Flashback: Trump Rolls Back Train-Braking Rule Meant to Keep Oil Tankers from Exploding Near Communities

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Nov 26, 2015
109,396
27,039
2,220
Does it seem to You that the media isn't covering TRump's involvement with "increasing the odds of railway accidents"? Here is the newspaper source revealing TRaitor TRump's role in subverting rail safety, in case You want to "spread the word".

 
Does it seem to You that the media isn't covering TRump's involvement with "increasing the odds of railway accidents"? Here is the newspaper source revealing TRaitor TRump's role in subverting rail safety, in case You want to "spread the word".

Did Biden reverse what Trump did on train brakes?
 
Does it seem to You that the media isn't covering TRump's involvement with "increasing the odds of railway accidents"? Here is the newspaper source revealing TRaitor TRump's role in subverting rail safety, in case You want to "spread the word".

Hey, you thirder world beta male! Read this and stop gaslighting with your two faced lies.

Chair of NTSB Throws Shade on DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Says Trump Era Brake Decision Not to Blame for East Palestine Toxic Train Wreck​

 
Hey, you thirder world beta male! Read this and stop gaslighting with your two faced lies.

Chair of NTSB Throws Shade on DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Says Trump Era Brake Decision Not to Blame for East Palestine Toxic Train Wreck​

oooopsie! :rofl:
 
Does it seem to You that the media isn't covering TRump's involvement with "increasing the odds of railway accidents"? Here is the newspaper source revealing TRaitor TRump's role in subverting rail safety, in case You want to "spread the word".


I don't think you've started enough threads.
 
1676560524631.jpeg

Pee Wee's Big Gay Adventure.
 
I am curious about a couple of things:

1). Vinyl chloride: according to


This substance is apparently forbidden to be transported by rail. This could be a major liability for the rail company.

However, the “blame trump” campaign is not valid. Politifact is even stating that the Obama brake rule wouldn’t have applied to this train because this train didn’t meet the definition of a high hazardous material train. While I’d like to get a look at the BOL for the train, I’m assuming the reason why it doesn’t meet the definition is because the material would have had to be listed as packing group I to be considered a high hazardous train. I think these materials were all packing group III.

Initially they say:

Based on analysis of the risk of differing train compositions, this rule defines an HHFT as a train comprised of 20 or more loaded tank cars of a Class 3 flammable liquid in a continuous block or 35 or more loaded tank cars of a Class 3 flammable liquid across the entire train. For the purposes of advanced braking systems, this rule also defines a “high-hazard flammable unit train” (HHFUT) as a train comprised of 70 or more loaded tank cars containing Class 3 flammable liquids traveling speeds at greater than 30 mph.

So HHFUT is a train of 20 or more cars in a continuous block loaded with class 3, or 35 cars loaded with class 3 across the entire train. The it says for the advanced braking system, it’s a train of 70 or more cars loaded with class 3 going over 30 mph.

Then down in the table it says:

Require trains meeting the definition of a “high-hazard flammable unit
train” (HHFUT)11 be operated with an electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) braking system by January 1, 2021, when transporting one or more tank cars loaded with a Packing Group I flammable liquid.
• Require trains meeting the definition of a HHFUT be operated with an ECP braking system by May 1, 2023, when transporting one or more tank cars loaded with a Packing Group II or III flammable liquid.

So, if none of the cars were carrying PGI materials, they would not have been required to receive the retrofit until May of this year.

I tried looking up the chemicals online but it’s hard to get transportation codes for most of it.

Apparently huffpo is also saying the Obama rule wouldn’t have applied to the Norfolk train.

The blame game is a bit premature. We don’t know what caused it. If it was a seized axle, then the brake rule wouldn’t even be relevant…UNLESS the old pneumatic brakes were the cause of the seized axle. By this I mean, if it was found that a brake shoe got hung up and had pressure applied to it, they could make the case that the brake caused excessive heat on the connected parts and that cause the bearing to lock up and thus seize the axle.

But again, we don’t know what happened yet, but it hasn’t stopped the creation of the narrative that it’s trumps fault.

Lol, like I said before…all it takes is a small story, the it gets repeated enough until it’s “the truth”.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top