Train crash in Scotland

[gooner1]

sim72 said:

Helicopter123 said:

The train left Stonehaven at 0653.

It is c. 3 miles out of the Station.

Alarm not raised until 0940.

That's a huge gap - poor souls may have been waiting 3 hours for help to arrive.

No, the train had gone south and been stopped because of a landslip. It had turned round and was returning to Aberdeen when the accident happened.

I think that’s been confirmed, it’s now being reported that the train hit a landslip on the correct track back to Aberdeen which
may have been caused by the trains earlier journey.

[sim72]

Dan_1981 said:

Still struggling to understand exactly what seems to have happened. Does the train run like this ENGINE - CARRIAGES - ENGINE

There's a picture of one 'engine' (is this terminology correct?) at the edge of the bridge, looking up at it.

Then a close up of the same 'engine' with firemen in front of it.

In the foreground of that image there is what appears to be debris, and damage to trees etc suggesting something else has gone down the embankment.

Then there are two other images circulating. One of the three carriages, piled up ontop of one another and one of the other 'engine' down the embankment.

Surely if the train down the embankment was the lead 'engine' then the carriages should be inbetween the crash place and the rear 'engine'

or m i misunderstanding how the train was set up?

No, you've got it right. Looks like the lead locomotive has become detached from the train and gone down the embankment, leaving the coaches piled up on the track. The rear locomotive is near the bridge behind the coaches.

[P5BNij]

Whatsmyname said:

If the train had stopped at a land slip (Alarm bells) and was returning back on itself doing a bang road move for a start why would the driver not proceed at caution (speed slow enough to stop short of any obstruction)

That’s a lot of damage for a 5-10mph derailment.

As far as I'm aware the train did not return wrong line but crossed over to the right line at Carmont.

Line speed is 75mph so it could well have accelerated away from the crossover which is perfectly within the rules.

And just for accuracy as to the train's formation, it was power car + four intermediate coaches + power car.

[Dan_1981]

sim72 said:

Dan_1981 said:

Still struggling to understand exactly what seems to have happened. Does the train run like this ENGINE - CARRIAGES - ENGINE

There's a picture of one 'engine' (is this terminology correct?) at the edge of the bridge, looking up at it.

Then a close up of the same 'engine' with firemen in front of it.

In the foreground of that image there is what appears to be debris, and damage to trees etc suggesting something else has gone down the embankment.

Then there are two other images circulating. One of the three carriages, piled up ontop of one another and one of the other 'engine' down the embankment.

Surely if the train down the embankment was the lead 'engine' then the carriages should be inbetween the crash place and the rear 'engine'

or m i misunderstanding how the train was set up?

No, you've got it right. Looks like the lead locomotive has become detached from the train and gone down the embankment, leaving the coaches piled up on the track. The rear locomotive is near the bridge behind the coaches.

So I guess what we could be looking at is... lead engine goes down embankment as they reach the bridge, carriages don't follow, but derail and pile up on the other side of the bridge, rear engine is left at the exit to the bridge, but in photos actually looks like the lead.

Makes sense I guess.

The picture of the engine down the embankment i'd suggest that digger / excavator isn't new to the scene and was working on something there already.

[Big-Bo-Beep]

gooner1 said:

I think that’s been confirmed, it’s now being reported that the train hit a landslip on the correct track back to Aberdeen which
may have been caused by the trains earlier journey.

unless the stationary train was derailed and propelled down the banking by the force of a landslip, the train should have
hit any landslip at walking pace if it was under caution and doing a " wrong direction move " ,
i.e. going north on the southbound line.

[sim72]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

gooner1 said:

I think that’s been confirmed, it’s now being reported that the train hit a landslip on the correct track back to Aberdeen which
may have been caused by the trains earlier journey.

unless the stationary train was derailed and propelled down the banking by the force of a landslip, the train should have
hit any landslip at walking pace if it was under caution and doing a " wrong direction move " ,
i.e. going north on the southbound line.

It was on the correct road. Speed limit there for HSTs is 75mph.

[Whatsmyname]

Even if it was on the right road wtf would you not proceed at caution? All the signs are there.

[gooner1]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

unless the stationary train was derailed and propelled down the banking by the force of a landslip, the train should have
hit any landslip at walking pace if it was under caution and doing a " wrong direction move " ,
i.e. going north on the southbound line.

Understood, however the BBC are now stating the train was travelling South , which unless my internal compass is completely fubared would not constitute a bang road movement. : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-537517...
EFA.

Edited by gooner1 on Wednesday 12th August 15:55

[P5BNij]

Whatsmyname said:

Even if it was on the right road wtf would you not proceed at caution? All the signs are there.

At the time the only sign of any obstruction would have been the one he was returning from, so unless instructed otherwise once over the crossing at Carmont he would be heading back north at line speed. The driver couldn't have known that the bridge he was now approaching for the second time but from a different direction was going to be a problem.

[Braveheart300]

Many now saying 3 reported dead with one missing.

[downthepub]

My house is near the helipad at the main hospital in Aberdeen and there was a flurry of choppers at about 1pm. That's a long time trapped upside down in a carriage, assuming the helis were flying in from the site of the crash.

[oobster]

Is this the bridge pictured in other images?

[BrundanBianchi]

Pretty unlucky really. Stops for a land slip, goes back, and hits a land slip caused by passing by originally. What are the chances?

[Big-Bo-Beep]

BrundanBianchi said:

Pretty unlucky really. Stops for a land slip, goes back, and hits a land slip caused by passing by originally. What are the chances?

jesus P Christ on a bike. after 6 hours we still don't have a reasonable explanation for what happened.

was he travelling full speed on the south line and hit the landslide, or did he come to grief travelling full speed returning north on the north line after turning at a crossover [ where ? ] , or came to grief at another landslip returning north on the south line after avoiding hitting the original landslip ?

[nordboy]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

jesus P Christ on a bike. after 6 hours we still don't have a reasonable explanation for what happened.

was he travelling full speed on the south line and hit the landslide, or did he come to grief travelling full speed returning north on the north line after turning at a crossover [ where ? ] , or came to grief at another landslip returning north on the south line after avoiding hitting the original landslip ?

Yep, disgraceful that someone hasn’t got instantly on PH to update total strangers immediately!!

[P5BNij]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

BrundanBianchi said:

Pretty unlucky really. Stops for a land slip, goes back, and hits a land slip caused by passing by originally. What are the chances?

jesus P Christ on a bike. after 6 hours we still don't have a reasonable explanation for what happened.

was he travelling full speed on the south line and hit the landslide, or did he come to grief travelling full speed returning north on the north line after turning at a crossover [ where ? ] , or came to grief at another landslip returning north on the south line after avoiding hitting the original landslip ?

He was stopped on the southbound line because it was was obstructed due to flooding, then with the signaller's permission he changed ends and proceeded north along the same line to the crossover at Carmont, once clear of the crossover onto the northbound line he would be accelerating back up to line speed when he came to the obstruction which caused the derailment. Hope that makes sense. I've been in a similar situation several times over the years and unless instructed to proceed at caution throughout the entire move to a particular location, you go back up to line speed, or the normal speed for your train, whichever is appropriate. Hope that makes sense.

[Braveheart300]

oobster said:

Is this the bridge pictured in other images?

Believe so yes.

[P5BNij]

BTP now confirming three fatalties.

[sim72]

Oh bloody hell.

I've just realised on the image of the burning locomotive from earlier, it's the right hand end that is the cab end (i.e. it's been completely obliterated) which means there could well be a carriage attached to the other end at the bottom of the embankment.

Poor bloody driver.

[NRS]

Dan_1981 said:

sim72 said:

Dan_1981 said:

Still struggling to understand exactly what seems to have happened. Does the train run like this ENGINE - CARRIAGES - ENGINE

There's a picture of one 'engine' (is this terminology correct?) at the edge of the bridge, looking up at it.

Then a close up of the same 'engine' with firemen in front of it.

In the foreground of that image there is what appears to be debris, and damage to trees etc suggesting something else has gone down the embankment.

Then there are two other images circulating. One of the three carriages, piled up ontop of one another and one of the other 'engine' down the embankment.

Surely if the train down the embankment was the lead 'engine' then the carriages should be inbetween the crash place and the rear 'engine'

or m i misunderstanding how the train was set up?

No, you've got it right. Looks like the lead locomotive has become detached from the train and gone down the embankment, leaving the coaches piled up on the track. The rear locomotive is near the bridge behind the coaches.

So I guess what we could be looking at is... lead engine goes down embankment as they reach the bridge, carriages don't follow, but derail and pile up on the other side of the bridge, rear engine is left at the exit to the bridge, but in photos actually looks like the lead.

Makes sense I guess.

The picture of the engine down the embankment i'd suggest that digger / excavator isn't new to the scene and was working on something there already.

It seems like that is the case approximately. There is a 4th carriage which is "missing" from that explaination, and I presume that one is the carriage/engine that is reported underwater, of which there has been no photo so far.