November 19, 2017, 11:03 am
Facebook iconTwitter iconYouTube iconGoogle+ icon
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07227 UAE Dirham
1 Philippine Peso = 2.22452 Albanian Lek
1 Philippine Peso = 0.03503 Neth Antilles Guilder
1 Philippine Peso = 0.34355 Argentine Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02607 Australian Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.03503 Aruba Florin
1 Philippine Peso = 0.03935 Barbados Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 1.64187 Bangladesh Taka
1 Philippine Peso = 0.0327 Bulgarian Lev
1 Philippine Peso = 0.00742 Bahraini Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 34.29713 Burundi Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01968 Bermuda Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02667 Brunei Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.13499 Bolivian Boliviano
1 Philippine Peso = 0.0645 Brazilian Real
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01968 Bahamian Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 1.28247 Bhutan Ngultrum
1 Philippine Peso = 0.20681 Botswana Pula
1 Philippine Peso = 393.93939 Belarus Ruble
1 Philippine Peso = 0.03931 Belize Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02511 Canadian Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01951 Swiss Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 12.40988 Chilean Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 0.13051 Chinese Yuan
1 Philippine Peso = 59.13813 Colombian Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 11.08422 Costa Rica Colon
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01968 Cuban Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 1.83943 Cape Verde Escudo
1 Philippine Peso = 0.42677 Czech Koruna
1 Philippine Peso = 3.47954 Djibouti Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 0.12411 Danish Krone
1 Philippine Peso = 0.94451 Dominican Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 2.25075 Algerian Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.2609 Estonian Kroon
1 Philippine Peso = 0.34652 Egyptian Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.53227 Ethiopian Birr
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01667 Euro
1 Philippine Peso = 0.04117 Fiji Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.0149 Falkland Islands Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01491 British Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.0895 Ghanaian Cedi
1 Philippine Peso = 0.92483 Gambian Dalasi
1 Philippine Peso = 177.2137 Guinea Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 0.14447 Guatemala Quetzal
1 Philippine Peso = 4.05313 Guyana Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.15372 Hong Kong Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.46232 Honduras Lempira
1 Philippine Peso = 0.12613 Croatian Kuna
1 Philippine Peso = 1.21291 Haiti Gourde
1 Philippine Peso = 5.19481 Hungarian Forint
1 Philippine Peso = 266.09603 Indonesian Rupiah
1 Philippine Peso = 0.06915 Israeli Shekel
1 Philippine Peso = 1.27847 Indian Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 22.9634 Iraqi Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 693.36875 Iran Rial
1 Philippine Peso = 2.02755 Iceland Krona
1 Philippine Peso = 2.47068 Jamaican Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01392 Jordanian Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 2.21558 Japanese Yen
1 Philippine Peso = 2.03994 Kenyan Shilling
1 Philippine Peso = 1.37194 Kyrgyzstan Som
1 Philippine Peso = 79.10272 Cambodia Riel
1 Philippine Peso = 8.33333 Comoros Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 17.70956 North Korean Won
1 Philippine Peso = 21.5429 Korean Won
1 Philippine Peso = 0.00594 Kuwaiti Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01614 Cayman Islands Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 6.52952 Kazakhstan Tenge
1 Philippine Peso = 163.2625 Lao Kip
1 Philippine Peso = 29.73239 Lebanese Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 3.02145 Sri Lanka Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 2.44392 Liberian Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.27873 Lesotho Loti
1 Philippine Peso = 0.05999 Lithuanian Lita
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01221 Latvian Lat
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02676 Libyan Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.18535 Moroccan Dirham
1 Philippine Peso = 0.34406 Moldovan Leu
1 Philippine Peso = 1.02145 Macedonian Denar
1 Philippine Peso = 26.82015 Myanmar Kyat
1 Philippine Peso = 48.01181 Mongolian Tugrik
1 Philippine Peso = 0.15831 Macau Pataca
1 Philippine Peso = 6.91558 Mauritania Ougulya
1 Philippine Peso = 0.66706 Mauritius Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 0.30638 Maldives Rufiyaa
1 Philippine Peso = 14.09681 Malawi Kwacha
1 Philippine Peso = 0.37473 Mexican Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 0.08186 Malaysian Ringgit
1 Philippine Peso = 0.27564 Namibian Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 7.02479 Nigerian Naira
1 Philippine Peso = 0.60232 Nicaragua Cordoba
1 Philippine Peso = 0.16201 Norwegian Krone
1 Philippine Peso = 2.03758 Nepalese Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02897 New Zealand Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.00757 Omani Rial
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01968 Panama Balboa
1 Philippine Peso = 0.06374 Peruvian Nuevo Sol
1 Philippine Peso = 0.06312 Papua New Guinea Kina
1 Philippine Peso = 1 Philippine Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 2.07261 Pakistani Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07062 Polish Zloty
1 Philippine Peso = 111.06651 Paraguayan Guarani
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07477 Qatar Rial
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07746 Romanian New Leu
1 Philippine Peso = 1.16854 Russian Rouble
1 Philippine Peso = 16.37721 Rwanda Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07379 Saudi Arabian Riyal
1 Philippine Peso = 0.15368 Solomon Islands Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.26269 Seychelles Rupee
1 Philippine Peso = 0.13104 Sudanese Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.16586 Swedish Krona
1 Philippine Peso = 0.02669 Singapore Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01491 St Helena Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.43695 Slovak Koruna
1 Philippine Peso = 149.94097 Sierra Leone Leone
1 Philippine Peso = 10.99961 Somali Shilling
1 Philippine Peso = 408.72688 Sao Tome Dobra
1 Philippine Peso = 0.17218 El Salvador Colon
1 Philippine Peso = 10.13341 Syrian Pound
1 Philippine Peso = 0.2756 Swaziland Lilageni
1 Philippine Peso = 0.64542 Thai Baht
1 Philippine Peso = 0.04872 Tunisian Dinar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.04538 Tongan paʻanga
1 Philippine Peso = 0.07647 Turkish Lira
1 Philippine Peso = 0.13045 Trinidad Tobago Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.59144 Taiwan Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 43.97875 Tanzanian Shilling
1 Philippine Peso = 0.52076 Ukraine Hryvnia
1 Philippine Peso = 71.36954 Ugandan Shilling
1 Philippine Peso = 0.01968 United States Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 0.57989 Uruguayan New Peso
1 Philippine Peso = 158.20543 Uzbekistan Sum
1 Philippine Peso = 0.19628 Venezuelan Bolivar
1 Philippine Peso = 446.89099 Vietnam Dong
1 Philippine Peso = 2.12515 Vanuatu Vatu
1 Philippine Peso = 0.05043 Samoa Tala
1 Philippine Peso = 10.9329 CFA Franc (BEAC)
1 Philippine Peso = 0.05313 East Caribbean Dollar
1 Philippine Peso = 10.93861 CFA Franc (BCEAO)
1 Philippine Peso = 1.9754 Pacific Franc
1 Philippine Peso = 4.91834 Yemen Riyal
1 Philippine Peso = 0.27568 South African Rand
1 Philippine Peso = 102.11531 Zambian Kwacha
1 Philippine Peso = 7.12121 Zimbabwe dollar

Faulty brakes in old bus played role in Tanay crash

(Continued from last week)

by Lucille Sodipe, VERA Files

By its passengers’ accounts, there was something wrong with Panda Bus No. 8.

Halfway through their 90-kilometer journey from Quezon City to Tanay, Rizal, those seated at the back could already smell something burning. And on the road leading to where it crashed, killing 15 people, investigators found no skid marks, indicating the wheels hadn’t stopped turning until the final moment.

The initial report of the Tanay police said, “… the bus accordingly suffered from brake defects and lost its control and hit on the barrier placed near the road widening area and eventually ramped (sic) a Meralco post and ravine tree (sic).”

Two weeks later, a report released by a joint technical inspection team composed of the Tanay police, the National Bureau of Investigation, bus manufacturer Hino Motors Philippines and a road safety interest group found no mechanical problem with the brakes. The cause of the crash pointed to an error on the part of the driver, Julian Lacorda Jr., who was among those who died.

Former Land Transportation Office chief and now secretary-general of the Philippine Global Road Safety Partnership Alberto Suansing admits the joint technical inspection team could not make a detailed examination of all parts of the bus.

Suansing said that when the team arrived in Tanay on March 3, or 11 days after the crash, it found the wreckage of the bus at a covered court in Brgy. Sampaloc, already sawn off in two.

The Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office’s (MDRRMO) terminal report said Panda Coach Tours and Transport, the company that owned the bus, towed it the day after the crash with clearance from local police.

“Here, you’ll see how the authorities handled, or mishandled, the evidence, maybe in their desire to clear the area,” said Suansing. 

The team nevertheless focused on the bus’ brake system. Buses like Panda have a hydraulic brake system, which uses brake fluid to bring the wheels to a stop.

Once a driver steps on the foot valve or brake pedal of these buses, a plunger pushes the brake fluid from the master cylinder located near the engine through tubes called brake lines until the fluid reaches the braking unit of each wheel. There is a reservoir sitting above the master cylinder that supplies it with enough brake fluid.

Each of the four combination wheels of the Panda bus has a braking unit, as is common with buses. The braking units are classified as drum brakes. Here, the brake fluid enters the wheel cylinder in each braking unit, which in turn pushes the brake shoe to attach itself to the brake drum. This will immobilize the wheel, bringing the vehicle to a stop. 

The team could only physically inspect the left rear brake of the bus. With all others, they had to make do with a visual inspection.

Based on their visual inspection, the team found no leaks on the wheel cylinders and the brake lines of the front and rear brakes. The reservoir still contained brake fluid, while the brake pedal was damaged, possibly when the collision happened, the report said. 

For the left rear brake, which was the only accessible part of the bus according to Suansing, they took out the combination tires to expose the braking unit.

His group noticed the brake shoe was still thick, which means it wasn’t worn out, explained Suansing. “Mukhangbago pa nga (It even looks new),” he added. But around the lining was a white film called glazing, which indicates the brake shoe was subjected to intense heat due to friction.

Suansing pointed out that the bus descent was long. “[The driver] was stepping on the pedal too often. That will heat up the brake shoe. When it glazes, it means it’s already hot,” he said. It’s the most likely source of the burning odor survivors reported smelling, he added.

More evidence of overheating was seen in the brake drum, based on the report: the inner part was blackened and showed heat cracks. The bearing grease was also melted. The group saw there was too much dirt and dust on both the brake shoe and brake drum surface.

There were no backing plates or dust covers which protect the braking unit from dirt.

They concluded that this overheating “probably caused brake friction fade.”

Brake friction fade typically happens when there are sudden and sustained braking. This usually occurs when a driver “rides” the brake pedal while descending a mountainous terrain. The constant and abrupt stepping heats up the brake drums quickly, making them less responsive. This is why shifting to and driving in a lower gear, commonly known as doing an engine brake, is recommended when traversing this kind of landscape. 

Suansing said they also found the gearshift in neutral, though this was not indicated in the group’s official report.

He speculates that the driver must have been driving in high gear and tried to downshift so he could use the engine brake to slow the bus down, but shifted to neutral instead. And then he got stuck there.

Because the bus was in neutral, it was therefore careening freely down the road, and the driver must have stepped on the brake pedal and stayed there the entire time, without shifting gear. “So he was freewheeling seconds before the impact, that’s why he came down fast,” Suansing said.

The group submitted their findings to the Tanay police on March 9. They said “there was no observed problem in the brake mechanical parts during the inspection.”

A veteran mechanic interviewed by VERA Files, however, said while the driver’s skills and behavior were questionable, the responsibility for the crash cannot be placed entirely on him. 

The mechanic, who asked not to be named, agrees with the driver’s culpability, even saying Lacorda’s background should also have been thoroughly looked into. “Was he drugged or drunk the night before? How skilled was he as a driver?”

But he is adamant in saying it cannot be 100 percent the driver’s fault. If Panda maintained the bus properly, it could have helped in preventing the tragedy.

The mechanic, who owns an auto repair shop in Metro Manila, has been fixing and maintaining trucks, luxury vehicles and 4-wheel drives for more than two decades now. His clients include civil society organizations and local government units.

The joint technical inspection team’s findings seems to echoe Panda’s earlier statement that there was nothing wrong with the bus, which was inspected the day before the crash.

In a sworn statement, Panda auto mechanic Victor Imbat said he checked and adjusted the brakes and clutch lining of the bus on Feb. 19. He also conducted several maintenance procedures and spent six hours from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. working on the bus. This was their standard operating procedure before any trip, he said. He also said he went to the crash site after the incident to check on the bus’ brakes. He found nothing wrong with the brake system.

The veteran mechanic said this is inconsistent with the findings of Suansing’s technical inspection team. 

He said if indeed adjusted the brakes the day before, the brakes wouldn’t have been dirty, as found by the inspection team.

“Kung nag-adjust ka at binuksanmo, kasinaa-adjust iyan na ‘di mobinuksan, dapatwalakanitongdumi. Ibig sabihin, hindimosinervice. Sinikwatmolang na ina-adjust mo( If you adjusted the brakes and opened them, because you can adjust without opening, there shouldn’t be this much dirt. So that means, you didn’t ‘service’ the bus. You just poked it),” he said.

The mechanic, who owns an auto repair shop in Metro Manila, has been fixing and maintaining trucks, luxury vehicles and 4-wheel drives for more than two decades now. His clients include civil society organizations and local government units.

He said the proper way of checking and adjusting brakes especially during preventive maintenance would require all four combination wheels to be taken out to expose, inspect and clean the brakes.

“Bakitkanagkaroon ng too much dirt? Kasiwalasilang dash cover.Bakitnaiipon (ang dumi)? Eh ‘di ang tagalnaniyan, di mobinubuksan (Why did it have too much dirt? Because it had no dash cover.Why did dirt accumulate? Because you haven’t opened (the brakes) for a long time),” the mechanic said. 

The report said the dirt found by the inspection team came from the environment and from worn out brake shoe material. Dirt enters the mechanism of the braking unit, causing wear and tear, which could contribute to the brake being prone to overheating.

Imbat also said he serviced the bus by himself for six hours.

The mechanic says the process of completing a proper check and adjustment on brakes alone in a bus like Panda would take at least 12 hours for a team of two. The difficulty of taking out the wheels and exposing the brake units alone takes time. And then Imbat had to clean each, unless he did not expose the brake units and just cleaned on the outside, which is the common practice among mechanics, he said.

The mechanic also noted that the brake shoe, though thick and seemingly in good condition, might actually be old or “expired.” Based on his experience, a brake shoe might be expired even if it is still thick.

An expired brake shoe hardens and may not react as quickly nor attach as firmly to the brake drum. It will also heat up faster. “When you buy an old vehicle, a traditional mechanic will say, the brake shoe’s still thick, we can still use it. You check the composition of the brake shoe, it looks okay and it works. But how old is it?” he says. It’s the drivers who usually sense when something is amiss with the brake shoe.

Suansing says poor maintenance is not a variable in this case and insists that it was a clear case of human error. “It was really the driver, the continuous pressing on the brake pedal which caused overheating.”

The Tanay police declared the crash “cased closed” on March 13.

“It was the driver’s error that ultimately led to the tragedy. The students said they smelled something burning and they told the driver. He should’ve stopped and checked the vehicle so the biggest fault is the driver’s,” said PO2 Joe Sevillena, the investigator assigned to the case.

The criminal liability of the suspect, the driver in this case, was the main point of the investigation conducted by the Tanay police, said Sevillena. The bus operators can still be held liable in a civil case, because vehicles should be roadworthy.

But that is no longer part of their work, he said.

The Panda bus was last examined at the LTO Motor Vehicle Inspection Center in Pasay in 2016. It passed the inspection.But the Senate investigation into the Tanay bus crash has revealed that the country’s motor vehicle inspection system isn’t functioning well, despite the billions of pesos in motor vehicle users’ taxes that are channeled into it every year.

Land Transportation Office (LTO) Chief Edgar Galvante said during the Senate inquiry on the Tanay bus crash that the entire Motor Vehicle Inspection System (MVIS) in the country needs to be overhauled.

“The equipment we’re using for inspection do not function properly that’s why we rely on physical and visual inspection,” Galvante said. This applies to all nine Motor Vehicle Inspection Centers (MVIC) in the country.

LTFRB chair Delgra echoed Galvante’s statement, explaining that because the government’s Motor Vehicle Inspection System (MVIS) is ineffective, transport agencies have had to place a 15-year-cap on the age of all buses and mini-buses for them to be considered roadworthy.

Suansing insists age does not determine a vehicle’s roadworthiness as laid down in government policies for the past two decades. “You have to test it. The vehicle has to undergo inspection. A respectable inspection system by the government needs to be in place,” he said.

Delgra agrees. He said a vehicle more than 15 years old can still be allowed to travel, if it were roadworthy. “Even if the bus is less than 15 years, if it’s not roadworthy, then we would not allow anymore the giving of franchise for such a unit,” he explains.

The age of the Panda bus became an issue when an LTFRB investigation found out the engine and the chassis or body did not match.

“Hino Japan confirmed that the engine number of that bus is of a different unit from the chassis number of the same bus. So at the time of the accident, the bus was a 29-year-old bus,” Delgra said, identifying the bus as similar to surplus units imported through Subic Freeport Zone.

The date of manufacture listed on the bus’ certificate of registration was 2004, even if Hino Motors in Japan built the bus in 1988, Delgra added.

The Land Transportation Office (LTO) is in charge of issuing certificates of registration for all vehicles in the country.

Based on the LTFRB’s 2013 memorandum setting a 15-year age limit for all buses and mini-buses in the country, the bus shouldn’t have been plying the roads in the first place, Delgra said.

Suansing pointed out there was nothing unlawful with the setup, as these are refurbished or rebuilt buses.

“There’s nothing anomalous as far as changing the engine is concerned. That was inspected in Subic and was declared roadworthy,” Suansing told the Senate committee.

Suansing told VERA Files that the likely explanation for the difference in the actual year model and the one recorded in LTO lies in the office’s policy.

In 2014, LTO and LTFRB came out with a joint administrative order (JAO), listing down guidelines in determining the year model of all vehicles. The goal was to identify the correct age of a vehicle to harmonize standards and properly implement the 15-year age limit.

In this JAO, the year model of rebuilt vehicles is based on the oldest major component of the bus – either the engine or the chassis.

But before 2014, LTO’s practice had been to record the year a bus was rebuilt and registered for the first time as its date of manufacture. Hence, the 2004 registration of the Panda bus with the 1988 chassis and new engine. (To be concluded)

(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issue. VERA is Latin for true.)
No votes yet

Column of the Day

Thumbs up and down at Asean

By JOSE BAYANI BAYLON | November 17,2017
‘This is the issue of the general public’s grasp of what it means for our country to be part of a greater, regional association of nations.’

Opinion of the Day

Onward: Planned Parenthood; Human Rights summit

By DAHLI ASPILLERA | November 17, 2017
‘Congratulations to the country’s PNP, AFP and all law enforcers, for a productive, uninterrupted, impressive Asean Summit. Great talents had put together a successful show.’