Many children killed in another ski trip coach crash
Discussion
JonnyFive said:
Surely it didn't impact that wall then, they wouldn't be dragging it out of the wall.. They'd be getting people out/chopping it up to get them out? Would take something pretty big to tow it out of a concrete wall, and I'd imagine the first things on scene would be ambulances/police cars so nothing strong enough to tow?
It strikes me as it might have got a slide on, hit the wall at an angle, gone upwards and hit the roof and ended up at the side scraping along?
The picture i just posted is it embedded in the wallIt strikes me as it might have got a slide on, hit the wall at an angle, gone upwards and hit the roof and ended up at the side scraping along?
This is it after it was moved.
You can see the green paint from the wall here
I would assume access to the offside was almost impossible due to the tunnel wall
Nickyboy said:
As for the driver falling asleep, i read somewhere the coach had only just its journey just before the tunnel so i doubt falling asleep is an issue.
It is not necessarily the case. It would depend on what the person has been doing the night before. If he didn't get enough rest then the change to a cacoon type environment might have caused him to relax. I normally experience a degree of tiredness at around 11 am. I try and have a cup of caffeine around 10.30 but all this does is put it back to just after lunch. Other times I just run with it. Retirement can be so exhausting.The more you read of this the more horrific it becomes. Like the Aberfan disaster, where more than four times as many people, children and adults, were killed, the effect of this crash will go beyond the parents and loved ones into the community.
Edited by Derek Smith on Wednesday 14th March 22:34
Mojocvh said:
@ jonny
Did you find it that necessary to bodge up some MS drawing to reinforce your opinion [on an internet forum which counts as jack shyte in the real world] when everyone else is shocked and thinking of the loss of these children, their carers and families?
Seeing as we were discussing how we think it could have happened.. Yes.Did you find it that necessary to bodge up some MS drawing to reinforce your opinion [on an internet forum which counts as jack shyte in the real world] when everyone else is shocked and thinking of the loss of these children, their carers and families?
It's obvious everyone is shocked by it, as am I.
I'd also be interested in how/why it happened.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Trains have been massively safer in crashes since the change from "body on frame" construction to a "metal tube" monocoque. There were various reasons for this change, not just safety. To get buses sorted out a similar approach would be needed and reducing the size/number of windows in the vehicle. Serious bus crashes seem remarkably rare given the massive mileages driven every year. Perhaps like aircraft it's just not worth making them crash-worthy.
Compulsory seat belts and airbags might help.
Indeed railway carriages in the UK are massively safer in accidents today. The number of people killed in accidents involving Mk3 or Mk4 coaches is comparatively low.Compulsory seat belts and airbags might help.
matchmaker said:
Indeed railway carriages in the UK are massively safer in accidents today. The number of people killed in accidents involving Mk3 or Mk4 coaches is comparatively low.
The last generation of Multiple Unit stock built by BR doesn't always stand up very well in accidents, I seem to remember that the Pacer struck in the Winsford crash had it's body displaced by something like 2 metres in relation to it's underframe and that the weakness of the welded aluminium construction of the 166/165 that was involved in the Ladbroke Grove crash was partially responsible for the high number of casualties. dandarez said:
s
t! I might hand in my bus-pass now 
On a serious note is there no way a cage structure cannot be built in? Or is it all too costly?
Thinking about it, round here (and they are regularly stopped and taken off the road - but then reappear!) schoolkids are ferried by some operators using 'cast off' double-deckers, usually handpainted and garish (one is purple and looks like household paint from B&Q!! It's not unusual for random stops of them and find brakes are joke, emissions are a joke etc etc.
I wouldn't let my grandchild on one if it was stationary!
Without legislation to force coach and bus builders to make safety-related alterations to designs then safety improvements will probably be low priority. Any real strength is normally in the chassis, which in PSV's is normally a separate ladder chassis from one manufacturer (Volvo, Scania etc) and a comparatively lightweight body from another (Plaxton, Vanhool etc). There are integral-construction buses and coaches available, but most operators still prefer the flexibility of speccing a chassis and body separately.t! I might hand in my bus-pass now On a serious note is there no way a cage structure cannot be built in? Or is it all too costly?
Thinking about it, round here (and they are regularly stopped and taken off the road - but then reappear!) schoolkids are ferried by some operators using 'cast off' double-deckers, usually handpainted and garish (one is purple and looks like household paint from B&Q!! It's not unusual for random stops of them and find brakes are joke, emissions are a joke etc etc.
I wouldn't let my grandchild on one if it was stationary!
Degner said:
Surely that isn't the actual wall it hit, 'cos otherwise the coach must have come pretty much to a dead halt from 60ish mph? If it is, then surely the coach has withstood the impact pretty well?
If that is the wall it hit then I would have expected a lot more damage if the impact speed was 60MPH (96kph) Obviously I don't know but would guess it was travelling a fair slower. The speed limit sign at the tunnel entrance says 60kph (37MPH) but maybe that's not the normal speed.It's also a bit odd (if it hit a flat vertical wall) that the lower part of the front of the coach seems less damaged than the upper part.
JonnyFive said:
It strikes me as it might have got a slide on,
Coaches have had ESP for some years, so that seems unlikely.Magog said:
matchmaker said:
Indeed railway carriages in the UK are massively safer in accidents today. The number of people killed in accidents involving Mk3 or Mk4 coaches is comparatively low.
The last generation of Multiple Unit stock built by BR doesn't always stand up very well in accidents, I seem to remember that the Pacer struck in the Winsford crash had it's body displaced by something like 2 metres in relation to it's underframe and that the weakness of the welded aluminium construction of the 166/165 that was involved in the Ladbroke Grove crash was partially responsible for the high number of casualties. Deva Link said:
If that is the wall it hit then I would have expected a lot more damage if the impact speed was 60MPH (96kph) Obviously I don't know but would guess it was travelling a fair slower. The speed limit sign at the tunnel entrance says 60kph (37MPH) but maybe that's not the normal speed.
It's also a bit odd (if it hit a flat vertical wall) that the lower part of the front of the coach seems less damaged than the upper part.
After seeing one of the vids after the coach was removed you can clearly see the curvature of the tunnel in the layby which would have made a difference to the roof damage, also the body tends to ride up as in this vidIt's also a bit odd (if it hit a flat vertical wall) that the lower part of the front of the coach seems less damaged than the upper part.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFlGHxV5WsY
Nickyboy said:
Deva Link said:
If that is the wall it hit then I would have expected a lot more damage if the impact speed was 60MPH (96kph) Obviously I don't know but would guess it was travelling a fair slower. The speed limit sign at the tunnel entrance says 60kph (37MPH) but maybe that's not the normal speed.
It's also a bit odd (if it hit a flat vertical wall) that the lower part of the front of the coach seems less damaged than the upper part.
After seeing one of the vids after the coach was removed you can clearly see the curvature of the tunnel in the layby which would have made a difference to the roof damage, also the body tends to ride up as in this vidIt's also a bit odd (if it hit a flat vertical wall) that the lower part of the front of the coach seems less damaged than the upper part.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFlGHxV5WsY
I've travelled through this tunnel. It looks that it was either mechanical failure of some sort or a puncture and loss of control with the coach hitting the refuge area wall. The kinetic energy involved must be massive, hence the damage and death toll. Either way it is a terrible tragedy for all involved and I feel for the parents of all the children and the survivors.
GTO Scott said:
Without legislation to force coach and bus builders to make safety-related alterations to designs then safety improvements will probably be low priority. Any real strength is normally in the chassis, which in PSV's is normally a separate ladder chassis from one manufacturer (Volvo, Scania etc) and a comparatively lightweight body from another (Plaxton, Vanhool etc). There are integral-construction buses and coaches available, but most operators still prefer the flexibility of speccing a chassis and body separately.
Nasty. Rerporting now that the driver may have suffered a heart attack. The vehicle did hold up pretty well condsidering the force of the impact, given that some of the damage was inflicted as part of the rescue effort. The coach was an integral construction vehicle, but it was nearly 10 years old. Safety standards have moved on in those ten years, like the Oxford Tube vehicles posted earlier, of a similar design but much newer, two of which have survived overturning at 60mph with superficial damage (one driver error and the other caused by a passenger, who was later jailed).Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff