Join the discussion on the following article:
Central Maine & Quebec CEO: ‘We’ll have to prove ourselves’
Join the discussion on the following article:
Central Maine & Quebec CEO: ‘We’ll have to prove ourselves’
They have to maintain all of their locomotives to prove that they are working properly.
For safety purposes they need to build a steel containment wall around the curve that goes through Lac-Mégantic.
I have heard some talk of relocating the track outside Lac Magentic proper. Is this something they are seriously looking at?
How come nobody likes used GE’s?
@Paul, think FEC when looking for used EMD’s or other than that, a good SD40-2 or GP40-2 can be had for $275,000 ea. +/-
The fact they’re immediately running out and buying replacement locomotives, even if only $10M worth (what’s that, like, five cheap ones?) should hopefully reassure some of the posters in recent threads about the CM&Q that FIG intends to run this as a going concern.
I feel like being insulted by the Marxist trolls. Thus: The CM&Q is going to be testing the waters and that will involve minimizing risk to the parent company. For now, investment in CM&Q will be very conservative until it can be seen if it will be profitable, something BAR,CP and MMA found difficult, in recent times.
It’s my sincere hope that Fortress doesn’t make the same mistake that Ed Burckhardt made by being cheap and relying on ONE man running the train. To answer your question, Gregory; the old GE’s weren’t very reliable.
The curved tracks through the town and around the lake need to be diverted and elevated over lake on a series of piers and bridges so that the grade is reduced. They can get rid of the grade crossing and the sharp curve through the town if they can build bridges for the tracks over the lake.
Another choice is to get rid of the curving track around the lake and construct a new line East and West. That would require buying and trading land.
@MEL & MO MILLER from CALIFORNIA … Having TWO on that train would have made NO difference. Rules were followed, Both would have gone to a hotel for the night with train locked down the same way. The Engineers DIDNT release the brakes, the FD did, by accident when they shut down the Loco. Biggest problem now is competing for export work with Docks in NB and NS.
Two men on the crew might very well have made a difference. Remember that sufficient hand brakes were supposed to have been set to protect against exactly what did happen - the failure of the engines to maintain brake pressure. No one could have anticipated why the engine was shut down, but two people setting the hand brakes at the end of a long day might have done a more adequate job and thus prevented the tragedy.
The train would not have run away if the hand brakes had been set as required by Canadian regulations and MM&A rules. Two employees working together are less likely to ignore rules because under duress, one might be convinced to testify against the other. The fire department did not shut down the locomotive - the MM&A representative did. If the hand brakes had been set, shutting down the locomotive would not have caused the runaway.
They need to reroute the tracks. There are no industries served in the town of Lac-Manganic . The tracks are just cutting the town in half.
Please sell or donate some of those GEs. Don’t kill them all! I saw this happening a mile away, very sad.
With all the rehash of this terrible incident and the desire to minimize danger for a town along the railroad I offer just one thought:
How does a company minimize risk? What constitutes acceptable risk for a company?
Leaving a unattended train load (45-50 tank cars?) at the top of a incline with a community right adjacent to the right of way at the bottom of the incline is not minimizing risk and in my mind is morally indefensible. Even if there was NO community at the bottom of the incline this action was wrong in my judgement.
Can anyone provide a explanation for this train and ones before being left in this spot?
Setting oneself (or company) up for failure is just wrong. If things can go wrong they will and disaster might well be the result. Unfortunately very horribly well illustrated by this tragedy.
i worked on the BAR and i hope they save the BAR geeps