Minor collision between Edinburgh tram and bus

[robertclark125]

BBC Scotland reported this morning a minor collision between an Edinburgh tram, and a bus near the city centre. The bus involved is a First Edinburgh X38 liveried single decker, but there have been no reports of injuries.

Due to the incident, trams are currently not running east of Haymarket, with tickets being accepted on Lothian Buses services.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-28978931

Bus and tram in Edinburgh collision

A bus and a tram have collided during the rush hour in Edinburgh.

The accident happened on West Maitland Street at about 07:45. Both vehicles were travelling east towards Princes Street.

Police said no-one was injured and the tram was not derailed but arrangements were being made to move it.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

From looking at the pictures, it appears as if the bus driver pulled out in front of the tram?

 

[edwin_m]

Probably so - the bus is well over the line that is supposed to delineate the tram lane. Possibly pulled out to pass a cyclist or other vehicle without realising there was a tram coming up behind?

 

[fgwrich]

Probably so - the bus is well over the line that is supposed to delineate the tram lane. Possibly pulled out to pass a cyclist or other vehicle without realising there was a tram coming up behind?

I wonder from the second picture if that van parked against the kerb was there before the collision - in which case if it was, then I was thinking the same - bus pulling out, tram coming from behind.

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder from the second picture if that van parked against the kerb was there before the collision - in which case if it was, then I was thinking the same - bus pulling out, tram coming from behind.

I think it's a police van although the photo is too small to read the text on the bonnet. I'd assumed it arrived afterwards carrying some of the various hi-vi bods who are peering around and under things on the photos.

 

[richw]

I wonder from the second picture if that van parked against the kerb was there before the collision - in which case if it was, then I was thinking the same - bus pulling out, tram coming from behind.

On the Daily Record link at the bottom of the BBC page there is a picture taken adjacent to the white van. It is a First Vauxhall Combo, so certainly arrived afterwards.

 

[Abpj17]

I'd guess the bus pulled out to avoid a cyclist. Looking at the 3rd BBC pic, it's quite a step change in direction after the bus had been through the traffic lights.

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...o-trams-resume-after-crash-with-bus-1-3524593 includes a couple of comments that, on the surface, sound sensible and from those there at the time (one claims to have been in the tram). Both refer to a cyclist; one of them mentions that the cyclist 'jumped' off the pavement.

edit: https://twitter.com/AlastairDalton/status/505345810201333760 includes a quote from the Tram company - CCTV proves their driver not at fault...

 

[edwin_m]

a quote from the Tram company - CCTV proves their driver not at fault...

Clearly rubbish... the tram should have swerved to avoid the bus.

 

[Tom B]

At least, being a First Edinburgh bus, there wouldn't have been anybody on it!!

 

[daikilo]

Clearly rubbish... the tram should have swerved to avoid the bus.

Clearly rubbish ... it couldn't.

 

[bluegoblin7]

Clearly rubbish ... it couldn't.

I think Edwin's comment was intended as sarcasm. It isn't unknown for people to comment that the tram should have swerved in incidents elsewhere when trying to divert blame.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Is it just me who looked at the rather boring accident pictures with little damage and thought 'so what'? Is every vehicle accident going to get its own news article/thread?

 

[fgwrich]

Is it just me who looked at the rather boring accident pictures with little damage and thought 'so what'? Is every vehicle accident going to get its own news article/thread?

Pretty much. Looks to be fairly simple damage only collision, but of course some of the media and tram opponents wouldn't be seeing it that way.

 

[GaryMcEwan]

It seems to be a non starter of a story, it didn't even appear on the main Scottish news programmes (STV News & Reporting Scotland) even though there was a brief story about it on their own websites...

 

[90019]

Probably so - the bus is well over the line that is supposed to delineate the tram lane.

It's a bus and tram lane.

Is it just me who looked at the rather boring accident pictures with little damage and thought 'so what'? Is every vehicle accident going to get its own news article/thread?

Nope - the car that hit a tram a few days ago didn't get one.

 

[overthewater]

It's a bus and tram lane.


Nope - the car that hit a tram a few days ago didn't get one.

Would that be the one at RBS? Again that has been sweeped under the carpet ........

 

[Blindtraveler]

An interesting off topic point here is this is the 2nd accident involving Firsts X38 service inside of 2 weeks, the first being a late night smash near Winchburgh with a few minor injuries.

 

[robertclark125]

The only real significance of this story, that I can see, for the news websites, is this is the first "in service" collision between a tram and a vehicle.

One small issue for Fifers was, this had a knock on effect on Stagecoach East Scotland X52, which was diverted.

 

[Surreyman]

I would love to be a fly on the wall when the insurance claims go in, presumably there is plenty of case history/legal precedents for this type of accident going back more than a 100 years?

Maybe a cyclist swerved/wobbled, or pedestrian made to step out and bus driver swerved to avoid and bang?

 

[Antman]

Is it just me who looked at the rather boring accident pictures with little damage and thought 'so what'? Is every vehicle accident going to get its own news article/thread?

I thought much the same and wondered if so many emergency service personel were really needed at what was clearly a minor collision............just get the bus and tram out the way and get things running again

 

[bluegoblin7]

The only real significance of this story, that I can see, for the news websites, is this is the first "in service" collision between a tram and a vehicle.

Except it isn't - I'm reliably informed that there was a tram/car collision about a week prior to this one.

 

[455driver]

Maybe a cyclist swerved/wobbled, or pedestrian made to step out and bus driver swerved to avoid and bang?

If this is the case then the bus driver will get the blame, if he had hit whatever jumped off the kerb then they would get the blame.

 

[carriageline]

Which is awful and annoying!! I had a big 4x4 pull out in front of me in the poor weather a few years ago (badly too), and the natural reaction was to avoid a collision. Unfortunately lack of ABS in my Clio Sport (loved that car!!), and slightly icey weather meant I hit a kerb at some speed. Insurance company practically threw it out, and I ended up scrapping the car (bent subframe and all sorts) Annoyingly, there would of probably been less damage if I just hit the damned women, but there we go!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[edwin_m]

I'm pretty sure there would have been CCTV on the street and forward-facing in both the bus and the tram, so it should be pretty easy for people to establish what happened.

 

[90019]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...amed-for-crash-between-tram-and-bus-1-3525763

Cyclist blamed for crash between tram and bus

A TRAM crash that sparked tailbacks across the city centre in the morning rush hour can be blamed on a reckless cyclist, the Evening News can reveal.

The collision at West Maitland Street occurred when a bus driver veered into a moving tram after being forced to swerve by a cyclist who “jumped” into his path from the pavement.

I would say I'm surprised, but I'd be lying.

 

[muz379]

If this is the case then the bus driver will get the blame, if he had hit whatever jumped off the kerb then they would get the blame.

Not disputing that this is true

But IMO it is wrong , if it was a cyclist wobbling or jumping off the pavement or a pedestrian stepping out in front of the bus it should either be their fault , or it should just be put down as an accident with nobody to blame . Surely anybody could understand why the bus driver would not want to hit a cyclist or a pedestrian and so would swerve into the path of a tram . I know myself when driving given the choice between hitting a ped or swerving into the side of another car Id rather swerve into the car .

 

[Flying Snail]

Not disputing that this is true

But IMO it is wrong , if it was a cyclist wobbling or jumping off the pavement or a pedestrian stepping out in front of the bus it should either be their fault , or it should just be put down as an accident with nobody to blame . Surely anybody could understand why the bus driver would not want to hit a cyclist or a pedestrian and so would swerve into the path of a tram . I know myself when driving given the choice between hitting a ped or swerving into the side of another car Id rather swerve into the car .

That is all very well but in the absence of the culpabable party (what are the chances the cyclist stayed around to take responsibility) then someone else has to foot the bill. Unless there is a specific arrangement in Scottish law that I don't know about in this case I would bet on it being the bus company insurance who pays.

Even if the cyclist is identified, absence of insurance means there is little chance they will actually end up paying the damages.

 

[richw]

If it was a cyclist I'm pretty certain every one involved would rather a relatively minor bump between tram and bus than a bus potentially taking out the cyclist which would inevitably end in serious injuries or even fatality for the cyclist,

 

[455driver]

If it was a cyclist I'm pretty certain every one involved would rather a relatively minor bump between tram and bus than a bus potentially taking out the cyclist which would inevitably end in serious injuries or even fatality for the cyclist,

Why should we care about the cyclists safety?
He obviously doesnt care otherwise he wouldnt have cycled off the pavement in front of a bus!

 

[muz379]

That is all very well but in the absence of the culpabable party (what are the chances the cyclist stayed around to take responsibility) then someone else has to foot the bill. Unless there is a specific arrangement in Scottish law that I don't know about in this case I would bet on it being the bus company insurance who pays.

Even if the cyclist is identified, absence of insurance means there is little chance they will actually end up paying the damages.

Again not disputing the facts as they stand

Just saying it should be different . If there is evidence that it was a ped or a cyclist stepping out . Or the cyclist wobbling cos of wind or a pothole(this would be no ones fault) Then the respective parties should just pay to but their own damages right it put down as A no fault accident . Obviously it gets complicated when you have loads of injured passengers on the bus and tram .
But now no doubt the bus drivers personal insurance will suffer because he will have to declare that he has had an accident that is his fault despite him doing the right thing and trying to avoid killing someone .

Why should we care about the cyclists safety?
He obviously doesnt care otherwise he wouldnt have cycled off the pavement in front of a bus!

Do we know for sure this is the case ?

What if the cyclist just wobbled because of wind or a pothole ? Surely then its not the cyclists fault ?

Personally Id rather swerve and hit another car instead of a pedestrian or cyclist because A) It would be traumatic knowing you had killed someone even if they where being stupid B) You are going to be under a lot more suspicion if you have killed someone as oppose to hitting another car .

Same principle as to why we should care then about trying to prevent people driving their cars onto level crossings when you are driving a train approaching at 100MPH , I am sure as much as that person has compromised their own safety you dont want to actually kill them ?