if only that idiot who noticed the tyre coming through the floor of the carriage and the rough ride had operated the emergency alarm rather than go looking for the guard.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Class 390 Windows
- Thread starter Huntergreed
- Start date
- Status
if only that idiot who noticed the tyre coming through the floor of the carriage and the rough ride had operated the emergency alarm rather than go looking for the guard.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
if only that idiot who noticed the tyre coming through the floor of the carriage and the rough ride had operated the emergency alarm rather than go looking for the guard.
If only the guard had also done so having been told about it rather than investigate first, as I understand he did.
That's precisely why I don't like there being a psychological barrier to the use of the passcom[1] by threatening fines and stuff.
[1] Modern DB stock has two - red handle is an immediate brake application, green button is a chat first.
I believe it was over a minute between when the guard was told about the wheel rim coming through the floor and the derailment.
It's notable though that he was absolved of any wrongdoing by the Court as he was following company policy.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Quite right that he was if that was indeed policy, but that kind of policy reminds me very much of Townsend Thoresen. DB certainly had blood on their hands for not having a policy of "safety concern" = "stop now".
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Yes - but that train was not exactly packed solid with passengers ? - 80 or so on a 9 car train.
Compare to how well 321420 / 418 stood up to the collision / derailment at Watford - the 1704 down was well loaded and from memory (having been one of the first managers to the scene) - the windows were intact - bar one where a wheelset had gone into it. Apart from the tragic death of a passenger - a good number of injuries were from items flying around , light panels coming down and "contact" bruises etc.
Odd experience I assure you , walking on the side of an overturned vehicle. Even odder , working with the Herts FB to secure a 321 to stop it rolling down the embankment. (hawsers attached to what was left of the DF and attached to the jacking point on a 321)
I don't think that's a great comparison, the Watford incident involved 2 trains which the kinetic energy of the crash could be distributed between, whilst at Greyrigg, it had to go through just the one. Additionally, according to Wikipedia, the Watford Junction rail crash was at about 50mph whilst Greyrigg occurred at 95mph, so the Greyrigg crash had almost 4 times the energy. A Mk3 structure experiencing something like Greyrigg would be very different
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Maybe so - but the 1989 built stock at Watford held up remarkably well - I assumed 2 of the 3 sets involved were for scrap - but they were all repaired and are still in service. Standards obviously much tighter in the interim years.
Really? The entire set had to be written off as beyond repair. Contrast with various Mk 3 100mph accidents (Colwich, Hatch End), fatality free for passengers despite much greater impacts, where the bulk of the stock involved was readily repaired.
I don't believe it had to be written off due to damage - the rear driving carriage didn't even leave the track. It just worked out cheaper to replace it as part of the upcoming order than to repair it.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Indeed. It was beyond economic repair, which in the case of some older cars can simply involve the airbag deploying.
Fairly certain I've read before that 4 coaches were written off and replaced. The repaired coaches became 321418 and the scrapped ones were rebuilt as 321420.
Yes. It contributed to the survival of 99.08% of those onboard. Look at the photos of the Grayrigg derailment itself and the conclusion is there for all to see.
What do you expect when a train has crashed at 80-odd mph off an embankment, it's not like it was going to be in service the following week now was it
Plus, it made a great training facility afterwards.
Last edited:
What's more, replacing the unit by tagging it on to the order for new carriages likely made the new carriages a little cheaper per unit since the order was bigger.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
It's not reasonable to judge the crashworthiness of a train on the basis of a single accident. Dramatic as it was, the Pendolino at Lambrigg didn't hit any solid object or a train coming the other way, unlike for example Great Heck or Colwich. Similar crashes with Mk3 stock, such as those mentioned above, demonstrated similar levels of survivability. We just don't know what would happen to a Pendolino in a Ladbroke Grove scenario - we don't want to find out and with the reduction in serious accidents we very probably won't.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
That is correct, 321 420 is formed from new build vehicles manufactured in 1997; they took the same carriage numbers as the written off vehicles that they replaced.
The original class 321 production was completed in 1990.
- Status