Thats shuts down others automatic safety systems, to allow signalers and controllers to do their job without "programmed decisions" ; but they failed to identify the train in time.
@@perracheposte1752and that is the problem, but manual actions from the controllers should override the automatic system and shut it down temporary. This way they can still direct everything when they know wich train is the runaway and still have a automatic safety systen in place
@@joycedudzinski9415 a lot of people who confuse spelling of things have dyslexia (like myself) or speak another language. likewise, there's also typos (easy to switch a few letters)
So the conductor literally did like 8 mistakes? - He didn't contact technicians when the emergency brake was triggered - He released the air from all the brakes - He accidentally prevented any new air to reach the brakes - He failed to test the brakes after working on them - He forgot about the electrical brakes - He failed to identify himself when alerting - He failed to tell his location when alerting - He left the cabin and couldn't communicate anymore I mean there was other stuff that messed up, most notably the "safety" reroute system, but this is still insane.
And despite all of that, I can't really blame him for most of it. Mistakes are human and all that jazz. The thing I judge him for most is not contacting technicians, but at the same time, I get that a very busy time schedule and likely having been in contact over similar issues many times in the past makes one want to shortcut the solution. Releasing the air of the brakes may well be a part of an official troubleshooting procedure that relies on them being refilled with new air. Him failing to test the brakes is somewhat true and somewhat false, given that the 'train behaved as it should' and his breaking minor breaking test was probably at low speed and sufficient for his singular working brake to manage. Failing to identify himself when alerting? He panicked, and I'm not entirely sure he truly forgot, or that the people at the central communication place may not have heard in the few seconds before he ran away to warn his passengers to brace. It is a messed up situation and he is definitely not without blame, but so many of these mistakes are just outright unfortunate and barely worthy of a 'hey, make sure you do this properly next time' if it had been observed alone during a calmer time. But instead, there was time pressure aplenty, and all the mistakes came together perfectly for maximum carnage on ALL levels. Had just one safety system worked as it should, probably nobody would have been hurt at all...
One contributing factor was also that the pressure indicator for the brakes in the Z5300 was only monitoring the pressure in the current cariage, not the whole train. The engineer did a brake test, but since it was only monitoring the carriage with working break system, everything looked good for him.
@@forevercomputing This is indeed how they work yes. But it gets a bit more complicated. In order to apply enough pressure to the break pads, you have two air tanks per brakes: There is a Main air tank and an Auxilliary air tank, the break pads pistons are in between both tanks and the Main air tank pressure controls the breaking. When there is no pressure in the Main air tank, breaks are applied by the pressure contained in the auxilliary tank. What the engineer and conductor did, is that they bled the pressure in both the main and the auxilliary air tank (wich is a procedure only allowed for maintenance, to move the carriage around the workshop). Since both tanks were are the same pressure, atmospheric pressure, so they were uncontrolled neither released neither applied, just free floating.
ya that was dumb hearing that but then i heard "state owned train" that why the state blamed the drivers so they didn't have to take any of the blame themselves.
Electric brakes causing excessive wear on brake shoes? They don't use the brake shoes, only the trains motors to retard the speed. To me there was a lot of blame put on the driver of this train, whereas his lack of knowledge of basic emergency procedures could largely be blamed on management of the railway operator. What level of training is given to drivers, and where are the regular refresher courses given so that they retain proficiency?
Some trains (mostly older types) have a way of operating the brakes by electric signal instead of air pessure, this is not the same as engine braking. But I agree with you that they put to much blame on the driver. (I'm a train driver myself).
It's surprisingly capable. It always used to brake 20-30 tons rollercoaster train travel at 80 km/h. The problem is, it's not super powerful and overheat easily
Not to mention, every car has a mechanical parking brake that could have been cranked on. Applying the brake as time consuming, but they could have applied two of them.
@davidbennetts 616 'electric brakes'? We don't have those on our trains at the SNCF. We use the air-compression Westinghouse system. (I work on those trains since 26 years now so I really know !)
No. This is all wrong. Train brakes are not like truck brakes. Train brakes need air pressure to apply. In the case of loss of pressure they do apply automatically, but it is pressure held in an accumulator tank in each car that applies the brakes, when main line pressure is lost. Once you understand this this the video will make more sense. He let all the air out of the tanks in each car, so there were no brakes since the main line pressure was also cut. Modern trains still work this way. They use air pressure to apply the brakes. Not springs.
@@GigsTaggart An elaboration: Given the age of the trains involved in the accident they probably didn't have electro pneumatic brakes but rather automatic/westinghouse air brakes? On a westinghouse brake system, there is a brake pipe which runs the length of the train and charged by compressors and the main reservoir when the brake is released. On each coach there are auxiliary reservoirs which store air to actuate the brakes via a one-way valve. So if the auxiliary reservoirs have low pressure, the air being pumped into the brake pipe will recharge the auxiliary reservoirs, so in no case will the auxiliary reservoirs ever have a lower pressure than the brake pipe. A triple valve controls the flow of air to and from the brake cylinder. When the pressure in the brake pipe drops, air will be allowed from the main reservoir into the brake cylinder, applying the brakes. The pressure in the brake cylinder will only be released once the reservoir and brake pipe pressure increase back to a threshold value. Closing the brake pipe valve while the brakes have been applied means that the brake pipe and therefore the auxiliary reservoir will not recharge, but also that the brake will not be able to release (since the low brake pipe pressure is sealed in). So that's probably what happened when the driver tried to reset the emergency brake and closed the main brake pipe valve. But who would use another valve handle for leverage? The driver then lets the air out of the brake system but which part is not specified. Apparently the triple valves do not allow air to backflow from the brake cylinder to the auxiliary reservoir so the driver may have somehow directly released the air in the brake cylinder? Not sure. Either way once all the air was released from the system the brakes became completely inoperative as the reservoir couldn't be recharged. The video talks briefly about "electric brakes" which probably means rheostatic brake? Rheostatic brakes which use the motor to slow the train down work best at high speed. At low speed, they're not as effective and provide little to no brake force at very low speeds. So air brakes are still needed to completely stop the train. Many trains also have spring-loaded parking brakes which require pressure to release installed (because if pressure was lost while the train was switched off the train would roll away!) but I don't think they're supposed to be used when the train is in motion.
It always amazes me how people working, which make mistakes, get jail time but managers and CEO of companies which ignore safety for profit just have to pay some money.
@@cmdr_krabovwas the driver in charge of the crappy safety system? No. So why was he the only one punished? We don’t live in a vacuum and to blame one or two people for this is messed up.
@@cmdr_krabov No, but he was ultimately the one responsible for ensuring that ALL employees of his company receive adequate training for their jobs, & obviously this train-driver had not!
@@bicivelo burh it aint da crappy safety system. da problem was da fact that da driver broke regulations. he shouldve waited for da maintenance staff. It was due to his actions dat da valver was closed. Also - u makin changeas to da brakin system but DONT DO BRAKIN POWER TEST? it basic thing to do !!
But by doing so, he doomed the people in the train he knew he would hit. He could have told someone in the first cabin to get everyone out and worked to get his train identified and thus diverted, saving everyone from his mistakes. The conductor of the train he hit, who stayed in the cabin to tell his passengers to evacuate should be remembered, since he did what his coworker did not.
The conductor of the train must never leave the cabin. If the passengers need to be alerted about anything, he needs to use the communication system and stay in the cabin. Or was there not such a system in that train model? By leaving the cabin to alert the passengers, he condemned many others. That was only one of his many mistakes. I hope that he cannot ever work in any train company. One thing is having a slight mistake that can be forgiven (we all are humans) and another such a long list, as already stated by another user in the comments.
@@haganeelric98 the video did mention that after this they added a PA for passengers.. so i'm going to go with no the train didn't have one before so the only way to warn them was to go tell them himself
Reminds me of the PRR's runaway in DC. From what I remember, one of their named passenger trains, the Federal, crashed into the station after the air brake valves on one of the coaches closed, resulting in only three of the coaches having brake power.
@@tormodhag6824 The type of air brake that you are visualizing is for road-going commercial trucks, where the air brake chamber is a SPRING BRAKE. The spring brake system is "failsafe" in that, a loss of air pressure causes the brake to be applied. In normal operation the in-cab foot valve sends signals to the brake control valve which then sends signals to the exhaust valves which in turn exhaust the air from the spring brake chambers and allow the powerful coil springs to actuate pressure on the slack adjuster levers which then rotate the camshafts thus forcing the brake shoes outwards against the brake drums. Seems like the train brakes are not spring brakes, rather they are actuated by positive air pressure.
@@naijagoatfarmeri think modern trains do have air tanks that makes the carriages failsafe to applying brake power if air pressure is lost from the locomotive. But this system doesnt work if someone drains the air explaining how the accident in this video could happen
The passenger who pulled the emergency brake because they didnt read the summer timetable also makes my blood boil. Conductor and company made a lot of mistakes, but if the passenger wasnt recklessly selfish, this wouldn't have happened either.
Typical French. Or really typical for any large corporation. As long as all the checkmarks are filled out in a spreadsheet, no one cares what really goes on.
@Dmwntkp99 There is not such à thing as 'secondary brakes' There is a stationary brake in each coach but it won't stop à rolling train. I worked with this material since 1998.
this is very similar to the Accident happend here in Örlikon with SBB, in Train Driver scool we learned about it and since then we are Obligated to do Break Checks after departing from Stations.
A "running brake check" is standard procedure on US railroads after every start from a stop. An air application is made and as soon as the brakes start taking hold, they are let off; brake check made.
@@royreynolds108 nice to meet a fellow Train Driver! I dindt wanted to go into the detail as much before, but specificly we do this roling Brake check after every change of train composition, after every departure from the starting or turning station or after every change of locomotive driver. Also after problems with the brakes have occurred. Have a nice Day! Or evening! Choo choo!
Where I live, city buses don't stop at bus stops unless there is somebody waiting to be picked up. If you want to be dropped off, you have to pull a lever which alerts the bus driver to stop at the next stop, and then they stop. If somebody pulled the lever, which the bus driver then stopped the bus at the next bus stop, but when they were stopped a truck that isn't used to a bus stopping there didn't notice the stopped bus and drove into the back of it, would you blame the person who made the bus come to a stop to be let off? No, of course not. Same here. The train coming to a stop did not cause the brakes to fail, in fact that was the last time they were working. It was the conductor who didn't know better and decided to wing it rather than radio in (as they were supposed to) that caused the brakes to fail.
@MrBattlecharge what are you talking about??? It is not the same at all. Bus passangers use a lever meant to notify the driver, the emergency brake lever is not used to tell the conductor you want to stop.
@richardwehmas no, it is used for emergencies (for which you can argue for or against what Odile did). What I am saying is the same is blaming that person for the accident that occurs, not the instances surrounding the particular situations. Neither caused the accident, each just stopped the vehicle and it would be equally wrong to blame that person for the accident.
@@MrBattlecharge I didn't say her actions caused the accident, I said equating what she did by illegally using an emergency lever because she failed to pay attention to the route stops with a bus passenger who uses a lever as intended is ridiculous. You can debate her culpability in the overall tragedy, i think it falls on the conductor, but there is no debate regarding her actions being a justified emergency or not. Her not paying attention to the route schedule did not count as an emergency that allowed using the lever.
How are the brakes not failing safe!? Any train I've seen before would freeze the brakes when air pressure is lost, thus not requiring the lines to be pressurized to brake. Why is this not the case for every train around the world?
The brakes have a fail safe, which these guys overcame. The indirect air brake has auxiliary reservoirs on every wagon (sometimes on every bogie). The normal condition is that the air pipe and the reservoirs are connected and have the same pressure. When the main pipe drops pressure, automatic valves immediately shuts the connection between the air pipe and the reservoirs and connect the reservoirs with the brake cylinders, thus applying the brakes. When the air pressure rises in the air pipe, the valves restore the connection between the air pipe and the reservoirs and make a connection between the brake cylinders and the atmosphere, so the brakes are released. If you want to unbrake a fully braked train, all you need to do is go at each valve and manually remove air from the brake cylinders, it takes a few second for each brake.
This was a frustrating amount of mistakes. Even with the mother pulling the emergency break, the people who are supposed to be professionals put people's lives in danger through their poor decisions. It is even more important for them to be calm and collected when things go wrong.
The not using electric brakes I think was the worst mistake in a chain. He had a somewhat working braking system, so why not try to use it??? Better to try than to have nothing!!
@@bastiennietveld7128 As I might've mentioned before, if the train has electric PROPULSION, it'll have electric BRAKING; the motors can serve as brakes when they generate electricity that's subsequently returned to the power source. For an electric railroad to NOT have electric braking is virtually unheard of worldwide....
That's insane as they have happened countless times. All forms of transportation had had countless terrible events and many safety systems fail at the same time including airplanes.
I think the errors of all the professionals in the situation are much more grave than that of the mothers. The driver of the train didnt even understand how it works and bypassed a safety mechanism.
So many contributing factors had to happen for this accident to occur…. Not calling the engineers, turning the valve by accident, leaving the cabin and not telling what train he was on, the closing of the station, the other train being delayed, etc etc. If even just ONE of these didn’t happen, the accident could have been prevented.
in my opinion, the girl who pulled the emergency brake isn’t at fault, the driver. its horrifying how little he knew about the train he was responsible for.
Seriously, she made one error as a non expert. The conductor FORGOT HE HAD ELECTRIC BRAKES. He literally broke his normal brakes, messed up the emergency alert, and ran to the back of the train instead of sticking around to save the lives he claimed.
@@aureliagold1222 it's not an error. It's done with selfish intent. She wanted to get off at that station no matter what. You usually receive a massive fine for pulling the brake in a non emergency situation, but it seems they just let her run away.
@@aureliagold1222The electric brakes wouldn't have made much of a difference, below 30 km/h they're useless. And staying in the cabin wouldn't have made any difference since the radio was overridden by the alarm. The mistake was made when he messed up the brakes and restarted the train without following any (shitty) procedures at the time. Those were changed because of this accident by the way and nowadays any procedure involving messing with the brakes includes a test of said brakes before any movement.
According to Seconds From Disaster, both the driver and the conductor survived the crash, so does the passengers, because they tell the passengers to go to the rear end of the runaway train
As much as I despise parents and their sheer entitlement sometimes, this woman could have easily stayed quiet and never come forward. Did she come forward because she felt bad for being a part of this chain reaction and wanted to clear things up for investigators, or because she was afraid she'd be found and punished more severely if she didn't? I was very surprised she stepped forward regardless.
Electric brakes will usually prevent wear to brake pads but are less effective once the speed gets lower which may be a reason they weren't used that much.
As someone who operates electric passenger trains (at a museum) there's probably one more thing the driver could have done. Set the train to reverse and open the control handle to the first notch. That's our procedure for a brake failure: "take the first point in reverse and hope for the best".
9:05 - just a question, Electric breaking - excessive wear on break pads? no way, electric break uses motors as a generators against each other (regulated by resistor or semiconductor circuits that waste that electricity) causing train to slow down or nowdays even stop entirely, no break pads used during that anywhere on the train...., train driver might said that (which i doubt), but as mentioned in video, thats not how EDB works on trains.
@@vincent412l7 I don't think the narrator made it up to be dramatic- they were just stating that the driver believed that was the case. (even if the driver was wrong about it, or perhaps made it up as an excuse for forgetting to do so.)
Some trains (mostly older types) have a way of operating the brakes by electric signal instead of air pessure, this is not the same as engine braking. (Belgian train driver)
9:11 electric brakes use the motors of the locomotive to brake by "burning" the electricity generated, the brake pads are never used. 9:25 He used the radio alarm, which effectively overrides any radio communications. Even if he stayed in the cabin, there was no way to communicate.with the control room. Since then the procedure has changed and runaway trains are forbidden to use radio alarm.
@@leonpano From what I heard there were experiments with that, but it was deemed to expensive cause they'd had to put batteries on the side of the tracks to get the electricity in case there was no demand for power. And the experiments was in the early 2000, so way after this happened.
@@leonpano Exactly, if there is no demand you will waste whatever is powering the power plant. That's why you ideally have a diversity of powerplants that you can start/turn off quicker or slower, to adapt to the demand.
@@aaronaaronsen3360 I made typo(possible auto correct same to smart) But for nuclear power plants is not easy to rapidly shutdown or startup(you can’t shutdown for night and run for day everyday) If there is some hydropower plant, they could pump water up(like charge battery)
Why was the guard who delayed the outbound train's departure also convicted of manslaughter? Like yeah he should have been there earlier, but that still seems like a stretch to file criminal charges.
I don't know if the video maker read or not the official report (I confess I didn't), but what I hear is a looooong lines of mistakes. 9:20 - the electric brakes use no brake pads. They are a contactless brake, that functions by reversing the rotation speed of the motors, which are permanently connected with the motor axle(s). This, of course, cause the braking, but this type of brake's efficiency drops with the speed, so you can't stop a train with them. However, it would have been possible to slow the train enough for the first carriage air brakes to function. On the other hand, even if I'm unaware of the French safety rules, I can tell what a Romanian driver would have done (as the brake technology we use here is identical): it is mandatory to perform "efficiency brake tests" on trains, meaning that the driver will reduce the air pressure with 0,7 bar and evaluate the braking effect. This operation is mandatory at: - departure the first station on a route - one station before a dead-end station (like Gare du Lyon) - after every intervention on the brake system (which includes manually removing the air from the auxiliary air reservoirs - which the French guys just did). Also, when you remove the air, it is mandatory to check it at the end of the train BEFORE moving the train again: the conductor will go at the final air connection with a gauge, the driver will apply brakes and the conductor must note the pressure dropping on his/hers gauge. Obviously, they DID NOT check it. If any of what I've said would have been done by the train crew, the accident would have been prevented. On the other hand, all the railway points are paired to avoid receiving accidentally a train over another. At the begining of the railway, this was done by means of keys (you could'n put the signal on green/"pass" if the keys were not out of the switch and inserted into the signal), than by means of relays. If SNCF tried some sort of electronic means to overcome this... it's criminal neglect (to say it in a beautiful manner).
I personally don’t know but trains have a weird air system it charges from the locomotive. And releasing pressure apples brakes because each car has a small reservoir that is charged through a system I don’t understand. If a car is allowed to sit that reservoir will leak and release the air brake. Needing a handbrake to stay stationary.
I drive big diesel trucks. They have two air systems- One is a spring brake which must be released by applying air to the system before the rig can move. This is what you hear when a truck comes to a stop and there’s a big release of air with a hiss. That is the releasing of the air which causes the emergency/parking brakes to be applied- this is done through two big knobs on the dash, one for the truck and one for the trailer. It will also automatically engage if the system air pressure drops below a certain point. The more powerful air brake system that is used during driving operates through the foot pedal. They actually use the same brake that stops the wheel but in two different ways- one is spring operated through the absence of air. The other system moves the same brake mechanism but through a separate air pressure system. They both have the same end reaction but achieve it in two different ways. The spring mechanism is in a canister right at the spot down on the axle next to the wheels on each side- you can see them under the truck or trailer from behind when you’re driving if you look closely. The other system is hooked up in conjunction with that one and looks similar- they both move the same rod that engages the same brake. I’m sure that trains could use a similar set-up but apparently the railroad people prefer to do things differently.
He emptied the air in all of the carriages since the breaks still were applied when he came back to the cabin. The reason the breaks were locked was because of the lever that he accidentally pulled when he wanted extra leverage, but he thought it was because the pressure was too high and decided to release all the air from all the breaks which then would release the breaks and the system couldn't refill with air because of the lever that he pulled by accident.
Railroads don't use spring brakes because they would require charging the brake system anytime the car was moved making switching operations in yards very inefficient. Railway air brake systems based on the Westinghouse air brake are very reliable when operated correctly. This accident was caused by the disabling of the airbrakes by the poorly trained train crew. The driver closed the valve on the brake pipe while resetting the emergency valve making the proper release of the brakes impossible. When the brakes wouldn't release because the driver and guard/conductor didn't understand how the brakes work they had the bright ideal to bleed all the air out of the system rendering them non functional. Without recharging the airbrake pressure both normal function and the emergency failsafe were disabled. If they had confirmed the brakes were functional before moving as they probably should have after experiencing a brake malfunction the accident would have been averted.
Pneumatic brakes work differently: when pressure is applied, it pushes against springs, opening the brakes. When there is not enough pressure, the brakes are locked close. The train should not be able to move then.
I got a weird flashing of a picture of an underground station throughout the video and I thought it was intentionally added for drama, but it annoyed me so much that I felt it needed a seizure warning. Turns out Chrome was probably bugging out.
I live there. My train station is « le vert de maison ». These old train named « le petit gris ». The little grey. There is no more in service since ten years approximately. It was very light corrugated iron. In winter, we froze inside, and when the heating was on, it smelled like something was burning. In summer, it was horrible. Very very hot ! There are many accidents on the platforms. High-speed trains pass by when the platforms are crowded. Many people have died. Sometimes, probably suicides. Recently, a pickpocket tried to rob someone. The person defended themselves and pushed him away; the thief hit the train and died. We wish they would put up protections to prevent falls or collisions. I don't know why they do nothing."
Ahh. The explanation comes later. But the text is still wrong. The brake system is not bled for air. The rear 7 trains are under pressure, as the main valve have been closed. So they will not participate in the braking.
This is called "isolated brakes" and can be easily done manually from each car. That's why the speed of a train is dependent of its braking capacity, usually expressed as "braked mass percentage".
No, poor location of the controlling valves. The driver had to squeeze between the 1st and 2nd car to access the air control valve and needed to use his other hand for bracing to move the valve. In doing this he inadvertently closed the main air line valve. This is a case of very bad design and construction of the rail cars. This also shows how poorly the training is for the train crew to not know exactly how the air brakes work on the train.
Interesting. Electric trains have regenerative braking, as do most diesel locomotives. Maybe in France, they don't, or didn't, have that capability back then. Either way, the decision not to use the available electric braking system was careless, at best and reckless, at worst.
This story is full of people who felt their individual selfish or careless actions wouldn't hurt anyone... After all, they didn't mean any harm.... SMH
Isnt one of the main advantages of dynamic / electric braking that it does not use the brake pads at all, how does the conductors statement make any sense ? Dont trains have an emergency track brake ? ( separate friction pad used on the tracks instead of the wheels )
I have one question.... You have 4 trains coming in, one of them reports no breaks. You don't know which. Alarms are sounding everything is stopped. The station is at the end of a downward slope, so one of those trains is coming full speed with no stopping it. No matter which or where it will stop it WILL crash. Why is the station no immediately evacuated including everyone on stationary trains with access to platforms?
100 percent the conductors fault. How do you know how enough to let air out of brakes, but not enough to know the issues with doing this. Absolutely dumbfounded.
The train operator was a total tool, he messed with the brakes but did not not test their function after, further more he had secondary non pneumatic ELECTRIC brakes which would work just FINE but did not use because "we usually don't use them so it didn't occur to me to use them" as he had ample time to do EVERYTHING he did notning right, bottom line the dude got away with mass murder but I doubt he even understands that
Exactly, I hope this guy is working nowhere near anything mechanical. Uses a lever as leverage and doesn't notice it changed position?! Then he doesn't try to contact the station except one time?! And this guy was given a position of authority and responsiblity?! Knowing how this world works, he probably is employed at a nuclear power plant...
That's why brakes on large vehicles like this should be fail safe brakes. If you loose air, they should lock up and then require mechanical override where you have to break out some tools and heavy labor to make them work without air. That's how European semi-truck brakes work by the way. If the trucker begins to loose air from the system in significant amount they have very little time left to park. After that it's a big wrench, lying down under the truck and loosening every individual brake manually by tightening a bolt. Also it's impossible to take off without the brakes being pressurized.
Every train engineer should know how to operate with brakes, how to turn it on and off, how to reset it. Fixing problems like brakes not released after emergency breaking is their job. First: report situation. Train stopped on route with unknown reason, that is violation of safety and must be reported via radio ASAP. Then check what caused emergency stop, if necessary update report to dispatcher. Then try to fix it.
With automatic air brakes, the emergency brake valve releases all of the air in the brake pipe. After that, it takes a few minutes to recharge the brakes. If the crashed were caused by the angle cock at the front car being closed, that would have to have happened after the brakes were released.
I’m clearly missing something but we’ve had vacuum brakes for 150 years! When they fail due to loss of vacuum, the brakes come on. it sounds like this train had some other kind of brakes.
When it became clear to rail traffic control that a runaway train was approaching the terminus station, they shoud have evacuated ALL the platforms immediately. Then there were less victims I guess. 9:27 He should have communicate with the control room from the rear cabin.
Seems like most of the problem was poorly trained drivers. He didn't know how to release the brakes instead inadvertently shutting them, didn't follow procedures to get engineers but release air from each brakes on his own, didn't remember he has another brake to use and didn't communicated which train he is to control when calling in the emergency then run off to the back out of contact.
A safety system that shuts down the other safety systems for runaway trains. Amazing.
Thats shuts down others automatic safety systems, to allow signalers and controllers to do their job without "programmed decisions" ; but they failed to identify the train in time.
@@perracheposte1752and that is the problem, but manual actions from the controllers should override the automatic system and shut it down temporary. This way they can still direct everything when they know wich train is the runaway and still have a automatic safety systen in place
French engineering.
@@jennylee9278 French engineering is good. Stop hating
@svis6888 there are plenty of great engineers in France.
Imagine being the person who hit the emergency breaks not know you made it out alive, but might have also doomed others unintentionally.
😳ikr 😱
@@MartintheTinman what's missed in the story is the schedule change was temporary and very poorly communicated to riders.
It's brakes, not break. Can you break open the eggs?
@joycedudzinski9415 Oh shut up. You know what he meant. English may not be his first language.
@@joycedudzinski9415 a lot of people who confuse spelling of things have dyslexia (like myself) or speak another language. likewise, there's also typos (easy to switch a few letters)
So the conductor literally did like 8 mistakes?
- He didn't contact technicians when the emergency brake was triggered
- He released the air from all the brakes
- He accidentally prevented any new air to reach the brakes
- He failed to test the brakes after working on them
- He forgot about the electrical brakes
- He failed to identify himself when alerting
- He failed to tell his location when alerting
- He left the cabin and couldn't communicate anymore
I mean there was other stuff that messed up, most notably the "safety" reroute system, but this is still insane.
Work under pressure and panic are powerful mistresses.
And despite all of that, I can't really blame him for most of it. Mistakes are human and all that jazz. The thing I judge him for most is not contacting technicians, but at the same time, I get that a very busy time schedule and likely having been in contact over similar issues many times in the past makes one want to shortcut the solution.
Releasing the air of the brakes may well be a part of an official troubleshooting procedure that relies on them being refilled with new air. Him failing to test the brakes is somewhat true and somewhat false, given that the 'train behaved as it should' and his breaking minor breaking test was probably at low speed and sufficient for his singular working brake to manage. Failing to identify himself when alerting? He panicked, and I'm not entirely sure he truly forgot, or that the people at the central communication place may not have heard in the few seconds before he ran away to warn his passengers to brace.
It is a messed up situation and he is definitely not without blame, but so many of these mistakes are just outright unfortunate and barely worthy of a 'hey, make sure you do this properly next time' if it had been observed alone during a calmer time. But instead, there was time pressure aplenty, and all the mistakes came together perfectly for maximum carnage on ALL levels. Had just one safety system worked as it should, probably nobody would have been hurt at all...
Brakes from large vehicles should haveair released to apply brakes. No air to release them.
One contributing factor was also that the pressure indicator for the brakes in the Z5300 was only monitoring the pressure in the current cariage, not the whole train.
The engineer did a brake test, but since it was only monitoring the carriage with working break system, everything looked good for him.
@@forevercomputing This is indeed how they work yes. But it gets a bit more complicated. In order to apply enough pressure to the break pads, you have two air tanks per brakes:
There is a Main air tank and an Auxilliary air tank, the break pads pistons are in between both tanks and the Main air tank pressure controls the breaking.
When there is no pressure in the Main air tank, breaks are applied by the pressure contained in the auxilliary tank.
What the engineer and conductor did, is that they bled the pressure in both the main and the auxilliary air tank (wich is a procedure only allowed for maintenance, to move the carriage around the workshop).
Since both tanks were are the same pressure, atmospheric pressure, so they were uncontrolled neither released neither applied, just free floating.
Convicting the late guard of the stationary train for involuntary manslaughter seems grossly unfair.
"the conducter who delayed the 2nd train was convicted of involuntary manslaughter" A criminal conviction for being late for work is pretty draconian
He wasn't convicted for being late, he was convicted because due to his delay, something bad happened.
@@haganeelric98by that logic the lady that pulled the emergency handle should've had the same punishment, yet she just got a fine.
ya that was dumb hearing that but then i heard "state owned train" that why the state blamed the drivers so they didn't have to take any of the blame themselves.
That’s the problem with french judges, the fault is always singular people and never the public companies
Electric brakes causing excessive wear on brake shoes? They don't use the brake shoes, only the trains motors to retard the speed. To me there was a lot of blame put on the driver of this train, whereas his lack of knowledge of basic emergency procedures could largely be blamed on management of the railway operator. What level of training is given to drivers, and where are the regular refresher courses given so that they retain proficiency?
Some trains (mostly older types) have a way of operating the brakes by electric signal instead of air pessure, this is not the same as engine braking. But I agree with you that they put to much blame on the driver. (I'm a train driver myself).
@@Joris_VBthose were rheostatic brakes only applied on the bogies of the locomotive, used to slow down the train but basically useless below 30km/h.
It's surprisingly capable. It always used to brake 20-30 tons rollercoaster train travel at 80 km/h.
The problem is, it's not super powerful and overheat easily
Not to mention, every car has a mechanical parking brake that could have been cranked on. Applying the brake as time consuming, but they could have applied two of them.
@davidbennetts 616
'electric brakes'? We don't have those on our trains at the SNCF. We use the air-compression Westinghouse system.
(I work on those trains since 26 years now so I really know !)
Airbrakes are designed the way they are for a reason. Braking is the default and you actively have to have air pressure to let go of the brakes.
Not all trains were designed with that failsafe. I think it's industry standard now.
@@grmpEqweer This train was, but it was manually overridden...
No. This is all wrong. Train brakes are not like truck brakes. Train brakes need air pressure to apply. In the case of loss of pressure they do apply automatically, but it is pressure held in an accumulator tank in each car that applies the brakes, when main line pressure is lost.
Once you understand this this the video will make more sense. He let all the air out of the tanks in each car, so there were no brakes since the main line pressure was also cut.
Modern trains still work this way. They use air pressure to apply the brakes. Not springs.
@@GigsTaggart An elaboration:
Given the age of the trains involved in the accident they probably didn't have electro pneumatic brakes but rather automatic/westinghouse air brakes?
On a westinghouse brake system, there is a brake pipe which runs the length of the train and charged by compressors and the main reservoir when the brake is released. On each coach there are auxiliary reservoirs which store air to actuate the brakes via a one-way valve. So if the auxiliary reservoirs have low pressure, the air being pumped into the brake pipe will recharge the auxiliary reservoirs, so in no case will the auxiliary reservoirs ever have a lower pressure than the brake pipe. A triple valve controls the flow of air to and from the brake cylinder. When the pressure in the brake pipe drops, air will be allowed from the main reservoir into the brake cylinder, applying the brakes. The pressure in the brake cylinder will only be released once the reservoir and brake pipe pressure increase back to a threshold value.
Closing the brake pipe valve while the brakes have been applied means that the brake pipe and therefore the auxiliary reservoir will not recharge, but also that the brake will not be able to release (since the low brake pipe pressure is sealed in). So that's probably what happened when the driver tried to reset the emergency brake and closed the main brake pipe valve. But who would use another valve handle for leverage? The driver then lets the air out of the brake system but which part is not specified. Apparently the triple valves do not allow air to backflow from the brake cylinder to the auxiliary reservoir so the driver may have somehow directly released the air in the brake cylinder? Not sure. Either way once all the air was released from the system the brakes became completely inoperative as the reservoir couldn't be recharged.
The video talks briefly about "electric brakes" which probably means rheostatic brake?
Rheostatic brakes which use the motor to slow the train down work best at high speed. At low speed, they're not as effective and provide little to no brake force at very low speeds. So air brakes are still needed to completely stop the train.
Many trains also have spring-loaded parking brakes which require pressure to release installed (because if pressure was lost while the train was switched off the train would roll away!) but I don't think they're supposed to be used when the train is in motion.
@@GigsTaggartyou are Wrong period
It always amazes me how people working, which make mistakes, get jail time but managers and CEO of companies which ignore safety for profit just have to pay some money.
burh u sayin the ceo closed da air valver himself ?
Okay but managers did everything they could in this situation, they are in no way blameable
@@cmdr_krabovwas the driver in charge of the crappy safety system? No. So why was he the only one punished? We don’t live in a vacuum and to blame one or two people for this is messed up.
@@cmdr_krabov No, but he was ultimately the one responsible for ensuring that ALL employees of his company receive adequate training for their jobs, & obviously this train-driver had not!
@@bicivelo burh it aint da crappy safety system. da problem was da fact that da driver broke regulations. he shouldve waited for da maintenance staff. It was due to his actions dat da valver was closed.
Also - u makin changeas to da brakin system but DONT DO BRAKIN POWER TEST? it basic thing to do !!
As soon as i saw the screenshot i knew it was Gar de Lyon,i saw seconds from disaster.
Me too!
Me included
Same
Same
Me too
I mean, props to the conductor who assumed the worst and moved people back. The rest of the situation sucks but that's at least something to remember.
But by doing so, he doomed the people in the train he knew he would hit. He could have told someone in the first cabin to get everyone out and worked to get his train identified and thus diverted, saving everyone from his mistakes.
The conductor of the train he hit, who stayed in the cabin to tell his passengers to evacuate should be remembered, since he did what his coworker did not.
The conductor of the train must never leave the cabin. If the passengers need to be alerted about anything, he needs to use the communication system and stay in the cabin. Or was there not such a system in that train model?
By leaving the cabin to alert the passengers, he condemned many others. That was only one of his many mistakes. I hope that he cannot ever work in any train company. One thing is having a slight mistake that can be forgiven (we all are humans) and another such a long list, as already stated by another user in the comments.
@@haganeelric98 the video did mention that after this they added a PA for passengers.. so i'm going to go with no the train didn't have one before so the only way to warn them was to go tell them himself
Fear sinks in, blood freezing like ice. Just the thought of being in a runaway train is scary.
Reminds me of the PRR's runaway in DC. From what I remember, one of their named passenger trains, the Federal, crashed into the station after the air brake valves on one of the coaches closed, resulting in only three of the coaches having brake power.
also the Armagh tragedy of 1889.
Was this before air brakes defaulted to the on state when losing pressure
@@tormodhag6824
The type of air brake that you are visualizing is for road-going commercial trucks, where the air brake chamber is a SPRING BRAKE.
The spring brake system is "failsafe" in that, a loss of air pressure causes the brake to be applied. In normal operation the in-cab foot valve sends signals to the brake control valve which then sends signals to the exhaust valves which in turn exhaust the air from the spring brake chambers and allow the powerful coil springs to actuate pressure on the slack adjuster levers which then rotate the camshafts thus forcing the brake shoes outwards against the brake drums.
Seems like the train brakes are not spring brakes, rather they are actuated by positive air pressure.
@@naijagoatfarmeri think modern trains do have air tanks that makes the carriages failsafe to applying brake power if air pressure is lost from the locomotive. But this system doesnt work if someone drains the air explaining how the accident in this video could happen
This is truly good. Thank you, Dark Records and UA-cam!!!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏♥️♥️♥️♥️
The passenger who pulled the emergency brake because they didnt read the summer timetable also makes my blood boil. Conductor and company made a lot of mistakes, but if the passenger wasnt recklessly selfish, this wouldn't have happened either.
Secondary brake was available but not used or unknown to them, what kind of training (pun not intended) is this?
they French, ignorance is their thing
Typical French. Or really typical for any large corporation. As long as all the checkmarks are filled out in a spreadsheet, no one cares what really goes on.
@Dmwntkp99
There is not such à thing as 'secondary brakes' There is a stationary brake in each coach but it won't stop à rolling train.
I worked with this material since 1998.
Ohhhhh!
this is very similar to the Accident happend here in Örlikon with SBB, in Train Driver scool we learned about it and since then we are Obligated to do Break Checks after departing from Stations.
A "running brake check" is standard procedure on US railroads after every start from a stop. An air application is made and as soon as the brakes start taking hold, they are let off; brake check made.
@@royreynolds108 nice to meet a fellow Train Driver! I dindt wanted to go into the detail as much before, but specificly we do this roling Brake check after every change of train composition, after every departure from the starting or turning station or after every change of locomotive driver. Also after problems with the brakes have occurred.
Have a nice Day! Or evening! Choo choo!
Imagine Odile Mirroir (She pulled that break) that she partly responsible for death of 56 people. How would you deal with that?
damn, same name as the Black Swan oof
Where I live, city buses don't stop at bus stops unless there is somebody waiting to be picked up. If you want to be dropped off, you have to pull a lever which alerts the bus driver to stop at the next stop, and then they stop.
If somebody pulled the lever, which the bus driver then stopped the bus at the next bus stop, but when they were stopped a truck that isn't used to a bus stopping there didn't notice the stopped bus and drove into the back of it, would you blame the person who made the bus come to a stop to be let off? No, of course not.
Same here. The train coming to a stop did not cause the brakes to fail, in fact that was the last time they were working. It was the conductor who didn't know better and decided to wing it rather than radio in (as they were supposed to) that caused the brakes to fail.
@MrBattlecharge what are you talking about??? It is not the same at all. Bus passangers use a lever meant to notify the driver, the emergency brake lever is not used to tell the conductor you want to stop.
@richardwehmas no, it is used for emergencies (for which you can argue for or against what Odile did). What I am saying is the same is blaming that person for the accident that occurs, not the instances surrounding the particular situations. Neither caused the accident, each just stopped the vehicle and it would be equally wrong to blame that person for the accident.
@@MrBattlecharge I didn't say her actions caused the accident, I said equating what she did by illegally using an emergency lever because she failed to pay attention to the route stops with a bus passenger who uses a lever as intended is ridiculous. You can debate her culpability in the overall tragedy, i think it falls on the conductor, but there is no debate regarding her actions being a justified emergency or not. Her not paying attention to the route schedule did not count as an emergency that allowed using the lever.
Sadly, another incident that proves most safety regulations and the updates to them are written in blood.
Just the thought of being in a runaway train is scary.
These videos scare me but i still like them
Ribbit
@@Nookdashiddole robit
How are the brakes not failing safe!? Any train I've seen before would freeze the brakes when air pressure is lost, thus not requiring the lines to be pressurized to brake. Why is this not the case for every train around the world?
They freeze brakes if air pressure is lost. Except it wasn't lost, the air that was let out was the brake tanks' not the main line aire
@@UnePintade but then why did the train move again after letting the air out of the tanks? I can't really wrap my brain around the logic of this.
The brakes have a fail safe, which these guys overcame. The indirect air brake has auxiliary reservoirs on every wagon (sometimes on every bogie). The normal condition is that the air pipe and the reservoirs are connected and have the same pressure. When the main pipe drops pressure, automatic valves immediately shuts the connection between the air pipe and the reservoirs and connect the reservoirs with the brake cylinders, thus applying the brakes. When the air pressure rises in the air pipe, the valves restore the connection between the air pipe and the reservoirs and make a connection between the brake cylinders and the atmosphere, so the brakes are released.
If you want to unbrake a fully braked train, all you need to do is go at each valve and manually remove air from the brake cylinders, it takes a few second for each brake.
This was a frustrating amount of mistakes. Even with the mother pulling the emergency break, the people who are supposed to be professionals put people's lives in danger through their poor decisions. It is even more important for them to be calm and collected when things go wrong.
How do people mess up this bad??..
Because… PEOPLE… so many of us are beyond useless creations
Because humans make mistakes. some reasonable, some terrible
Arrogance. Pride. So many people think 'I can fix this on my own.' and dont follow proper regulations.
@@mikaross4671 that to
Ignorance and practice.
"This Handle Killed 56 Passengers"
Shame on you! Bad, BAD handle!
The not using electric brakes I think was the worst mistake in a chain. He had a somewhat working braking system, so why not try to use it??? Better to try than to have nothing!!
We don't have 'electric brakes ' ; we use the air-compression Westinghouse system.
The guy in the vidéo makes à lot of mistake!
@@bastiennietveld7128 So there were no backup electric brakes? Okay, that's clarifies everything. Thanks for your explanation.
@@bastiennietveld7128 As I might've mentioned before, if the train has electric PROPULSION, it'll have electric BRAKING; the motors can serve as brakes when they generate electricity that's subsequently returned to the power source.
For an electric railroad to NOT have electric braking is virtually unheard of worldwide....
I used to take trains and subways regularly and it would never occur to me a catastrophic event like this might have happened. 😮
That's insane as they have happened countless times. All forms of transportation had had countless terrible events and many safety systems fail at the same time including airplanes.
@@ryerob4815 Trains are actually really safe, especially compared to say cars...
It was the worst possible scenario: driver knew enough to be dangerous, but not enough to do it safely.
I think the errors of all the professionals in the situation are much more grave than that of the mothers. The driver of the train didnt even understand how it works and bypassed a safety mechanism.
An impulse act led to a cascade of errors... A tale as old as time....
So many contributing factors had to happen for this accident to occur….
Not calling the engineers, turning the valve by accident, leaving the cabin and not telling what train he was on, the closing of the station, the other train being delayed, etc etc.
If even just ONE of these didn’t happen, the accident could have been prevented.
in my opinion, the girl who pulled the emergency brake isn’t at fault, the driver. its horrifying how little he knew about the train he was responsible for.
Seriously, she made one error as a non expert. The conductor FORGOT HE HAD ELECTRIC BRAKES. He literally broke his normal brakes, messed up the emergency alert, and ran to the back of the train instead of sticking around to save the lives he claimed.
Thats what im saying
@@misseselise3864 See my comment above about real engineers saving lives.
@@aureliagold1222 it's not an error. It's done with selfish intent. She wanted to get off at that station no matter what. You usually receive a massive fine for pulling the brake in a non emergency situation, but it seems they just let her run away.
@@aureliagold1222The electric brakes wouldn't have made much of a difference, below 30 km/h they're useless. And staying in the cabin wouldn't have made any difference since the radio was overridden by the alarm.
The mistake was made when he messed up the brakes and restarted the train without following any (shitty) procedures at the time.
Those were changed because of this accident by the way and nowadays any procedure involving messing with the brakes includes a test of said brakes before any movement.
Thats stupid if a truck runs out of air the brakes lock up. Why would they design it to not work at all if the air was low.
According to Seconds From Disaster, both the driver and the conductor survived the crash, so does the passengers, because they tell the passengers to go to the rear end of the runaway train
As much as I despise parents and their sheer entitlement sometimes, this woman could have easily stayed quiet and never come forward. Did she come forward because she felt bad for being a part of this chain reaction and wanted to clear things up for investigators, or because she was afraid she'd be found and punished more severely if she didn't? I was very surprised she stepped forward regardless.
At 3:51 that's the railway between Waterloo Station and Vauxhall Station, London, England. I'm not sure why it's included in this video.
Very good reportage……hello….I am from Belgium but I never heard about that story well thanks for the info. ( like always like your work ) .
Your videos are awesome!
I can just listen to you talk you hours. Ty for another vid
I love how world's 3rd biggest economy and most populated country has many train wrecks WAY worse than this EVERY YEAR. But no one talks about it
Electric brakes will usually prevent wear to brake pads but are less effective once the speed gets lower which may be a reason they weren't used that much.
When he ran out of the carriage, you said "they" ran out. I thought all the passengers ran out.
theres more than one conductor
As someone who operates electric passenger trains (at a museum) there's probably one more thing the driver could have done. Set the train to reverse and open the control handle to the first notch. That's our procedure for a brake failure: "take the first point in reverse and hope for the best".
Always turn up on time at your job‼️‼️‼️
Never skimp a stop.
9:05 - just a question, Electric breaking - excessive wear on break pads? no way, electric break uses motors as a generators against each other (regulated by resistor or semiconductor circuits that waste that electricity) causing train to slow down or nowdays even stop entirely, no break pads used during that anywhere on the train...., train driver might said that (which i doubt), but as mentioned in video, thats not how EDB works on trains.
I was wondering about that too
@@nukelukas I mean......it's 1988.
@@vincent412l7 I don't think the narrator made it up to be dramatic- they were just stating that the driver believed that was the case. (even if the driver was wrong about it, or perhaps made it up as an excuse for forgetting to do so.)
@vincent412l7 Simply stating what the driver claimed what his reasoning was to not use it is not misinformation.
Some trains (mostly older types) have a way of operating the brakes by electric signal instead of air pessure, this is not the same as engine braking. (Belgian train driver)
9:11 electric brakes use the motors of the locomotive to brake by "burning" the electricity generated, the brake pads are never used.
9:25 He used the radio alarm, which effectively overrides any radio communications. Even if he stayed in the cabin, there was no way to communicate.with the control room.
Since then the procedure has changed and runaway trains are forbidden to use radio alarm.
Does electric/regenerative brakes does not put power back to grid?
@@leonpano From what I heard there were experiments with that, but it was deemed to expensive cause they'd had to put batteries on the side of the tracks to get the electricity in case there was no demand for power. And the experiments was in the early 2000, so way after this happened.
@@aaronaaronsen3360 but that isn’t same for power plants
Generated power if there is no demand then is wasted
@@leonpano Exactly, if there is no demand you will waste whatever is powering the power plant. That's why you ideally have a diversity of powerplants that you can start/turn off quicker or slower, to adapt to the demand.
@@aaronaaronsen3360 I made typo(possible auto correct same to smart)
But for nuclear power plants is not easy to rapidly shutdown or startup(you can’t shutdown for night and run for day everyday)
If there is some hydropower plant, they could pump water up(like charge battery)
He dumped the Air and didn't do a brake test?
Why was the guard who delayed the outbound train's departure also convicted of manslaughter? Like yeah he should have been there earlier, but that still seems like a stretch to file criminal charges.
In 2003 in Melbourne Victoria we have had a runaway Train it's really scary
The headline promised us to show the handle, but it is not at 01:13 nor at 07:37.
I don't know if the video maker read or not the official report (I confess I didn't), but what I hear is a looooong lines of mistakes.
9:20 - the electric brakes use no brake pads. They are a contactless brake, that functions by reversing the rotation speed of the motors, which are permanently connected with the motor axle(s). This, of course, cause the braking, but this type of brake's efficiency drops with the speed, so you can't stop a train with them. However, it would have been possible to slow the train enough for the first carriage air brakes to function.
On the other hand, even if I'm unaware of the French safety rules, I can tell what a Romanian driver would have done (as the brake technology we use here is identical): it is mandatory to perform "efficiency brake tests" on trains, meaning that the driver will reduce the air pressure with 0,7 bar and evaluate the braking effect. This operation is mandatory at:
- departure the first station on a route
- one station before a dead-end station (like Gare du Lyon)
- after every intervention on the brake system (which includes manually removing the air from the auxiliary air reservoirs - which the French guys just did).
Also, when you remove the air, it is mandatory to check it at the end of the train BEFORE moving the train again: the conductor will go at the final air connection with a gauge, the driver will apply brakes and the conductor must note the pressure dropping on his/hers gauge. Obviously, they DID NOT check it.
If any of what I've said would have been done by the train crew, the accident would have been prevented.
On the other hand, all the railway points are paired to avoid receiving accidentally a train over another. At the begining of the railway, this was done by means of keys (you could'n put the signal on green/"pass" if the keys were not out of the switch and inserted into the signal), than by means of relays.
If SNCF tried some sort of electronic means to overcome this... it's criminal neglect (to say it in a beautiful manner).
7:38 You used the image of a monorail here by mistake.
Very interesting
Anyone else see this doc before ?
Not this one, but a much more detailed doccie was on the National Geographic TV series"Seconds from Disaster S02E11 (2005/2006)"
Yeah, about 377k people.
Human error has caused untold carnage an heartache.
The one pulling the emergency brakes on the decknd car is liable for all of the damages.
A dreadful system where one unlucky hapless driver is scapegoated for.
Why not have the brakes be applied when air pressure is lost like on tractor trailers?
I personally don’t know but trains have a weird air system it charges from the locomotive. And releasing pressure apples brakes because each car has a small reservoir that is charged through a system I don’t understand. If a car is allowed to sit that reservoir will leak and release the air brake. Needing a handbrake to stay stationary.
I drive big diesel trucks.
They have two air systems-
One is a spring brake which must be released by applying air to the system before the rig can move.
This is what you hear when a truck comes to a stop and there’s a big release of air with a hiss.
That is the releasing of the air which causes the emergency/parking brakes to be applied-
this is done through two big knobs on the dash,
one for the truck and one for the trailer.
It will also automatically engage if the system
air pressure drops below a certain point.
The more powerful air brake system that is used
during driving operates through the foot pedal.
They actually use the same brake that stops the wheel but in two different ways-
one is spring operated through the absence of air.
The other system moves the same brake mechanism but through a separate air pressure system.
They both have the same end reaction but achieve it in two different ways.
The spring mechanism is in a canister right at the spot down on the axle next to the wheels on each side-
you can see them under the truck or trailer from behind when you’re driving if you look closely.
The other system is hooked up in conjunction with that one and looks similar-
they both move the same rod that engages the same brake.
I’m sure that trains could use a similar set-up but apparently the railroad people prefer to do things differently.
He emptied the air in all of the carriages since the breaks still were applied when he came back to the cabin. The reason the breaks were locked was because of the lever that he accidentally pulled when he wanted extra leverage, but he thought it was because the pressure was too high and decided to release all the air from all the breaks which then would release the breaks and the system couldn't refill with air because of the lever that he pulled by accident.
Railroads don't use spring brakes because they would require charging the brake system anytime the car was moved making switching operations in yards very inefficient. Railway air brake systems based on the Westinghouse air brake are very reliable when operated correctly. This accident was caused by the disabling of the airbrakes by the poorly trained train crew. The driver closed the valve on the brake pipe while resetting the emergency valve making the proper release of the brakes impossible. When the brakes wouldn't release because the driver and guard/conductor didn't understand how the brakes work they had the bright ideal to bleed all the air out of the system rendering them non functional. Without recharging the airbrake pressure both normal function and the emergency failsafe were disabled. If they had confirmed the brakes were functional before moving as they probably should have after experiencing a brake malfunction the accident would have been averted.
That is how freight trains work, at least. I thought it was the same for commuters
@6:18 Great isometric drawing. Of course since it's French. Even their graffiti is artistic.
Glad you changed the thumbnail because the first one with the door handles was misleading.
I'm amazed the train doesn't identify itself when making a transmission. Boggles my mind.
Old RER was crappy, thanks for the reminder ^^
Pneumatic brakes work differently: when pressure is applied, it pushes against springs, opening the brakes. When there is not enough pressure, the brakes are locked close. The train should not be able to move then.
I got a weird flashing of a picture of an underground station throughout the video and I thought it was intentionally added for drama, but it annoyed me so much that I felt it needed a seizure warning. Turns out Chrome was probably bugging out.
I live there. My train station is « le vert de maison ». These old train named « le petit gris ». The little grey. There is no more in service since ten years approximately.
It was very light corrugated iron. In winter, we froze inside, and when the heating was on, it smelled like something was burning. In summer, it was horrible. Very very hot !
There are many accidents on the platforms. High-speed trains pass by when the platforms are crowded. Many people have died. Sometimes, probably suicides. Recently, a pickpocket tried to rob someone. The person defended themselves and pushed him away; the thief hit the train and died.
We wish they would put up protections to prevent falls or collisions. I don't know why they do nothing."
Ahh. The explanation comes later. But the text is still wrong. The brake system is not bled for air. The rear 7 trains are under pressure, as the main valve have been closed. So they will not participate in the braking.
This is called "isolated brakes" and can be easily done manually from each car. That's why the speed of a train is dependent of its braking capacity, usually expressed as "braked mass percentage".
Its like the subway scene from the Nicolas Cage movie Knowing only without effects and real carnage.
He cut out the brakes. Poor training.
No, poor location of the controlling valves. The driver had to squeeze between the 1st and 2nd car to access the air control valve and needed to use his other hand for bracing to move the valve. In doing this he inadvertently closed the main air line valve. This is a case of very bad design and construction of the rail cars. This also shows how poorly the training is for the train crew to not know exactly how the air brakes work on the train.
Interesting. Electric trains have regenerative braking, as do most diesel locomotives. Maybe in France, they don't, or didn't, have that capability back then. Either way, the decision not to use the available electric braking system was careless, at best and reckless, at worst.
Can you please cover the 2010 middle Tennessee floods? I'd greatly appreciate it 🙏🏼
I never heard of that accident before
By just looking at the title, I knew this was the 1988 Gare de Lyon train crash.
3:49 South West Trains jumpscare:
So the person that tried to do his job got punished the most and the woman who pulled the emergency brakes leading to the accident was only fined
It is a design flaw before anything else.
Sounds like entitlement on one part and cowardice on another.
People really suck, and that's why we can't have nice things.
It is insane that any random passenger can bring an entire train to a stop.
This story is full of people who felt their individual selfish or careless actions wouldn't hurt anyone... After all, they didn't mean any harm.... SMH
Isnt one of the main advantages of dynamic / electric braking that it does not use the brake pads at all, how does the conductors statement make any sense ? Dont trains have an emergency track brake ? ( separate friction pad used on the tracks instead of the wheels )
Makes sense considering it's from the same person who let out the air of the brakes
If the train was like the ones showed, it had no electromagnetic brakes.
Would you do a video on the 1923 earthquake in Japan?
Charlie stole the handle, now the won't stop going, no it won't slow down.
I thought that train brakes are designed so that pneumatic pressure keeps breaks *open* - so that if air is lost, the brakes are triggered.
I have one question....
You have 4 trains coming in, one of them reports no breaks. You don't know which. Alarms are sounding everything is stopped. The station is at the end of a downward slope, so one of those trains is coming full speed with no stopping it. No matter which or where it will stop it WILL crash.
Why is the station no immediately evacuated including everyone on stationary trains with access to platforms?
100 percent the conductors fault. How do you know how enough to let air out of brakes, but not enough to know the issues with doing this. Absolutely dumbfounded.
The train had brakes the entire time. the driver just forgot to sue them....Electric brakes were installed!!!
There were sure's hell a lot of EXCUSES for not using the regenerative/dynamic brakes....
The train operator was a total tool, he messed with the brakes but did not not test their function after, further more he had secondary non pneumatic ELECTRIC brakes which would work just FINE but did not use because "we usually don't use them so it didn't occur to me to use them" as he had ample time to do EVERYTHING he did notning right, bottom line the dude got away with mass murder but I doubt he even understands that
Exactly, I hope this guy is working nowhere near anything mechanical. Uses a lever as leverage and doesn't notice it changed position?! Then he doesn't try to contact the station except one time?! And this guy was given a position of authority and responsiblity?!
Knowing how this world works, he probably is employed at a nuclear power plant...
That's why brakes on large vehicles like this should be fail safe brakes. If you loose air, they should lock up and then require mechanical override where you have to break out some tools and heavy labor to make them work without air. That's how European semi-truck brakes work by the way. If the trucker begins to loose air from the system in significant amount they have very little time left to park. After that it's a big wrench, lying down under the truck and loosening every individual brake manually by tightening a bolt. Also it's impossible to take off without the brakes being pressurized.
Every train engineer should know how to operate with brakes, how to turn it on and off, how to reset it. Fixing problems like brakes not released after emergency breaking is their job. First: report situation. Train stopped on route with unknown reason, that is violation of safety and must be reported via radio ASAP. Then check what caused emergency stop, if necessary update report to dispatcher. Then try to fix it.
It sounds also like a lack of training.
With automatic air brakes, the emergency brake valve releases all of the air in the brake pipe. After that, it takes a few minutes to recharge the brakes. If the crashed were caused by the angle cock at the front car being closed, that would have to have happened after the brakes were released.
but.... didn´t the brakes actuated without air? Air: No Brake No Air: Brake this is the way
So you wait for the train and not only it was late but it didn't stop because it was late and someone decided to skip your station? I don't get it
Yeah because most people head to main station so they skip small stations. Its stupid move by companies but they do it sometime.
I’m clearly missing something but we’ve had vacuum brakes for 150 years! When they fail due to loss of vacuum, the brakes come on. it sounds like this train had some other kind of brakes.
Not following prescribed safety protocols is hazardous. RIP to all.
When it became clear to rail traffic control that a runaway train was approaching the terminus station, they shoud have evacuated ALL the platforms immediately. Then there were less victims I guess.
9:27 He should have communicate with the control room from the rear cabin.
I saw this in seconds from disaster.
10:54
Right there the real criminals get away with it again
Jail sentences seem pretty harsh.
I’m not sure what’s worse, the butchering of the French language or the number of commenters who don’t know how to spell “brake”
Or the difference between “lose” and “loose”.xx
Seems like most of the problem was poorly trained drivers. He didn't know how to release the brakes instead inadvertently shutting them, didn't follow procedures to get engineers but release air from each brakes on his own, didn't remember he has another brake to use and didn't communicated which train he is to control when calling in the emergency then run off to the back out of contact.