Train crash in Scotland

[Warby80]

IrateNinja said:

sim72 said:

That's a fairly shocking image to me... coach 1 and the lead loco must have done serious acrobatics. A very faint silver lining that they were much reduced passenger numbers.

Indeed, coaches 2 and 3 are upside down also.

[Otispunkmeyer]

sim72 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I saw the photo from the tracks earlier, taken in front of what you are labelling coach 2 and I couldn't really make out what the other two coaches had landed on top of. It look too shallow/skinny to be a coach I thought. But that overhead shot shows it is a coach. Hope there weren't too many in that coach!

[Big-Bo-Beep]

valiant said:

The fact that the two most important people who could advance this investigation are dead should hopefully quell your appetite for immediate answers.

Your statement is knobish and disrespectful.

You may say that, but with all GSMR voice communications from driver to signaller and signaller to NR Control
recorded it's easy for any Network Rail Incident Operative to access these calls in seconds and
ascertain the sequence of events that led to disaster.

[vaud]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

You may say that, but with all GSMR voice communications from driver to signaller and signaller to NR Control
recorded it's easy for any Network Rail Incident Operative to access these calls in seconds and
ascertain the sequence of events that led to disaster.

Maybe, but that comes in the investigation. Not when they are still securing the scene and looking for survivors. Even if that data is captured and secured now, they are (rightly) not going to rush to release any info.

[easyhome]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Assuming it’s the contractors at fault? Must be a NR employee.....

[essayer]

I just can’t work out how the carriages have ended up like that, if the lead power car fell to its left. Did the trailing car continue with power? Or just momentum was enough to do that?

[sim72]

essayer said:

I just can’t work out how the carriages have ended up like that, if the lead power car fell to its left. Did the trailing car continue with power? Or just momentum was enough to do that?

Power car falls to left, taking coach 1 with it, they break apart and coach 1 ends up where it is

At the same time, coach 1 drags the front of coach 2 to the left, and coach 3 jacknifes over it, leaving coach 3 upside down on top of coach 2.

Rear power car would have been powering until the connection was severed.

[P5BNij]

With just a short six car formation the rear power car would probably have not been running, however, given that the driver had changed ends at the point of the first obstruction he may have left it running.

[sim72]

P5BNij said:

With just a short six car formation the rear power car may not have been running.

Both PCs would have been powering as they effectively run in multiple via dedicated cabling through the trailers, regardless of the length of the formation.

[P5BNij]

sim72 said:

P5BNij said:

With just a short six car formation the rear power car may not have been running.

Both PCs would have been powering as they effectively run in multiple via dedicated cabling through the trailers, regardless of the length of the formation.

I've driven several with just the leading PC running.

[sim72]

P5BNij said:

I've driven several with just the leading PC running.

Yes, obviously there are times when the trailing PC doesn't run, but in normal circumstances they do (and of course, the trailing PC would have been leading only a short time previously, so I doubt if it was powered off).

Unless ScotRail regularly run their short-formed HSTs on one PC, and I've missed that completely?

[P5BNij]

Scot-Rail may well have a policy on whether trailing PCs should be left running or not, even so it's still at the drivers discretion. Slightly different scenario granted as the trains we haul aren't wired for through running, but when we run our infrastructure trains top 'n' tail we nearly always have the rear loco shut down until it's actually needed. Company policies do vary though.

[rigga]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

valiant said:

The fact that the two most important people who could advance this investigation are dead should hopefully quell your appetite for immediate answers.

Your statement is knobish and disrespectful.

You may say that, but with all GSMR voice communications from driver to signaller and signaller to NR Control
recorded it's easy for any Network Rail Incident Operative to access these calls in seconds and
ascertain the sequence of events that led to disaster.

I suspect there wasn't time to make any calls as the incident unfolded, obviously initial call at first stop at landslide, return journey possibly not.
OTMR will be investigated as part of the investigation.

(On train monitoring /black box)

[Europa1]

sim72 said:

P5BNij said:

I've driven several with just the leading PC running.

Yes, obviously there are times when the trailing PC doesn't run, but in normal circumstances they do (and of course, the trailing PC would have been leading only a short time previously, so I doubt if it was powered off).

Unless ScotRail regularly run their short-formed HSTs on one PC, and I've missed that completely?

My understanding is that these HSTs have been cascaded to Scotrail, refurbed, been made Equality Act compliant (hence the power operated external carriage doors) and run shorter formations than when they were mainline stock. Some magazines have referred to them as "HST GTis".

[loggo]

P5BNij said:

Scot-Rail may well have a policy on whether trailing PCs should be left running or not, even so it's still at the drivers discretion. Slightly different scenario granted as the trains we haul aren't wired for through running, but when we run our infrastructure trains top 'n' tail we nearly always have the rear loco shut down until it's actually needed. Company policies do vary though.

I thought the idea was to use the available power to benefit timings, particularly acceleration. So would have expected both power cars to be running.
Otherwise why not just save a shedload of cash and have a driving trailer ??

[P5BNij]

Route plan of the area where the derailment occurred here....

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/315489/resp...

Scroll down to page 22 which will show where the train crossed over at Carmont to return north towards Stonehaven and Aberdeen. 'DM' is the northbound Down Main, 'UM' is the southbound Up Main.

[P5BNij]

loggo said:

P5BNij said:

Scot-Rail may well have a policy on whether trailing PCs should be left running or not, even so it's still at the drivers discretion. Slightly different scenario granted as the trains we haul aren't wired for through running, but when we run our infrastructure trains top 'n' tail we nearly always have the rear loco shut down until it's actually needed. Company policies do vary though.

I thought the idea was to use the available power to benefit timings, particularly acceleration. So would have expected both power cars to be running.
Otherwise why not just save a shedload of cash and have a driving trailer ??

It is the general idea but in practice the extra power isn't always needed, it depends on the characteristics of the route, such as length of signalling sections and gradients etc. The HSTs were cascaded from one company to another and come as a set, so building new driving trailers or drafting them in from elsewhere wouldn't really be necessary.

[young_bairn]

Stonehaven resident here and used to travel up and down this line frequently. Nothing more to add other than the confusion why a train would depart aberdeen around 6:30 when drain covers were popping out the street at around that time. Seems like a total waste of lives. Passed returning fire services whilst walking the dog with ATV buggy on trailer and with exhausted looking firemen. Felt bloody awful.

[Europa1]

loggo said:

P5BNij said:

Scot-Rail may well have a policy on whether trailing PCs should be left running or not, even so it's still at the drivers discretion. Slightly different scenario granted as the trains we haul aren't wired for through running, but when we run our infrastructure trains top 'n' tail we nearly always have the rear loco shut down until it's actually needed. Company policies do vary though.

I thought the idea was to use the available power to benefit timings, particularly acceleration. So would have expected both power cars to be running.
Otherwise why not just save a shedload of cash and have a driving trailer ??

Ditto - hence the "HST GTi" characterisation I have seen in some magazines - 2 powerful power cars at either end of a shorter rake of coaches than used to be the case in their previous life

[skip_1]

easyhome said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Assuming it’s the contractors at fault? Must be a NR employee.....

Every chance it may be Forestry there. By all accounts the alarm was not raised for a while until a neighbour saw the smoke and investigated.