Following on from this thread I was wondering which company had the most serious accidents in terms of either accidents per route mile or by number of passengers carried.
James
James
-
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!
Trivia - Most dangerous railway company.
- Thread starter vidal
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Failed Unit
Established Member
It is difficult to really have a fair comparison as the ECML for example has a higher top speed, so therefore more likely to have more serious outcomes in terms of injury. For whatever reason we seem to have phases of bad accidents close together.
Great Western
Ladbroke Grove and Southall were fairly close together.
GNER
Hatfield and Great Heck where close together. When you add Potters Bar to the southern end of the ECML it was a bad patch for the route.
Great Western
Ladbroke Grove and Southall were fairly close together.
GNER
Hatfield and Great Heck where close together. When you add Potters Bar to the southern end of the ECML it was a bad patch for the route.
Dr Hoo
Established Member
British Railways in its early years from 1948. It obviously inherited all the operating weaknesses from the Big Four and an ageing fleet after the Second World War. Hardly any AWS or equivalent, nearly all slam doors, flimsy rolling stock construction, high staff turnover, horrendous working conditions for on-track staff and shunters.
Don’t just focus on ‘serious accidents’.
Don’t just focus on ‘serious accidents’.
Though by no means limited to one company, several major accidents took place on lines which had adopted the simple non-automatic vacuum brake. If the catastrophe at Armagh had not occurred on the Dundalk, Newry and Greenore, something similar would almost certainly have happened elsewhere. Whilst two of the most serious accidents pre-grouping took place in Scotland, different companies were involved, the Tay Bridge on the North British and Quintinshill on the Caledonian. The GWR had a generally strong safety record. Conversely the London, Chatham and Dover was nicknamed as the "Lose 'em, Smash 'em and Turnover". Was this actually justified?
D6130
Established Member
Pedants' corner: The Armagh accident occurred on the Great Northern Railway (Ireland)....not the Dundalk, Newry & Greenore.
Sir Felix Pole
Established Member
The LCDR was in ruinous competion with the SER and starved of investment which didn't help matters - its rolling stock was notoriously poor. The SER wasn't much better either with celebrity Charles Dickens being involved in the 1865 Staplehurst derailment, an event which traumatised him for the rest of his life.
The Cambrian has had quite a few incidents over the years with errors / overruns in single line working, most notably Abermule in 1921, plus level crossing accidents.
Oops! Quite right. Senior moment. Apologies all!Pedants' corner: The Armagh accident occurred on the Great Northern Railway (Ireland)....not the Dundalk, Newry & Greenore.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
As a slight variation on the OT in terms of accidents per days of operation, the Liverpool and Manchester didn't have the greatest of starts, running over and killing William Huskisson MP on its opening day.
Last edited:
...all of which were true of the pre-nationalisation companies, except more so, often significantly more so the further back you go.
The OP's question is pretty much impossible to answer since for starters it'll vary depending on the time period, traffic levels, location, etc. A "fair" comparison is impossible.
More generally, the London suburbs have been disproportionate for the share of serious accidents relative to train miles run, continuing into recent times.
Glasgow had a poor spell in the 1970s-80s with a sequence of major accidents to suburban trains there.
Glasgow had a poor spell in the 1970s-80s with a sequence of major accidents to suburban trains there.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
The number of trains running in a small area makes it more likely that an error will result in them hitting each other.
At the otyher extreme, the Midland & Great Northern (Muddle & Go Nowhere) had not a single passenger fatality in its 99 year existence