Train crash in Scotland

[Byker28i]

sim72 said:

There is speculation that the appalling damage to the front PC was because it derailed south of the bridge and the nearside hit the parapet "end on". The momentum (and the rear PC may still been powering if the driver didn't have time to shut off) pushed it over the bridge, dragging against the bridge wall, and at the end of the bridge it toppled over and into the wooded area.

Re: and the rear PC may still been powering if the driver didn't have time to shut off...

Laymans question for the knowledgeable Do they not have a dead mans handle?

[vaud]

Byker28i said:

Re: and the rear PC may still been powering if the driver didn't have time to shut off...

Laymans question for the knowledgeable Do they not have a dead mans handle?

Would it make any difference given the momentum?

[Byker28i]

vaud said:

Byker28i said:

Re: and the rear PC may still been powering if the driver didn't have time to shut off...

Laymans question for the knowledgeable Do they not have a dead mans handle?

Would it make any difference given the momentum?

Probably not but I was interested in the comment about the rear unit still powering.

[Matthen]

Byker28i said:

vaud said:

Byker28i said:

Re: and the rear PC may still been powering if the driver didn't have time to shut off...

Laymans question for the knowledgeable Do they not have a dead mans handle?

Would it make any difference given the momentum?

Probably not but I was interested in the comment about the rear unit still powering.

They do have a dead man's pedal, and frequent alarms that must be acknowledged. 6 seconds off the pedal causes a full emergency brake.

I'd imagine the driver would have hit the emergency brake - ineffective at stopping the train though it would have been, it would have stopped the powercars providing power.

If he didn't, it's possible the rear car would have been providing power up until the train broke, which would have caused the control line to go dead, dropping the PU to idle.

However, they weigh something like 60T. Thats a hell of a lot of momentum whatever speed he was doing.

[anonymous-user]

IamJacksContempt said:

I see the Scum are at it again...

Respectful as ever.

I see the backlash against The Sun is gathering pace in Scotland. Many newsagents announcing they will no longer sell it, and will not start selling it again at any point in the future.

[Dave_90]

Lord Marylebone said:

I see the backlash against The Sun is gathering pace in Scotland. Many newsagents announcing they will no longer sell it, and will not start selling it again at any point in the future.

The cynic in me is thinking that they know exactly what they are doing - cause an outrage with a front page like that and get everyone talking about them. Any publicity is good publicity and all that. The people who actually buy the sun, whoever they are, will probably carry on regardless and they will get many more angry clicks on their website thanks to this.

[P5BNij]

Leicester Loyal said:

Lily the Pink said:

P5BNij said:

He arrived at Carmont Signalbox at around 10.30 but the alarm had already been raised by a member of the public about an hour earlier.

Would an alarm have been raised as a matter of course when the train failed to appear at the next signal box or station ?

I was thinking this too, the signaller would surely realise the train stopped in a section? They should have known something had gone wrongway before he arrived at the Signalbox, around the same time the member of public rang up (assuming they rang up not long after the crash)

As I alluded to yesterday, the signalman at the next box in the direction of travel (Stonehaven) would know that the HST was in section on its way to him and would probably have been on the inter -box phone when he twigged that there was a delay, but how long he waited to make the call we don't yet know. Looking at the route plan I posted earlier we know that the train was clear of the crossover at Carmont and had accelerated northward on the Down Main, and had passed Carmont's last signal (CM13), the derailment occurred about a mile further on and the train had yet to reach the next signal (SV19) which is the distant (warning) signal for the approach to Stonehaven's first stop signal (SV18).

[mx5nut]

IamJacksContempt said:

I see the Scum are at it again...

Respectful as ever.

Hope you washed your hands after touching that.

[essayer]

RAIB investigation
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/passenger-train...

"After travelling for approximately 1.4 miles (2.25 km), the train struck a landslip covering the down line and derailed. As the track curved to the right, the train continued in a roughly straight line for around 100 yards (90 metres) until it struck a section of bridge parapet, which was destroyed. The leading power car continued over the bridge and then fell from the railway down a wooded embankment, as did the third passenger carriage. The first passenger carriage came to rest on its roof, having rotated to be at right angles to the track. The second passenger carriage also overturned onto its roof and came to rest on the first carriage. The fourth passenger carriage remained upright and attached to the rear power car; it also came to rest on the first carriage. All wheelsets of the rear power car derailed, but it remained upright."

Edited by essayer on Friday 14th August 14:36

[alangla]

Bloody hell. What were the forces involved to separate coach 3 & launch it that far from the rest? I'd assumed that was the first one that had gone down the embankment. Hopefully the RAIB report is out fairly quickly & doesn't get held up by any court proceedings etc.

[rigga]

Lord Marylebone said:

I see the backlash against The Sun is gathering pace in Scotland. Many newsagents announcing they will no longer sell it, and will not start selling it again at any point in the future.

First Liverpool, now Scotland, give it a while and there won't be many places where its for sale.

[Trevatanus]

rigga said:

Lord Marylebone said:

I see the backlash against The Sun is gathering pace in Scotland. Many newsagents announcing they will no longer sell it, and will not start selling it again at any point in the future.

First Liverpool, now Scotland, give it a while and there won't be many places where its for sale.

I guess there’s no harm in taking the opportunity to nail a few more nails in there coffin? I’ve complained, first time I’ve ever felt the need to.

[essayer]

A waste of time because IPSO won't entertain the complaint unless it's from a relative of the deceased

[bristolracer]

Awful headlines
The Sun should remember what happened in Liverpool,only last year, walking around the streets of Liverpool and seeing newsagents with posters in the windows explaining why they still refuse to stock the paper

Can anyone explain the fire?
I thought diesel was fairly stable and didn't ignite very well?

[rigga]

bristolracer said:

Can anyone explain the fire?
I thought diesel was fairly stable and didn't ignite very well?

No diesel does catch fire quite well, we had a new class of 172 units, and due to poor fitment of the high pressure fuel lines on one of the earlier ones, the engine caught alight as the fuel sprayed onto the exhaust mainifold, went up quickly, and caused a huge amount of damage.
That was about 8 or 10 years ago, and we still have a dedicated fitter checking every one that comes into the depot at night, its a job that will never get removed, no one will have the balls to do it, even though its not been repeated.

[alangla]

bristolracer said:

Can anyone explain the fire?
I thought diesel was fairly stable and didn't ignite very well?

There’s been a few instances of HST power cars going up in flames in accidents- Ladbroke Grove and Maidenhead being the big ones

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?...
http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?...

[carl_w]

essayer said:

RAIB investigation
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/passenger-train...

"After travelling for approximately 1.4 miles (2.25 km), the train struck a landslip covering the down line and derailed. As the track curved to the right, the train continued in a roughly straight line for around 100 yards (90 metres) until it struck a section of bridge parapet, which was destroyed. The leading power car continued over the bridge and then fell from the railway down a wooded embankment, as did the third passenger carriage. The first passenger carriage came to rest on its roof, having rotated to be at right angles to the track. The second passenger carriage also overturned onto its roof and came to rest on the first carriage. The fourth passenger carriage remained upright and attached to the rear power car; it also came to rest on the first carriage. All wheelsets of the rear power car derailed, but it remained upright."

Edited by essayer on Friday 14th August 14:36

How bizarre. I wonder what caused the third passenger carriage to catch fire?

[sim72]

alangla said:

bristolracer said:

Can anyone explain the fire?
I thought diesel was fairly stable and didn't ignite very well?

There’s been a few instances of HST power cars going up in flames in accidents- Ladbroke Grove and Maidenhead being the big ones

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?...
http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?...

Diesel will catch fire very quickly when sprayed into a vapour by a violent accident, as per the examples above.

When in bulk, it won't. I used to live near a major railway depot as a student, and in very cold winters they used to light fires underneath the fuel tanks of diesel locomotives that would be needed later that night, so that so that the fuel wouldn't wax up.

[sim72]

essayer said:

RAIB investigation
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/passenger-train...

"After travelling for approximately 1.4 miles (2.25 km), the train struck a landslip covering the down line and derailed. As the track curved to the right, the train continued in a roughly straight line for around 100 yards (90 metres) until it struck a section of bridge parapet, which was destroyed. The leading power car continued over the bridge and then fell from the railway down a wooded embankment, as did the third passenger carriage. The first passenger carriage came to rest on its roof, having rotated to be at right angles to the track. The second passenger carriage also overturned onto its roof and came to rest on the first carriage. The fourth passenger carriage remained upright and attached to the rear power car; it also came to rest on the first carriage. All wheelsets of the rear power car derailed, but it remained upright."

This is exactly what I posted last night (with the violent destruction of the front PC being due to hitting the parapet end-on), except that the fire-damaged vehicle turns out to be the third, not the first. No, I can't work out how the third vehicle could have been fire-damaged, either.

[bristolracer]

rigga said:

bristolracer said:

Can anyone explain the fire?
I thought diesel was fairly stable and didn't ignite very well?

No diesel does catch fire quite well, we had a new class of 172 units, and due to poor fitment of the high pressure fuel lines on one of the earlier ones, the engine caught alight as the fuel sprayed onto the exhaust mainifold, went up quickly, and caused a huge amount of damage.
That was about 8 or 10 years ago, and we still have a dedicated fitter checking every one that comes into the depot at night, its a job that will never get removed, no one will have the balls to do it, even though its not been repeated.

Ah ok
So split tank or pipe, diesel ends up on hot bits and then trouble