The publication of part of the inquiry report on three fires on bendy buses in a matter of days last summer, following which they were taken off the roads, raises eyebrows and leads to more questions than answers.
In reply to a Parliamentary Question by PL MP Carmelo Abela, Transport Minister Joe Mizzi on Monday said: “Because this is a matter of national interest, part of the mentioned inquiry report is being published following the requested advice from the Attorney General’s Office”.
In the original question, Mr Abela asked for the magisterial inquiry report on the “fires on bendy buses”, or parts of it, to be published.
The part of the report that was published, which was given coverage by sections of the media, mentions only one of three bus fires – that which occurred on BUS-238 in Marsa, shortly after midnight on 25 August and which destroyed the bus completely. Another caught fire on a bus stop while being driven down the Mellieha main road, carrying 12 passengers, and the third bus caught fire in Xemxija on 27 August when carrying around 30 people. The driver had observed black smoke as soon as he reached the Xemxija roundabout and asked the passengers to immediately evacuate the bus.
A total of 68 bendy buses were consequently taken off the roads.
The opening remarks of the part of the report make the conclusion that the fire on BUS-238 was not an act of sabotage but the reasons as to why this was excluded have not been published. The fact that the part of the report published rules out sabotage in the first case is in no way an attempt to give the cause of the fires on the two other buses that occurred within two days. The possibility of sabotage in the Mellieha and Xemxija cases has therefore not been ruled out.
One might also note that these three cases being mentioned were not the only ones and media reports said there were eight fires on Arriva buses by 27 August.
It is meanwhile unclear why only the part of the report concerning the first incident, and the one which involved no passengers, was published and why the government deemed it necessary to request the Attorney General’s advice.
The inquiry report concludes that the fire on BUS-238 resulted from a short circuit mentioning “an impressive quantity of circuits and wire looms” which could all have served as a point of accidental flame ignition once their insulation was damaged.
This bus had broken down near the Cospicua tunnel and was idle for two hours before it was driven to Marsa, where it broke down for the second time. When the fire took place, the bus’ hazard lights were on, meaning the bus’ main switch was on and there was at least one electric circuit working.
The Integrated Electronic Systems – Controlled Area Network allows for the electrical system to communicate and identify shorts in any of the circuits. When a short is identified, the computer system stops the current to this circuit and bypasses it to others until maintenance takes place.
The document points out that the fire probably started accidentally at the back side of the articulated bus from the wire loom under the floorboard, rather than from the ceiling. The cable harness under the floorboard is more susceptible to environmental damage and is closer to equipment that heats up a lot. Despite having anti-heat protection systems, the possibility of overheating still exists.
The report also notes that BUS-328 had “over half a million kilometres, during which the wires and pipes were not only under heat stress but also from continuous bending of cables every time the bendy bus turns to manoeuvre itself on Malta’s narrow and congested roads”. The bumps on the roads “which are not always smooth” increase the risk of damage to electrical systems.
The fact that mechanics could not make the bus work despite having given it the usual re-set indicates a serious fault or breakdown in the electrical system that hampered the transmission of data of other functions. The fire could have started when mechanics were still on site but this was too early to detect.