The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb.
Property is worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur,
This is like a giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an inverse condemnation suit against the Federal government, which allowed and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic chemical material.
Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty owner claims that the government 'took' their property without just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory, owning property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which are possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action has deprived the owners
of these property rights, and the owners need to be compensated.
A difference with Love Canal is that this is mostly public malfeasance and the other was mostly corporate.
The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb. Property is
worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur, This is like a
giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an inverse
condemnation suit against the Federal government, which allowed
and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic chemical
material. Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty owner claims
that the government 'took' their property without just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory, owning
property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which are
possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action has
deprived the owners of these property rights, and the owners need to
be compensated.
A difference with Love Canal is that this is mostly public
malfeasance and the other was mostly corporate.
On 2/16/23 3:13 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb. Property is worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur, This is like a
giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an inverse
condemnation suit against the Federal government, which allowed
and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic chemical
material. Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty owner claims
that the government 'took' their property without just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory, owningArguing "taking" is a page out of the sovereign citizen handbook. There
property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which are
possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action has
deprived the owners of these property rights, and the owners need to
be compensated.
are more effective ways to respond that won't end with being laughed out
of court.
A difference with Love Canal is that this is mostly publicThe blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules,
malfeasance and the other was mostly corporate.
whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the
rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
On 2/16/23 3:13 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb. Property is worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur, This is like a
giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an inverse
condemnation suit against the Federal government, which allowed
and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic chemical
material. Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty owner claims
that the government 'took' their property without just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory, owning
property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which are
possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action has
deprived the owners of these property rights, and the owners need to
be compensated.
Arguing "taking" is a page out of the sovereign citizen handbook. There
are more effective ways to respond that won't end with being laughed out
of court.
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules,
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
Or a fifth for whoever allowed the
change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules,
whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the
rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the
change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 5:33:29 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/16/23 3:13 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb. Property
is worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur, This is
like a giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an
inverse condemnation suit against the Federal government, which
allowed and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic
chemical material. Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty
owner claims that the government 'took' their property without
just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory,
owning property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which
are possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action
has deprived the owners of these property rights, and the owners
need to be compensated.
Arguing "taking" is a page out of the sovereign citizen handbook.
There are more effective ways to respond that won't end with being
laughed out of court.
You are so very wrong, I am a retired eminent domain specialist who
has spent twenty five years in the field, including supervisory and administrative activities. I have no affiliation nor affinity with
the sovereign citizen movement, which is a concept alien to the core
of my being.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_condemnation
and the professional organization International Right of Way
Association links to numerous other articles discussing inverse
condemnatio
a well respected eminent domain attorney, Gideon Kanner, has written extensively on all eminent domain issues, including inverse
condemnation.
Here is an interview with him.
https://eweb.irwaonline.org/eweb/upload/web_novdec13_GideonKanner.pdf
He is supportive of inverse condemnation but also critical of its
abuse.
I advise you to look up his articles published monthly in the IR/WA
magazine.
Here is more info: https://legaldictionary.net/inverse-condemnation/
Inverse condemantion is a mainstream legal reality, not a pipedream
of the fringe sovereign citizen movement.
BTW, I am not talking about the particular subset of "regulatory
takings"
Regulation falls under the government's authority under "police
power' and is not an eminent domain taking unless under the ost
extreme circumstances of government abuse of targeting or making a
property essentially valueless.
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety
rules, Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump
administration.
debunked. Trump was following rules set in place in 2016 by the
Obama administration, and in this case, the rules did not apply to
issues involving this case.
Or a fifth for whoever allowed the change of response to allow
burning off the chemicals instead of cleaning them.
Well there you go, you finally got something right that is the key,
indeed. Thats wher ethe Feds come in.
On 2/17/23 12:08 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 5:33:29 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/16/23 3:13 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
The entire county has been hit with an economic bomb. Property
is worthless, no matter what future cleanups might occur, This is
like a giant Love Canal. Each property owner should file an
inverse condemnation suit against the Federal government, which
allowed and/or instigated the purposeful explosion of toxic
chemical material. Inverse condemnation is where the pr, operty
owner claims that the government 'took' their property without
just compensation.
According to the widely held bundle of rights legal theory,
owning property conveys a bundle of various rights. two of which
are possession and 'use and enjoyment' The government's action
has deprived the owners of these property rights, and the owners
need to be compensated.
Arguing "taking" is a page out of the sovereign citizen handbook.
There are more effective ways to respond that won't end with being
laughed out of court.
You are so very wrong, I am a retired eminent domain specialist whoI'm happy to hear that.
has spent twenty five years in the field, including supervisory and administrative activities. I have no affiliation nor affinity with
the sovereign citizen movement, which is a concept alien to the core
of my being.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_condemnation
and the professional organization International Right of Way
Association links to numerous other articles discussing inverse
condemnatio
a well respected eminent domain attorney, Gideon Kanner, has written extensively on all eminent domain issues, including inverse
condemnation.
Here is an interview with him.
https://eweb.irwaonline.org/eweb/upload/web_novdec13_GideonKanner.pdf
He is supportive of inverse condemnation but also critical of its
abuse.
I advise you to look up his articles published monthly in the IR/WA magazine.
Here is more info: https://legaldictionary.net/inverse-condemnation/
Inverse condemantion is a mainstream legal reality, not a pipedream
of the fringe sovereign citizen movement.
BTW, I am not talking about the particular subset of "regulatory
takings"
Regulation falls under the government's authority under "policeYes, I understand eminent domain and welcome being educated concerning inverse condemnation, a concept I understand but had not seen referred
power' and is not an eminent domain taking unless under the ost
extreme circumstances of government abuse of targeting or making a
property essentially valueless.
to by that term.
My objection was based on past cases in which owners battled government action that led to loss of value due to "regulatory taking," commonly in property zoning changes.
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety
rules, Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump
administration.
debunked. Trump was following rules set in place in 2016 by theYes, as I just posted elsewhere. However, the rules didn't apply because
Obama administration, and in this case, the rules did not apply to
issues involving this case.
of lobbying to frame them so they wouldn't apply.
Trump isn't off the hook as his administration weakened the rules further.
Or a fifth for whoever allowed the change of response to allow
burning off the chemicals instead of cleaning them.
Well there you go, you finally got something right that is the key,
indeed. Thats wher ethe Feds come in.
We can throw in the Ohio governor's reluctance to declare a disaster.
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:27:55 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 12:08 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 5:33:29 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
My objection was based on past cases in which owners battled government
action that led to loss of value due to "regulatory taking," commonly in
property zoning changes.
Unless to an extreme degree, that is an allowable practice under governmental police power
Here is one case where the government went too far
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina_Coastal_Council
Well there you go, you finally got something right that is the key,
indeed. Thats wher ethe Feds come in.
We can throw in the Ohio governor's reluctance to declare a disaster.
Nor did Biden declare it a disaster. He refused.
On 2/17/23 6:11 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:27:55 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 12:08 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 5:33:29 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
There's a different problem (not in this case) that government can
create value such as in the Canadian scandal occurring now in which developers bought "useless" land in anticipation of their friends in
power rezoning it for economic purposes. At what point do people claim
not getting a benefit is really a taking?
With so many governments, there are going to be stupid eminent domain situations:
https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2023/02/austin-ordered-to-pay-south-terminal-operator-90-million-in-eminent-domain-fight-at-abia/
Okay, that dealt with, why is an inverted condemnation suit a good idea
when there was no eminent domain action? Calling the government
responsible due to lax regulation is a political stand, not a legal one.
Injured parties need to act in civil court by demonstrating damages and seeking redress from the railroad who was negligent.
Well there you go, you finally got something right that is the key,
indeed. Thats wher ethe Feds come in.
We can throw in the Ohio governor's reluctance to declare a disaster.
Nor did Biden declare it a disaster. He refused.There are things he can't do unless the governor declares a disaster
first, including declare a federal disaster, and that requires
demonstrating significant property damage.
As alarming as the potential harm is, it hasn't happened yet.
https://news.yahoo.com/fema-helping-east-palestine-train-211445972.html
We just went thru this in Austin after the recent ice storm: the
disaster declaration had to wait for fact-finding to demonstrate need
before Abbott could act.
On 2/17/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules,
whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration. >>
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the
rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the >> change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?Electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. Blame to both the Obama and
Trump administrations for acceding to industry wishes to avoid their requirement in cases like East Palestine.
2015: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/safety/rail-rule-summary
2017: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/16/2017-22281/hazardous-materials-enhanced-tank-car-standards-and-operational-controls-for-high-hazard-flammable
The problem appears to be what number of cars a train has before ECP is required, but I haven't seen a specific commentary on that, so please
share if you have.
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 8:02:49 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 6:11 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:27:55 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 12:08 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 5:33:29 PM UTC-5, mINE109
wrote:
There's a different problem (not in this case) that government can
create value such as in the Canadian scandal occurring now in
which developers bought "useless" land in anticipation of their
friends in power rezoning it for economic purposes. At what point
do people claim not getting a benefit is really a taking?
That touches on another eminent domain issue. Its called Special
Benefits Special Benifits do not apply when there is no taking If
there is a taking, Special Benefits may or may not apply, depending
on whether the government is Federal or state, Federal law includes
special benefits, staes are split about 50/50 on it. If Special
Benefits are in the law, those benefits (increases in value) are oly
deducted to offset damages to the remainder, the comensation for the
part taken must be paid, even if there are benefits
With so many governments, there are going to be stupid eminent
domain situations:
https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2023/02/austin-ordered-to-pay-south-terminal-operator-90-million-in-eminent-domain-fight-at-abia/
It looks like the agency admitted compensation was due, the argument
was over the amount. In my time I have seen many outrageous
arbitration o court awards.
Okay, that dealt with, why is an inverted condemnation suit a good
idea when there was no eminent domain action? Calling the
government responsible due to lax regulation is a political stand,
not a legal one.
No. It is a legal issue, not political. it is based on real property
law and the Fifth Amendment. The Courts have ruled that excessive
regulation can be considered an eminent domain action.
Injured parties need to act in civil court by demonstrating damages
and seeking redress from the railroad who was negligent.
yes, and/or the government. But it also can be settled out of
court.
Well there you go, you finally got something right that is
the key, indeed. Thats wher ethe Feds come in.
There are things he can't do unless the governor declares aWe can throw in the Ohio governor's reluctance to declare a
disaster.
Nor did Biden declare it a disaster. He refused.
disaster first, including declare a federal disaster, and that
requires demonstrating significant property damage.
As alarming as the potential harm is, it hasn't happened yet.
https://news.yahoo.com/fema-helping-east-palestine-train-211445972.html
We just went thru this in Austin after the recent ice storm: the
disaster declaration had to wait for fact-finding to demonstrate
need before Abbott could act.
Hee is some additional info. In my time in eminent domain I handled
two inverse condemnation situations. In both cases the local
government admitted responsibility and settled the cases before the
owners had to file inverse condemnation suits.
Case 1) I successfully negotiated a slope easement from the front
yard of a house along a major route in a rural area. During
construction, excavation of the slope easement unexpectedly exposed
the tip of the septic field, rendering it inoperable. The choice was
to try to fix the situation or buy out the owner, She wished to
remain in her residence. I attempted to have the drainfield
reconstructed, but the Environment Department tested the soils, and
they were inadequate. Then our agency applied to the sewer agency to
have the closest sewer line extended to the property. That would be
at our expense. The whole process took a few years. We handled the
interim by constructing an underground vault in the front yard, with
an injector pump and a large tank. We also paid a sewer cleaning
service to come by with a truck twice a week to pump out the tank.
Case 2) This case has similarities to Palestine, in that faulty
regulations and the permitting process was involved. There was a
somewhat older subdivision, maybe 25 or 30 years old. It was built on
a slope. Construction was allowed with retaining walls to hold the
slope. so, about 30 years later the walls failed, the slope moved,
and pushed against the houses foundations, and moved them. the houses
became unsafe and uninhabitable. The government agreed to buy up the
houses and relocate the occupants. We took responsibility because we
allowed the original homebuilder to proceed with construction.
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 12:09:44 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:Electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. Blame to both the Obama and
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules,
whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration. >>>>
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the
rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the >>>> change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?
Trump administrations for acceding to industry wishes to avoid their
requirement in cases like East Palestine.
2015: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/safety/rail-rule-summary
2017:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/16/2017-22281/hazardous-materials-enhanced-tank-car-standards-and-operational-controls-for-high-hazard-flammable
The problem appears to be what number of cars a train has before ECP is
required, but I haven't seen a specific commentary on that, so please
share if you have.
I haven't seen anything on this, nor have I seen even an argument that ECPs could have prevented this derailment apparently caused by a failed wheel bearing.
I'm not sure if the wheel locked or if it completely fell off.
All this should come out eventually, but due to the magnitude of the potential lawsuits,
no one is being particularly forthcoming right now.
Not the RR, the DoT, or even the EPA.
On 2/18/23 10:01 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 12:09:44 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:Electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. Blame to both the Obama and >> Trump administrations for acceding to industry wishes to avoid their
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules, >>>> whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the >>>> rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the
change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?
requirement in cases like East Palestine.
2015: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/safety/rail-rule-summary
2017:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/16/2017-22281/hazardous-materials-enhanced-tank-car-standards-and-operational-controls-for-high-hazard-flammable
The problem appears to be what number of cars a train has before ECP is >> required, but I haven't seen a specific commentary on that, so please
share if you have.
I haven't seen anything on this, nor have I seen even an argument that ECPshttps://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/white-house-to-provide-federal-resources-to-east-palestine/
could have prevented this derailment apparently caused by a failed wheel bearing.
I'm not sure if the wheel locked or if it completely fell off.
All this should come out eventually, but due to the magnitude of the potential lawsuits,
no one is being particularly forthcoming right now.
Not the RR, the DoT, or even the EPA.
"Representatives from multiple federal agencies held a briefing on background Friday. News agencies are not allowed to quote those
officials or broadcast their quotes but there are still some key takeaways"
Some back story. Use reader view and read past the consumer safety bias
for easier digestion. Plenty of links to original sources.
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,”
On 2/18/23 10:01 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 12:09:44 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:Electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. Blame to both the Obama and >> Trump administrations for acceding to industry wishes to avoid their
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules, >>>> whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the >>>> rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the
change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?
requirement in cases like East Palestine.
2015: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/safety/rail-rule-summary
2017:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/16/2017-22281/hazardous-materials-enhanced-tank-car-standards-and-operational-controls-for-high-hazard-flammable
The problem appears to be what number of cars a train has before ECP is >> required, but I haven't seen a specific commentary on that, so please
share if you have.
I haven't seen anything on this, nor have I seen even an argument that ECPshttps://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/white-house-to-provide-federal-resources-to-east-palestine/
could have prevented this derailment apparently caused by a failed wheel bearing.
I'm not sure if the wheel locked or if it completely fell off.
All this should come out eventually, but due to the magnitude of the potential lawsuits,
no one is being particularly forthcoming right now.
Not the RR, the DoT, or even the EPA.
"Representatives from multiple federal agencies held a briefing on background Friday. News agencies are not allowed to quote those
officials or broadcast their quotes but there are still some key takeaways"
Some back story. Use reader view and read past the consumer safety bias
for easier digestion. Plenty of links to original sources.
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,” Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official at the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), told The Lever. “The railroads will test new features. But once they are told they have to do it… they don’t want to spend the money.”
... A spokesperson for the agency confirmed to The Lever that the
derailed train was not equipped with ECP brakes.
...As one railroad industry insider told The Washington Post anonymously
in 2016: “Trains are like giant Slinkies. When you have that back of the train running into the front of the train, they can actually push cars
out, cause a derailment and cause a hell of a mess.”
ECP braking, the analyst said, takes “the energy out of the train
quicker, so when a train does derail there is less energy that has to be absorbed by crushing tank cars.”
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 11:30:14 AM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/18/23 10:01 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 12:09:44 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 2/17/23 11:23 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 2:33:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:Electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. Blame to both the Obama and >> Trump administrations for acceding to industry wishes to avoid their
The blame can be shared among whoever changed federal safety rules, >>>> whoever lobbied for those changes, and the train operator.
Two out of three are corporate and the third is the Trump administration.
You can add a fourth: the Biden administration that didn't change the >>>> rules back despite campaign promises. Or a fifth for whoever allowed the
change of response to allow burning off the chemicals instead of
cleaning them.
Could you site the specific "rule" you're claiming would have prevented this calamity?
requirement in cases like East Palestine.
2015: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/safety/rail-rule-summary >>
2017:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/16/2017-22281/hazardous-materials-enhanced-tank-car-standards-and-operational-controls-for-high-hazard-flammable
The problem appears to be what number of cars a train has before ECP is >> required, but I haven't seen a specific commentary on that, so please >> share if you have.
I haven't seen anything on this, nor have I seen even an argument that ECPshttps://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/white-house-to-provide-federal-resources-to-east-palestine/
could have prevented this derailment apparently caused by a failed wheel bearing.
I'm not sure if the wheel locked or if it completely fell off.
All this should come out eventually, but due to the magnitude of the potential lawsuits,
no one is being particularly forthcoming right now.
Not the RR, the DoT, or even the EPA.
"Representatives from multiple federal agencies held a briefing on background Friday. News agencies are not allowed to quote those
officials or broadcast their quotes but there are still some key takeaways"
Some back story. Use reader view and read past the consumer safety bias for easier digestion. Plenty of links to original sources.
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,” Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official at the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), told The Lever. “The railroads will test new features. But once they are told they have to do it… they don’t want to
spend the money.”
... A spokesperson for the agency confirmed to The Lever that the
derailed train was not equipped with ECP brakes.
...As one railroad industry insider told The Washington Post anonymously in 2016: “Trains are like giant Slinkies. When you have that back of the train running into the front of the train, they can actually push cars out, cause a derailment and cause a hell of a mess.”
ECP braking, the analyst said, takes “the energy out of the train quicker, so when a train does derail there is less energy that has to be absorbed by crushing tank cars.”Latest news
a brake issue did not cause the derailment,
a hot box erupted from a frozen axle.
ECP BRAKING IS NOT AN ISSUE
no evidence of a slinky effect
derailment probably caused by materials warpage as a result of fire
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cause-of-east-palestine-derailment-likely-revealed-in-a-video/
https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/what-caused-the-train-derailment/
Steve is wrong, again.
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 11:30:14 AM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,”
Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official at the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), told The Lever. “The railroads will test new
features. But once they are told they have to do it… they don’t want to >> spend the money.”
... A spokesperson for the agency confirmed to The Lever that the
derailed train was not equipped with ECP brakes.
...As one railroad industry insider told The Washington Post anonymously
in 2016: “Trains are like giant Slinkies. When you have that back of the >> train running into the front of the train, they can actually push cars
out, cause a derailment and cause a hell of a mess.”
ECP braking, the analyst said, takes “the energy out of the train
quicker, so when a train does derail there is less energy that has to be
absorbed by crushing tank cars.”
Latest news
a brake issue did not cause the derailment,
a hot box erupted from a frozen axle.
ECP BRAKING IS NOT AN ISSUE > no evidence of a slinky effect
derailment probably caused by materials warpage as a result of fire
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cause-of-east-palestine-derailment-likely-revealed-in-a-video/
https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/what-caused-the-train-derailment/
Steve is wrong, again.
On 2/18/23 1:01 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 11:30:14 AM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,” >> Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official at the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), told The Lever. “The railroads will test new
features. But once they are told they have to do it… they don’t want to
spend the money.”
... A spokesperson for the agency confirmed to The Lever that the
derailed train was not equipped with ECP brakes.
...As one railroad industry insider told The Washington Post anonymously >> in 2016: “Trains are like giant Slinkies. When you have that back of the
train running into the front of the train, they can actually push cars
out, cause a derailment and cause a hell of a mess.”
ECP braking, the analyst said, takes “the energy out of the train
quicker, so when a train does derail there is less energy that has to be >> absorbed by crushing tank cars.”
Latest news
a brake issue did not cause the derailment,
a hot box erupted from a frozen axle.
ECP BRAKING IS NOT AN ISSUE > no evidence of a slinky effect
derailment probably caused by materials warpage as a result of fire
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cause-of-east-palestine-derailment-likely-revealed-in-a-video/
https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/what-caused-the-train-derailment/
Steve is wrong, again.Hold on, there. Quoting experts on the issues involved doesn't make me wrong.
From wkbn:
"“The crew did receive a wayside defect detector, shortly before the derailment indicating a mechanical issue. Then an emergency break [sic?] application was initiated,” Graham said.
However, the train was not able to stop in time."
How is not being able to stop in time not a braking issue? How could ECP brakes not have reduced the severity?
https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qze4/32-nasty-rail-workers-say-they-knew-the-train-that-derailed-in-east-palestine-was-dangerous
"...according to the load profile of the train viewed by Motherboard,
nearly all of the cushioned draw bars were in the middle of the train,
with the train’s heaviest third behind those. Whitaker likened this
effect to a bowling ball attached to the end of a slinky attached to
your ankle. When you’re moving, you’re dragging that bowling ball behind you. When you stop, the further away the bowling ball is, the harder
it’s going to roll into your ankle. That many cushioned draw bars with that much weight behind them, Whitaker explained, means the slinky is
longer and the bowling ball is heavier."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2359895-ohio-chemical-spill-what-could-have-caused-the-train-to-derail/
"“You’re basically dealing with a big mile-long or more Slinky,” says Russell Quimby..."
From wkbn:
"“The crew did receive a wayside defect detector, shortly before
the derailment indicating a mechanical issue. Then an emergency
break [sic?] application was initiated,” Graham said.
However, the train was not able to stop in time."
How is not being able to stop in time not a braking issue? How
could ECP brakes not have reduced the severity?
https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qze4/32-nasty-rail-workers-say-they-knew-the-train-that-derailed-in-east-palestine-was-dangerous
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2359895-ohio-chemical-spill-what-could-have-caused-the-train-to-derail/
At any rate ECP or not, it takes a huge distance and a lo of time too
stop a train.
https://www.econstructioncareers.com/news-insight/how-long-train-stop
and from Austin's newspaper, itself
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2017/03/10/how-long-does-it-take-to-stop-a-train-it-depends-on-several-factors/10023942007/
And this:
Steve wants to blame Trump for following the law (passed during the
Obama administration)
“We’re constrained by law on some areas of rail regulation (like the braking rule withdrawn by the Trump administration in 2018 because of
a law passed by Congress in 2015),” Buttigieg tweeted this week.
On 2/18/23 1:01 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 11:30:14 AM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:
https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-rules-before-ohio-derailment/
“Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this accident? Yes,” >> Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official at the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), told The Lever. “The railroads will test new
features. But once they are told they have to do it… they don’t want to
spend the money.”
... A spokesperson for the agency confirmed to The Lever that the
derailed train was not equipped with ECP brakes.
...As one railroad industry insider told The Washington Post anonymously >> in 2016: “Trains are like giant Slinkies. When you have that back of the
train running into the front of the train, they can actually push cars
out, cause a derailment and cause a hell of a mess.”
ECP braking, the analyst said, takes “the energy out of the train
quicker, so when a train does derail there is less energy that has to be >> absorbed by crushing tank cars.”
Latest news
a brake issue did not cause the derailment,
a hot box erupted from a frozen axle.
ECP BRAKING IS NOT AN ISSUE > no evidence of a slinky effect
derailment probably caused by materials warpage as a result of fire
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cause-of-east-palestine-derailment-likely-revealed-in-a-video/
https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-derailment/what-caused-the-train-derailment/
Steve is wrong, again.Hold on, there. Quoting experts on the issues involved doesn't make me wrong.
From wkbn:
"“The crew did receive a wayside defect detector, shortly before the derailment indicating a mechanical issue. Then an emergency break [sic?] application was initiated,” Graham said.
However, the train was not able to stop in time."
How is not being able to stop in time not a braking issue? How could ECP brakes not have reduced the severity?
https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qze4/32-nasty-rail-workers-say-they-knew-the-train-that-derailed-in-east-palestine-was-dangerous
Steve is wrong, again.Hold on, there. Quoting experts on the issues involved doesn't make
me wrong.
From wkbn:
"“The crew did receive a wayside defect detector, shortly before
the derailment indicating a mechanical issue. Then an emergency
break [sic?] application was initiated,” Graham said.
However, the train was not able to stop in time."
Ever consider the path of force from a moving cargo load, to a wheel
brake? The cargo and and the rail cars are all in motion. Then brake
is applied......to the wheels of the car. All the braking energy is transferred from the wheel to the wheel bearing.
It actually could have been the emergency brake that initiated the derailment. Coasting to a stop might have kept the train in the
tracks. We'll probably never know for sure.
How is not being able to stop in time not a braking issue? How
could ECP brakes not have reduced the severity?
https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qze4/32-nasty-rail-workers-say-they-knew-the-train-that-derailed-in-east-palestine-was-dangerous
This is a completely different issue that could have contributed but AFAICT.... has no tie to blaming Trump, so it won't get any coverage
from dems or MSM.
On 2/19/23 7:20 PM, ScottW wrote:
Steve is wrong, again.Hold on, there. Quoting experts on the issues involved doesn't make
me wrong.
From wkbn:
"“The crew did receive a wayside defect detector, shortly before
the derailment indicating a mechanical issue. Then an emergency
break [sic?] application was initiated,” Graham said.
However, the train was not able to stop in time."
Ever consider the path of force from a moving cargo load, to a wheel brake? The cargo and and the rail cars are all in motion. Then brake
is applied......to the wheels of the car. All the braking energy is transferred from the wheel to the wheel bearing.
It actually could have been the emergency brake that initiated the derailment. Coasting to a stop might have kept the train in theCareful: if subsequently revealed information shows something different
tracks. We'll probably never know for sure.
Art will say you're wrong.
I'm pretty confident that we'll probably never know for sure. But
more to the point of the tragedy, the decision to burn the cargo is
now appearing highly suspect. Seems no one responsible for this call
knew the chemical consequences creating far more toxic substances
than the cargo itself.
You might want to start watching Fox as they've been scathing in
their criticism of the RR and DeWine as well as the federal response.
Steven Hilton was calling for DeWine to resign for his financial ties
to the RR and letting them take the lead in initial disaster control.
Seems they asked for the "controlled" burn and state officials ok'd
the plan. A former EPA official with years in toxic waste cleanup
said he'd never seen a decision like it....ever.
On 2/20/23 6:44 PM, ScottW wrote:
I'm pretty confident that we'll probably never know for sure. But
more to the point of the tragedy, the decision to burn the cargo is
now appearing highly suspect. Seems no one responsible for this call
knew the chemical consequences creating far more toxic substances
than the cargo itself.
You might want to start watching Fox as they've been scathing inI've seen elsewhere how much the railroads spend on lobbying which has
their criticism of the RR and DeWine as well as the federal response. Steven Hilton was calling for DeWine to resign for his financial ties
to the RR and letting them take the lead in initial disaster control.
Seems they asked for the "controlled" burn and state officials ok'd
the plan. A former EPA official with years in toxic waste cleanup
said he'd never seen a decision like it....ever.
been effective at the federal level under both parties as well as in Ohio.
Yes, that burnoff is highly expedient.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 154:35:35 |
| Calls: | 10,383 |
| Files: | 14,054 |
| Messages: | 6,417,848 |