TGV Strasbourg derail
Author
Discussion

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

207 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all

DuraAce

4,272 posts

189 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Related to yesterday?

gbruckner

53 posts

138 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Video at https://www.rt.com/news/322054-tgv-train-derails-e...

Seems to have happened near a bridge. Can anybody translate what the person in the video says? frown

FourWheelDrift

92,237 posts

313 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Other reports saying it was a test train on a new TGV line, not a passenger filled train.

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

207 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Says excessive speed



0000

13,816 posts

220 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
gbruckner said:
Video at https://www.rt.com/news/322054-tgv-train-derails-e...

Seems to have happened near a bridge. Can anybody translate what the person in the video says? frown
Can't quite catch the first bit. Something about in all his life, then that the TGV exploded. I doubt he means that literally though.

Steve_D

13,801 posts

287 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Says excessive speed

Is it just me that finds it odd that the wreckage is predominately alongside the bridge but there is smoke at both ends of the bridge.

Steve

eharding

14,648 posts

313 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Steve_D said:
saaby93 said:
Says excessive speed

Is it just me that finds it odd that the wreckage is predominately alongside the bridge but there is smoke at both ends of the bridge.

Steve
Bloody hell, that looks grim frown

Looking at the scouring of the ground extending from the bottom left, across the river and onto the opposite bank it looks like most of the train didn't make it as far as the bridge?

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

207 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Looking at other photos it looks its the back of the train is in the canal
Assuming the trains coming from bottom left the front of the train may have hit the bridge and ended up top right

Does that work?

FourWheelDrift

92,237 posts

313 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Looking at other photos it looks its the back of the train is in the canal
Assuming the trains coming from bottom left the front of the train may have hit the bridge and ended up top right

Does that work?
I thought it came off a rail bridge (looks likes a bridge for each direction with electrification on each) and falling in between the two bridged/lines?


Beyond Rational

3,544 posts

244 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Front of the train hits the bridge, explodes and momentum and bridge sides carry burning wreckage along the bridge, rest of the train takes the path of least resistance and goes straight on down the embankment.

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

207 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
FourWheelDrift said:
I thought it came off a rail bridge (looks likes a bridge for each direction with electrification on each) and falling in between the two bridged/lines?

There's foreshortening in that photo making the two bridges look closer than they are. That piece in the canal looks like the back - see the roof aerial things







Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 14th November 19:04

Hooli

32,278 posts

229 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
Christ that looks messy.

anonymous-user

83 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
That looks like a tight radius for a 'high speed' ? frown

MajorProblem

4,700 posts

193 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
speedyguy said:
That looks like a tight radius for a 'high speed' ? frown
Track will have a cant on it. And no, I don't mean Tony Blair.

hidetheelephants

35,702 posts

222 months

Saturday 14th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Looking at other photos it looks its the back of the train is in the canal
Assuming the trains coming from bottom left the front of the train may have hit the bridge and ended up top right

Does that work?
Beyond Rational said:
Front of the train hits the bridge, explodes and momentum and bridge sides carry burning wreckage along the bridge, rest of the train takes the path of least resistance and goes straight on down the embankment.
That seems plausible from the pictures.

Fer

7,773 posts

309 months

Sunday 15th November 2015
quotequote all
MajorProblem said:
Track will have a cant on it. And no, I don't mean Tony Blair.
This deserved recognition.

hidetheelephants

35,702 posts

222 months

Sunday 15th November 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The propulsion system will have lubrication, perhaps pressurised; in a collision like this the oil will go every which way along with stuff that's quite hot like brake components; add in dry lineside plants, litter or detritus/seat cushions from the train and you have a small and smoky fire. Overhead line damage can easily start fires as well.

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

207 months

Sunday 15th November 2015
quotequote all
It doesn't look like it did explode. the front hit the bridge and theres a few bits of burning stuff there but mainly its just come off the rails

Simpo Two

92,666 posts

294 months

Sunday 15th November 2015
quotequote all
Doing 220mph they said on R4 today.