495C4A2B   
   From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Calvin Henry-Cotnam  wrote:   
   >Wayne Hines (w.d.hines.unspammed@ns.sympatico.nospam.ca) said...   
      
   >>The locomotive/independent brakes should have been off to test whether   
   >>the applied handbrakes would hold the train.   
      
   >The MMA railroad should have had a rule and procedure in place to that   
   >effect.   
      
   It did.   
      
   >They didn't even have a rule requiring the minimum number of   
   >handbrakes as recommended by Transport Canada.   
      
   I saw no reference to that in the report. The safety agency came up with   
   its own number by testing an actual consist.   
      
   >The locomotive engineer set the number of handbrakes that the MMA's   
   >rules told him to set and no further test procedure was to follow.   
      
   This is false.   
      
   >The point is, no disaster is ever attributable to one or two things. It   
   >takes several failures in combination.   
      
   Can you name the two main points of failure without having read the report   
   for yourself?   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)