Train crash in Scotland

[Rick101]

Correct. Line was proved clear by the train ahead.

Whilst landslips can happen, this was an exceptional circumstance. Sinkholes happen, that does not mean all cars should be limited to 5mph forevermore just in case.

[saaby93]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did the first train travel so slowly there was a two hour gap until giving the ok to the second one

[P5BNij]

saaby93 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did the first train travel so slowly there was a two hour gap until giving the ok to the second one

We'll find out soon enough.

The longest I've been held anywhere awaiting a decision from Control was six hours in Knighton Loop just south of Leicester when a broken rail was discovered a little further on at Wigston.

[essayer]

We all complain when stuck on a delayed train, but fking hell, imagine being stuck for two hours, then on the way back to where you started from, a derailment like this to occur

[sim72]

saaby93 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did the first train travel so slowly there was a two hour gap until giving the ok to the second one

Timeline appears to be thus
0639: The down train (2B13) departs Montrose
0657: 2B13 (which is then just south of Carmont) reports landslip on the up line
0659: 1T08 is stopped at Carmont SB
0713: 2B13 arrives at Stonehaven but is then terminated due to flooding between there and Aberdeen.
c0700-0910: Investigation of up line takes place, it is determined that 1T08 cannot continue
0910: 2B13 is moved out of the way at Stonehaven so that 1T08 can arrive there
0925: 1T08 is moved across onto the down line
0936: 1T08 departs northbound
0938: 1T08 is derailed

Therefore there was about two and half hours between 2B13 and 1T08.

Ironically, it appears that the initial report of the up line landslip by 2B13 was only *just* in time to stop 1T08 in the first place.

[Europa1]

essayer said:

We all complain when stuck on a delayed train, but fking hell, imagine being stuck for two hours, then on the way back to where you started from, a derailment like this to occur

Especially dying in it.

[matchmaker]

sim72 said:

saaby93 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did the first train travel so slowly there was a two hour gap until giving the ok to the second one

Timeline appears to be thus
0639: The down train (2B13) departs Montrose
0657: 2B13 (which is then just south of Carmont) reports landslip on the up line
0659: 1T08 is stopped at Carmont SB
0713: 2B13 arrives at Stonehaven but is then terminated due to flooding between there and Aberdeen.
c0700-0910: Investigation of up line takes place, it is determined that 1T08 cannot continue
0910: 2B13 is moved out of the way at Stonehaven so that 1T08 can arrive there
0925: 1T08 is moved across onto the down line
0936: 1T08 departs northbound
0938: 1T08 is derailed

Therefore there was about two and half hours between 2B13 and 1T08.

Ironically, it appears that the initial report of the up line landslip by 2B13 was only *just* in time to stop 1T08 in the first place.

I'd say, having read the interim RAIB reports, that the above is broadly speaking, correct. The only point I'd amend/add to is the period c0700-0910. Part of the delay is that the points that 1T08 had to use to cross from the up line to the down line are what is termed "trailing points". Any points that a train carrying passengers traverses must be locked to avoid the points being "split" by the passage of a train (the failure of such a mechanism caused the Grayrigg derailment). The trailing points at Carmont did not have such a feature, so a MOM - Mobile Operations Manager - was dispatched by road to Carmont to put a physical lock on the points - known as "clipping". One this had been done 1T08 could proceed.

That's in the RAIB reports.

[Whatsmyname]

How much of that is in the report because a lot of it bksks.

[gooner1]

Whatsmyname said:

How much of that is in the report because a lot of it bksks.

For example?

[matchmaker]

Whatsmyname said:

How much of that is in the report because a lot of it bksks.

OK, what parts are bks?

[Whatsmyname]

I’m a bit time poor at the minute but I’ll read the report and try to explain it a lot better and post something this evening if you like.

[matchmaker]

I'd better correct what I posted earlier about the crossing at Carmont. I had thought it was mentioned in the RAIB report, but having reread the report I must have picked some information up elsewhere. In general what I wrote about passenger trains using unlocked points is correct - the points must be physically locked open or shut by being clamped manually. I understood that a manager had to be dispatched to Carmont to do this.

If I've caused any confusion, apologies. My railway signalling comes from an earlier era!

[alangla]

matchmaker said:

If I've caused any confusion, apologies. My railway signalling comes from an earlier era!

So does Carmont's...

[Whatsmyname]

Doesn’t really matter the age of the signalling the rules “principles” are pretty much the same.

[Robertj21a]

Whatsmyname said:

How much of that is in the report because a lot of it bksks.

Why don't you just read the report ?

[Whatsmyname]

Robertj21a said:

Why don't you just read the report ?

You could just read a bit above and see why. I’m on my phone and out and about at the minute.

[Robertj21a]

Whatsmyname said:

Robertj21a said:

Why don't you just read the report ?

You could just read a bit above and see why. I’m on my phone and out and about at the minute.

Nobody asked you to read it this minute.

[coppernorks]

matchmaker said:

I'd better correct what I posted earlier about the crossing at Carmont. I had thought it was mentioned in the RAIB report, but having reread the report I must have picked some information up elsewhere. In general what I wrote about passenger trains using unlocked points is correct - the points must be physically locked open or shut by being clamped manually. I understood that a manager had to be dispatched to Carmont to do this.

If I've caused any confusion, apologies. My railway signalling comes from an earlier era!

Yes, many sigboxes don't have point locks or powered crossovers, these boxes are not required to use their
crossovers much, just for engineering purposes and emergency occasions like this.

Had the train been empty of passengers and running as empty stock this "Clamp and Scotch " procedure
would not be necessary, but as the train had passengers on it the crossover had to be secured.

In the old days such a task would have been the signaller's job, but now a
MOM is required thus wasting huge amounts of time finding one and them travelling to the location.

[IJWS15]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Polmont was carriages and a 47 so 3 link (probably screw) couplings, HST (IIRC) has buckeyes between all cars so much more rigid and less likely to concertina.

Most multiple units are now bolted joints between the units

[Whatsmyname]

Ok so we have a set of mechanical points that we are gonna go send an empty rain over In the facing direction, they have no facing point lock as they are predominantly trailing. What proves the correct position of the switch rail to within 5mm tolerance? Or do you just pull the lever and yolo it? Presuming no clip and scotch.