Train crash in Scotland
Discussion
Trevatanus said:
I have a relative who is working at the scene, he says he has no idea how they are going to move the trains, and he has working on the railways for 30 years.
I suspect that apart from the rear power car and possibly the rear coach, the rest are so badly damaged that they will be cut up on the spot.matchmaker said:
Trevatanus said:
I have a relative who is working at the scene, he says he has no idea how they are going to move the trains, and he has working on the railways for 30 years.
I suspect that apart from the rear power car and possibly the rear coach, the rest are so badly damaged that they will be cut up on the spot.shed driver said:
Do the HST sets have forward facing CCTV? And is that likely to have survived the impact and subsequent fire?
Judging by the image of the front power car, the cameras will not have survived, but I'm unsure where the OTMR boxes that store the data are situated on a HST, someone more knowledgable may know. If they're not in the cab they may be OK (and in fact even if they are, they're built to withstand huge trauma). S5Scot said:
I expect they may chinook the carriages to that hard standing area rather than cut up, if at all possible.
Apart from the rear PC they'll almost certainly cut them, as the cost of recovery would probably outweigh the value of the stock.When this Class 66 derailed a few years ago in a remote area, they cut it on the spot as it would have cost a ridiculous amount to recover, and that was a practically new loco worth several million quid.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77541583@N00/1670048...
Question for PH train experts:
"is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
"is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
Max_Torque said:
Question for PH train experts:
"is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
We have. And started a lot earlier than cars."is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
Max_Torque said:
Question for PH train experts:
"is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
The rolling stock involved here is not modern... Refurbished stuff, probably 40 years old itself."is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
abzmike said:
Max_Torque said:
Question for PH train experts:
"is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
The rolling stock involved here is not modern... Refurbished stuff, probably 40 years old itself."is modern rolling stock explicitly designed for crash resistance"?
If you look at passenger cars, we now design our car EXPLICITLY for crash performance. In as little as roughly 40 years we have gone from driving cars that basically pretty much any accident would result in serious injury or death to driving cars that are both incredibly strong but also incredibly protective of their occupants. If we can do this for cars, why not for trains?
sim72 said:
S5Scot said:
I expect they may chinook the carriages to that hard standing area rather than cut up, if at all possible.
Apart from the rear PC they'll almost certainly cut them, as the cost of recovery would probably outweigh the value of the stock.When this Class 66 derailed a few years ago in a remote area, they cut it on the spot as it would have cost a ridiculous amount to recover, and that was a practically new loco worth several million quid.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77541583@N00/1670048...
monkfish1 said:
Old yes. But Mk3 have proven themselves extremeley robust over the last 40 years.,
Less so in the recent accidents. Ufton Nervet in particular saw one folded in half - https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/RSSB_U... - page 135 onwards shows the damage to the coachesThese are ex-Great Western coaches as well - 40+ years of salt baths at Dawlish can't have done them much good & the ones being refurbished for Scotrail apparently had all sorts of corrosion problems found when they were in the works.
In saying that, there's been some stunning successes for Mk3s, this one in particular - https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php... 100mph collision, zero passenger fatalities.
Trevatanus said:
Not sure if already posted, but several people walked away from the incident, including an off duty conductor, who ran a mile along the track to a signal box to raise the alarm.
Not sure if anyone else was also able, as apparently the phone signal is poor at the site.
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. It can take quite a while to walk along the cess or in the four foot between the rails, walking it can be difficult enough, never mind running.Not sure if anyone else was also able, as apparently the phone signal is poor at the site.
Not an actual 'alarm' as such but the signalman at the next box would certainly be making enquieries about the delay.
Something else to add which I've just been made aware of - before the HST had stopped at the initial obstruction south of Carmont on the southbound line, a northbound service passed the location and the driver reported it, this service was stopped at Stonehaven soon after and was held in the platform there, this may account for the long delay in allowing the HST to turn back from the obstruction and head back towards Stonehaven.
Something else to add which I've just been made aware of - before the HST had stopped at the initial obstruction south of Carmont on the southbound line, a northbound service passed the location and the driver reported it, this service was stopped at Stonehaven soon after and was held in the platform there, this may account for the long delay in allowing the HST to turn back from the obstruction and head back towards Stonehaven.
sim72 said:
Apart from the rear PC they'll almost certainly cut them, as the cost of recovery would probably outweigh the value of the stock.
When this Class 66 derailed a few years ago in a remote area, they cut it on the spot as it would have cost a ridiculous amount to recover, and that was a practically new loco worth several million quid.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77541583@N00/1670048...
Good video of them recovering that:When this Class 66 derailed a few years ago in a remote area, they cut it on the spot as it would have cost a ridiculous amount to recover, and that was a practically new loco worth several million quid.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/77541583@N00/1670048...
https://youtu.be/O20QMStd_kU
I wonder if something similar will have to happen in this instance.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff