Tragic derailment of corridor train

Just saw some photos of when they removed 6444 from the accident site. It's in really, really bad shape. I will be surprised if it ever returns to service. The cab is gone, the entire cowl is crushed in on the engineer's side, the roof is crumpled quite a bit. I don't think the prime mover is any good after seeing the exterior damage.

I found something special in my picture archives...
I found a picture,may be the only one,with the 2 latest wrecked VIA F40 together
the 6400 was pulling the 6444 to CAD Lachine,a bit more than 2 years ago,the 6444 was getting problems with motor and was going for rebuilt..
two weeks after,6400 was involved in a derailment with 6457 at St-Charles-de-Bellechasse,and two years after,the 6444 was involved in the derailment at Burlington..

I rode home from Toronto on Friday (via GO from Hamilton to Union, then backtracking on VIA 97/Amtrak 64 to NYC). My GO train ran Track 3 all the way from Bayview Jct to Oakville. Leaving Aldershot, we were up to 70 well before King Road, so for some folks I know that were wondering how the VIA train could have gotten up to near that speed between the station and King, well... quite easily is the answer. The Maple Leaf got routed via Track 3 from Appleby onward on the way back as well. There did not appear to be any speed restrictions through the area of the wreck, but there were some noticeable soft spots both in the area of where the locomotive and first car derailed as well as within the crossover in question. There was a crew doing repair work on the building that got damaged and the yellow caution tape still adorns the trees from there to the former road crossing.

Just my observations.

Any further updates?

Nothing yet, but I suspect that in all likelihood we will not be hearing anything further until the TSB investigation comes to any conclusions. There could be some updates over the coming months, but it could end up being as much as a year.

Your best bet (to stay updated) is just to keep checking the TSB site : http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/m ... 2t0038.asp

Good call. So strange that i easily could have been on that train if i were still with my ex!

Last tuesday,I saw the 6444 at Montreal Maintenance center..
But,the locomotive have been stripped off,the cab still under a blue rag over it,no more roof,and it's almost impossible to recognize it..
I was delivering at MMC in a truck and we had to go across the MMC to join the main builtding where the offices are,and I did a short clip,where we can see the 6444 at the beginning of the sequence..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGmIIWqr3hc

it's the most latest new,from 2 days ago,no we have a good view on the final destiny of the 6444.

Woah, that is shocking to see....! You can see right through it out the other side! I wonder if it was set for scrapping and they simply grabbed the internals out for spare parts or something?

they stripped it out for pieces
now it look like this


and for the ones that they did"nt seen the new update,here a raw view of the accident
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLRXa7CyD2c

I wonder why they left the panels by the HEP generator?

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is scheduled to release its report on their findings in this incident at a press conference tomorrow. Tuesday, June 11, at 9:10 a.m.. http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/a ... 130610.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What suprizes me is the total lack of ATC/ATS on these lines with the amount of traffic on them.
The RTC(DS)could(should) have given a "heads up" on the signal maintainers in the area and the reroute to #3 track
to the Head end crew of #94.

Backshophoss wrote:What suprizes me is the total lack of ATC/ATS on these lines with the amount of traffic on them.
The RTC(DS)could(should) have given a "heads up" on the signal maintainers in the area and the reroute to #3 track
to the Head end crew of #94.

The signals should be enough of a heads up to the train crew. As the report mentioned, dispatch is not required to notify the train of each time they cross over. It would not be the worse thing if they did ... but with two (this time three) qualified and experienced engineers in the cab someone should have seen the signal and stopped the train.

Do they have "Delay In Block" rules for this line? This seems to be the perfect situation for a DIB rule. The train stopped after the last advance signal and then restarted with the crew apparently forgetting the signals that they were operating under. Then again ... when a crew loses situational awareness bad things happen, regardless of the rules.

The signal crew noticing the approaching train and having the time to decide that the train was traveling too fast and being able to evacuate shows some awareness. Even thought they "owned" Track 2 they thought there might be a problem and cleared the tracks. Probably not a bad idea even if the train had successfully taken the crossover.

Delay in block rules should be in their rule book,but the move from 2 to 3 track is unusal to say the least,the RTC(DS) shoud have said something
about the move while #94 was doing station work(stopped),ATC/ATS would have "enforced" the signal in front of that crossover by dumping the air.
Every DS/RTC has their own style of running their district,most will do little "talking to trains" while other will give "heads up" calls due to
crossing/signal failures and let the crew know there's an out of ordinary move ahead,livestock on the track,etc....

Backshophoss wrote:... while other will give "heads up" calls due to crossing/signal failures and let the crew know there's an out of ordinary move ahead,livestock on the track,etc....

The heads up calls for signal failures and known track obstructions should not be optional. On the line I monitor I hear them occasionally over the radio and they are serious conversations taken down as if they were track warrants, including mentioning the rule that the train will operate under while passing the crossing. I would hope that such things are also reported on this Canadian line under their rules and are not optional.

Perhaps unusual crossover moves should be added to the rulebook. But that would also need to define usual and dispatchers have their own preferences as to where to cross trains. What is usual on one trip may not be usual to the next dispatcher ... and depending on the size of the territory announcing every move (not knowing what each crew thought was usual) could be a burden that would cause other mistakes or delays.