desanding equipment and be authorized
by a Rova Mech advice.
regards Paul Johnston (MNRC)
Russell Norton
>Any severe grade in NSW where heavy freight trains are hauled by diesel or
>electric locos would also apply.
>If we contend that the problem is sand and AC track ccts , ie we are in
>electrified territory, then also the climb up the blue mtns (1:33) worse
than
>Cowan, or Como bank on the Illawarra would also be candidates.
>If there is no exclusion , ie DC or AC track ccts cause the problem then
there
>are dozens of track cct 1:40 grades where sanding would not be uncommon.
> In relation to the claim that all NSW locos are fitted with de-sanding
>brushes does this also apply to NRs or DLs or indeed any non NSW locos that
>have to operate over these sections of track?
>
>MD
NR's and DL's are fitted with de-sanding equipment, as are ALL diesel locos
that regularly operate in NSW. If you want to run a loco within NSW that
doesn't have de-sanding equipment, you require a rova mech authority, and
the loco must be block worked everywhere. This situation applied to BL's
when they first started working into NSW, prior to de-sanding equipment
being fitted to them.
De-sanding equipment on diesels are not brushes. They consist of an air hose
attached in the vicinity of each sander, and blow main reservoir air onto
the track to remove excess sand. If you are going forward, and start
sanding, the leading sanders will dump sand, and simultaneously the trailing
de-sanders will blow air on the track to remove any build up of excess sand.
Cowan bank is not unique in relation to sanding. Diesels will sand anywhere
& everywhere, and not necessarily on steep banks, especially current models
that automatically sand when their computers think they detect wheel slip.
They will also automatically sand going DOWN a grade, if the dynamic brake
is being used and wheel slippage starts to occur.
The uniqueness of Cowan bank would appear to stem from the fact that,
depending on whom you believe, the integrity of the entire signalling system
on Cowan bank at that time was questionable.
The conspiracy theorists, of which I probably fall into the category, will
say it was a big cover-up. However, that doesn't help the young family of
Gordon Hill (the driver), or the families of the other 5 passengers that
tragically perished. Hopefully the idiot who put the handbrake on still has
nightmares about their big secret.
Russ....
David Langley
>
> Are you saying that there are no hills in victoria that require the
> use of sand in adverse conditions????
What I'm inferring is that Victoria does not have a grade like Cowan that is
traversed by so many trains, and in the former days pre limited wheel slip locos
and multiple units, a lot more trains pouring sand onto the rails in what can be a
fairly damp area.
David.
David Langley
> I cant see why Cowan Bank is unique.
> Any severe grade in NSW where heavy freight trains are hauled by diesel or
> electric locos would also apply.
Cowan Bank is unique because that is where the train was hit. And sand was the cause.
If a train is hit on Como Bank etc then we would have to investigate it all over
again. Does it mean anything regarding the Cowan incident that the track circuits had
very recently been replaced?
>
> If we contend that the problem is sand and AC track ccts , ie we are in
> electrified territory, then also the climb up the blue mtns (1:33) worse than
> Cowan, or Como bank on the Illawarra would also be candidates.
> If there is no exclusion , ie DC or AC track ccts cause the problem then there
> are dozens of track cct 1:40 grades where sanding would not be uncommon.
But are they all the same sort of length and traffic flow.
David.
David Langley
> Hopefully the idiot who put the handbrake on still has
> nightmares about their big secret.
I think this says it all. If this hadn't happened then the whole incident and
subsequent ramifications would have been nonexistent.
David.
James Robinson
> In the US, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is the Authority
> given the power to investigate, prosecute, and enforce the necessary
> changes. The NTSB is a part of the Federal Department of Transport, and
> acts independently of any railroad operator or owner.
There is a misconception of the role of the US NTSB. It is strictly an
independent investigating body, and down not have any authority to
prosecute or enforce any regulations. It is also not a part of the
Federal Department of Transportation, which does have the authority to
create regulations and enforce them.
The NTSB only has the authority to investigate accidents and safety
issues, and report on their findings. It has been given extensive
powers to accomplish that role, similar to that of the courts of law,
such as the power of detention, search and seizure, and the power of
requiring testimony under oath. Beyond that, their power over the modal
regulators and operators is strictly limited to their influence from the
publication of their findings. It is intended that it be an
investigating body independent of both the regulators and the operating
companies.
The Department of Transportation is the regulatory body that can create
regulations, inspect the operations of transport companies, and enforce
the regulations through fines or by initiating criminal prosecution.
The DOT actually has no authority to investigate accidents.
The Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board has
been set up under a similar framework to the US NTSB.
David Johnson
> Maurie Daly wrote:
>
> > I cant see why Cowan Bank is unique.
> > Any severe grade in NSW where heavy freight trains are hauled by diesel or
> > electric locos would also apply.
>
> Cowan Bank is unique because that is where the train was hit. And sand was the cause.
Cowan Bank was unique, because due to the high mineral content in the area, the track
circuits had to be desensitised. There are numerous stories of trains disappearing off
the track circuits in the past, including inter-urbans which have no sand. This could be
due to the residue of sand left by preceding freight trains (prior to de-sanding). These
problems should now be rectified due to the modernisation of the track circuiting when
the bi-directional was put through.
Bill McNiven
After wandering away from Zanthus (Coonara?) here are two issues in this
thread:
1 Why did the train stall?
2 Why did the signalling fail to protect the stalled train from a
following train?
On 2, I'm grateful for all the detail of sand and track circuits.
On 1, I'm not sure that it's an established fact that an "idiot put the
handbrake on".
I travelled up Cowan Bank behind 3801 on the day before the fatal collision.
3801 went close to stalling at what became the site of the collision a day
later. Circumstances I noted were that the track was freshly resleepered
with concrete sleepers, and that the uniform 1 in 40 grade south of No. 3
Tunnel seemed to have acquired a few undulations during the
resleepering/ballasting.
My understanding on handbrakes was that a well-meaning but shocked volunteer
stated the speculation "someone must have put the handbrake on" but no
smoking handbrake was ever found.
I retired from the steam train business about two days later, so I didn't
follow the inquest evidence.
Can somebody tell me
1 Is the "idiot who put the handbrake on" an established fact or an urban
myth?
2 Was the possibility (i.e. my conspiracy theory) that tight track gauge
on a 12-chain curve or a grade steeper in parts than 1 in 40 contributed to
the train stalling?
Thanks in advance
Bill
< Tell >
>
> In all accidents, there a number of contributing factors. The Tangara (which
> was on the main North, not the North Shore) was doing just under the track speed
> for the section. The driver was then faced with a turnout signal that he was
> not expecting for a number of reasons. It should all be in the report.
If enginemen are faced with this "not expecting for a
number of reasons, you beaut NSW signal control", quite
a common occurrence over there it seems, then
HOO-bloody-RAY for Radio Train Control Orders, at least
the driver has been told on the Train Order and
repeated back to the Controller what any likely
"deviations" from the norm are expected.
----Terry Burton
Alice Springs NT
Eddie Oliver
>
> A question now for the NSW people, what happened in the days of the plodding
> standard goods loco climbing Cowan Bank and dropping all their sand etc. Electric
> signals with track circuits existed then so did they have any problems way back
> then.
There was a form of sequential release (based on correct sequencing of
occupancy of track circuits) on Cowan Bank back in the "old" days,
probably when automatic signalling was first introduced there.
Presumably it was in recognition of the likely problems with heavy
sanding, dampness etc, although I have no knowledge of whether it was
provoked by an accident. This feature was removed at some time unknown
to me, although probably in connection with the resignalling activities
around the time of electrification. Such a feature was restored after
the Cowan Bank accident.
Eddie
jumbojim
Myths & otherwise
1. Handbrake theory was dismissed as a furphy. The
"evidence" came from a "remark" on the footplate by the
driver along the lines of "someone has probably put a hand
brake on" which was captured on a tape recorder wielded by a
visitor on the footplate during the climb and incident. The
tape recording was given in evidence at the coronial
inquest. It was subsequently dismissed by the coroner has
having no evidence in fact.
2. Gauge was tight a/c re-railing with heavier rail having a
wider head onto old sleepers.
2a. The grade is certainly steeper than 1 in 40 at the point
of
stalling a/c the lowering of the trackbed in 3 & 4 tunnels
to gain clearance for DDIUs. It is actually 1 in 33.5 for a
short stretch as it climbs back up to the 1 in 40 alignment.
By way of compensation, the grade on the up approach to No4
tunnel is easier than 1 in 40 for a short stretch.
JJ
In article <NkTx3.1372$1E2....@ozemail.com.au>, "Bill
McNiven" <wmcn...@gunzel.ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Can somebody tell me
>1 Is the "idiot who put the handbrake on" an established
fact or an urban
>myth?
>2 Was the possibility (i.e. my conspiracy theory) that
tight track gauge
>on a 12-chain curve or a grade steeper in parts than 1 in
40 contributed to
>the train stalling?
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Bill
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Paul Hogan
Bill McNiven <wmcn...@gunzel.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:NkTx3.1372$1E2....@ozemail.com.au...
<snip>>
> Can somebody tell me
> 1 Is the "idiot who put the handbrake on" an established fact or an
urban
> myth?
> 2 Was the possibility (i.e. my conspiracy theory) that tight track
gauge
> on a 12-chain curve or a grade steeper in parts than 1 in 40 contributed
to
> the train stalling?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Bill
>
I was on Cowan Bank on the night of the crash, at a vantage point across the
valley on the old Pacific Hwy, where the garage used to be. Obviously it was
quite dark, so my observations are based on sound, but I do remember that as
the train came out of No 3 tunnel, it was labouring at very slow speed, and
the final stall did not seem to involve any slipping. Steam pressure was
not an issue, as the engine blew off shortly after stopping. I was also on
the train the previous evening, and noted the extra effort required on this
section, although this has always been the slowest part of the Bank.
I'm not certain if the handbrake theory was ever proved, but something must
have retarded the trains speed, other than slippery rails. I think it was
suspected that the "1 in 44" at this section had become somewhat steeper
after track relaying, as the curvature / grade was no longer compensated.
More knowledgable people may correct me on this.
David's postings on the sanding issues certainly debunk a lot of the
prevalent conspiracy theories. As with many accidents, in the final analysis
it appears that it was caused by a number of adverse factors acting in
combination, rather than any one single incident.
Regards,
Paul Hogan
< Tell >
to the original post has prompted me to ask:-
If the IP was sent into a siding where another train
was waiting, how come the driver on the IP did not go
for the big hole on the Westinghouse well before.?
How come the crew on the goods waiting for a cross, did
not see the points set for a kiss.!
This is NOT Cowan bank or anywhere else on the East
Coast, but the wide open Nullabor with plenty of scope
to see where opposing trains are sitting and which way
the points are set, DAY or NIGHT.
Most have only two choices, mainline or crossing loop.
casey-joe <ber...@bigpond.com> has very forcibly told
us that it was due too TC, and I quote in part:-
"They refuse to answer their Radios, and sit over there
in Adelaide, probably wanking themselves off in their
own self importance! Yes legends in their own little
minds!" ..end quote.
Well .....a lot of the PA controllers are working in
Adelaide now, they are very experienced, but human just
like the rest of us crews included.
I await the report with interest, because it might
determine whether I travel long distance rail again.
Privatisation has nothing much to do with this one,
only the pass cars were private owned, everything else
was GOVERNMENT owned.
Then again, "corporatisation" of government bodies
might provide a clue.
----Terry Burton
robson
>
> .... As with many accidents, in the final analysis
> it appears that it was caused by a number of adverse factors acting in
> combination, rather than any one single incident.
That is usually the case with all rail accidents!
Rob
Russell Norton
jumbojim wrote in message <09920fb9...@usw-ex0103-020.remarq.com>...
>Bill
>
>Myths & otherwise
>
>1. Handbrake theory was dismissed as a furphy. The
>"evidence" came from a "remark" on the footplate by the
>driver along the lines of "someone has probably put a hand
>brake on" which was captured on a tape recorder wielded by a
>visitor on the footplate during the climb and incident. The
>tape recording was given in evidence at the coronial
>inquest. It was subsequently dismissed by the coroner has
>having no evidence in fact.
The following is from "Australian Railway Disasters", Kenn Pearce, 1994, IPL
Books, page 209:
Mr Derrick Hand the state coroner "said that "on the balance of
probabilities" it seemed a passenger on the steam train had, at least
partially, pulled on the handbrake in the third carriage of the steam train
before the accident happened. That, together with a higher than nominated
load* tonnage for the train, steep grade and curvature of the track,
prevented the train from being lifted from its stop."
* While it may have been correct that the train load was higher than
originally planned - due to substitution of heavier vehicles - the train was
within the prescribed load limits for 3801 even with its reduced boiler
pressure of 220 pounds per square inch (1517 kPa).
Regards,
Russ...
Rod Gayford
train was put away to let a Super Chief pass and the switchman for reasons
unknown threw the switch just as the Chief approached the switch. The only
difference was that the Chief was doing 80 mph and the resulting crash
killed a number of passengers and train staff. A story on it was in Trains
magazine within the last 12 months. I thought in Australia manual points
should be clipped when passenger trains pass to prevent such occurrences?
Cheers
RJG
< Tell > <tel...@OZozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:381008df...@news.ozemail.com.au...
Exnarc
Rod Gayford <rja...@smartchat.net.au> wrote in message
news:7qhnpc$lnm$1...@merki.connect.com.au...
> I thought in Australia manual points
> should be clipped when passenger trains pass to prevent such occurrences?
>
> Cheers
> RJG
NO. Not in ARTC (AN) territory.
Remember, these locations are at the back of beyond, even without the
provision of powered operation the switches are physically locked by the
lever, that when thown (turned), seats into a groove on the switch stand
preventing it from being vibrated open.
In the case of this accident, it appears (because the location is powered)
that the crew member operated the throw button as the train approached, and
as several others (far more expert on the subject than me) have indicated
this is possible due to the short approach circuit at these locations.
Read: Notagunzel and David Langley's mails in "INDIAN PACIFIC CRASH" message
for the technical answers.
Bob.
David Langley
> I thought in Australia manual points
> should be clipped when passenger trains pass to prevent such occurrences?
The clipping of points generally happens only when a passenger movement is
about to take place over a facing set of points (switches) that are otherwise
unlocked. That is not secured by a lock bar (worked from a signal box or hand
worked), a point machine or some other device to prevent accidentally movement
under the train. In Victoria we had no dramas with passenger trains passing
over trailing points at speeds up to 115kmph with the points secured merely by
a hand locking bar, pin and padlock, or even nothing except a CCW lever to
hold them for the straight road.
David Langley.
David Johnson
> After wandering away from Zanthus (Coonara?) here are two issues in this
> thread:
> 1 Why did the train stall?
> 2 Why did the signalling fail to protect the stalled train from a
> following train?
>
> On 2, I'm grateful for all the detail of sand and track circuits.
Tests show that 0.3mm of sand requires 800 volts to break down. 1 - 1.2mm of
sand requires 2000 to 3000 volts to break down.
The maximum sanding specified for a 38 class is 4 to 5 lb/min, however, after
the accident, 3801 was tested as having 7.22 lb/min on the leading wheels on the
up side. The specification for the trailing sand is 1 to 2 lb/min, but was
later tested as 3.82 lb/min on the up side. Down side sanding was within spec.
> On 1, I'm not sure that it's an established fact that an "idiot put the
> handbrake on".
OK... Following is an extract from a statement of the person who checked them
at the time."
yyyyy and himself then walked along the train, all brakes appeared to be off
until he (xxxxx) observed a wheel with brake shoes applied on Car 3, FS2090.
He kicked the shoes but they did not move; he then touched the wheel which was
hot to touch.
yyyyy yyyyyyy also touched the wheel.
He then walked to the second bogie to see if its brakes were applied but as he
reached the bogie a person from inside the carriage called out that "the
handbrake was on, I have let it off". He is not sure if these were the exact
words but it was something similar. He noticed that the brakes on the rear bogie
of the carriage were not applied.
He walked back to the front of the carriage and noticed that the brakes on the
leading bogie were now released. yyyyy checked the brakes on this carriage were
fully released by also pulling the release handle to exhaust any brake cylinder
pressure. Although the brake shoes were free of the wheels a significant amount
of air was exhausted.
He then again checked the next car and although the brakes appeared to be
released, he was able to exhaust a small amount of air when he pulled the
release handle. He checked that the last two (2) cars, brakes were not visibly
applied and returned to the locomotive.
Barry and he climbed onto the locomotive and advised the crew that we had found
a handbrake that appeared to have been applied.
The Driver attempted to start the train but could not move more than about two
(2) metres. He remembers looking at the steam gauge which was showing a full
head of steam.
"
The conclusion of the report is as follows:
"
In complying with the Terms of Reference the Board is conscious of the Coronial
Enquiry which will be held into this collision. However, our investigations have
shown the following:
1. Determine the Cause of the Collision:
The collision occurred after the intercity express N172 passed signal 34.6 which
was showing a green aspect. This green aspect was exhibited because sand on the
Up rail on track circuits 34.6B and 34.6C insulated the steam train NS24 from
the rail.
2. Establish why NS24 steam train came to a stand and what occurred from that
time to the time of the collision.
There were no problems with NS24 particularly Locomotive 3801 prior to Boronia
No. 4 tunnel. At sometime during transit through No. 4 tunnel Locomotive 3801
suffered a severe wheel slip which lasted approximately 15 seconds. This of
course caused the train to lose momentum and the speed dropped from
approximately 30 kph to about 5-8kph. The Board believes there was a brake
applied in Car 3 (FS2090) prior to this time and with the drop in speed, a
significant increase occurred in the braking power due to the characteristics of
cast iron brake blocks versus speed.
The load for this train was calculated on the basis of a grade of 1:40 and the
train weight as per the diagram book. The calculated load was then confirmed by
tests using the dynamometer car.
Surveys of the grade show that the train came to a stand on a grade of 1:35.
Also test weighings of the type of car used in NS24 show the load to be
approximately 6 tonnes higher than indicated in the diagram book.
The moment the train came to a stand it is unlikely that it would have been able
to be lifted, especially when one takes into consideration the amount of sand on
the rail.
The Board, however, is of the opinion that the application of the handbrake on
Car 3 (FS2090) was the most significant cause of the train coming to a stand.
At the time of the wheel slip and thereafter, sand was applied in order to aid
contact between rail and driving wheels. The amount of sand discharged through
the sanding equipment was above the specified amount on the driver's side.
The Board believes that after coming to a stand there were three distinct
periods:
(a) Attempts to restart while irregular application of brakes were being
investigated.
(b) Having released the handbrake on FS2090 further attempts were made to move
the train which were unsuccessful.
(c) Attempts were made to bunch the train by application of the handbrake on
the rear car and then powering to move forward.
During this time there was a conference between Driver and Guard and Guard and
Assistant Station. Master, Hawkesbury River.
There were a number of witnesses who noted repeated change of aspects of the
signal 33.4 distant which was located with two carriages to the rear of this
signal standing on track 34.6B.
At some time at least 2 minutes prior to the collision the signal 33.4 distant
showed a continuous green aspect which must have been for at least 10 seconds.
Coincidently with this the last two cars also failed to shunt track circuit
34.6B again because of sand insulation, causing signal 34.6 to change its aspect
from red to green.
3. Establish the details of the operation of N172 (double deck intercity)
from Gosford to the time of the collision.
From the time the Driver of N172 accepted the road at signal 34.6 (green aspect)
the collision was inevitable in the absence of protection in the rear of NS24.
N172 departed Gosford at 1829 hours and passed Hawkesbury River signalbox at
1847 hours and arrived at signal 34.6 at approximately 1849 hours. The Driver
discussed the reason for the signal 34.6 being at red with the Assistant Station
Master at Hawkesbury River and then remained at that signal until approximately
13 minutes later when the Driver received a green aspect at signal 34.6 and
moved passed it. Two minutes later the train emerged from Boronia 3 tunnel at
approximately 60kph, having a sighting distance of about 60 metres. The Driver
would not have been able to stop the train prior to the collision or make any
significant reduction in speed.
4. Examine the implementation of emergency procedures after the collision
occurred.
The Board accepts that all railway protection procedures after the collision
were implemented quickly and satisfactorily. The emergency services were
summonsed in the first case by a railway employee who was observing the train
from Oliver's Garage across the valley.
The Board has some disquiet over the time taken to advise the relevant emergency
authorities by on duty staff. The actual performance of all emergency services
(including rail) was first class.
5. In respect of Items 2, 3 and 4, what deviations were detected from
standard maintenance operating practices and procedures.
The following matters appear to be requiring further examination after the
Coroner has completed his Inquiry:
(a) State of the locomotive sanding equipment. (b) The use of sand prior to the
collision.
(c) Irregular use of unauthorised persons for brake examination.