Carmont rail crash - RAIB report issued
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-...
It makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
It makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
Edited by matchmaker on Thursday 10th March 14:49
matchmaker said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-60685...
It makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
Wrong linkIt makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
phumy said:
matchmaker said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-60685...
It makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
Wrong linkIt makes sobering reading...apart from anything else, a drain not constructed as per design drawings.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-...
MikeStroud said:
I didn't understand the difference between what they were supposed to build and what was built. What is the difference in simple terms? tia.
Someone had built a bund across the slope above the track which wasn't meant to be there, directing water down the slope towards the track. The french drain couldn't cope with the water being diverted in this way and it overflowed, gravel/stones from the drain ended up on the track.Leicester Loyal said:
'Lessons will be learnt'
I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Yup I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Network Rail seem to be going the way of their predcessor, Railtrack, in having precious little grasp of their own infrastructure. I can't see it getting any better.
The accident has sadly brought into sharp focus the shortcomings of the design of the HST (High Speed Train / "Intercity 125") power car (loco) cabs, which are a separate fibreglass unit bolted onto the chassis and main body of the loco. The leading power car cab became completely detached in the impact, leaving the driver little chance of survivial; although it was commented that the forces involved were far in excess of any design parameters, and there was no absolute certainty that a newer train would have avoided the driver becoming a fatality. Aslef, the train drivers' union, is now pressing hard for the removal of all remaining HSTs from service ASAP.
Edited by Southerner on Friday 11th March 12:28
Southerner said:
Leicester Loyal said:
'Lessons will be learnt'
I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Yup I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Network Rail seem to be going the way of their predcessor, Railtrack, in having precious little grasp of their own infrastructure. I can't see it getting any better.
Can't see it getting any better soon, if anything it'll get worse with the impending changes that have been put forward for 2023. Sadly we're just minuscule cogs in a vast machine, meaning our hands are tied when it comes to sorting stuff out, the red tape is unbelievable.
Southerner said:
Leicester Loyal said:
'Lessons will be learnt'
I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Yup I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Network Rail seem to be going the way of their predcessor, Railtrack, in having precious little grasp of their own infrastructure. I can't see it getting any better.
I don't think a bloody drain on its own would require so much work!
Southerner said:
Leicester Loyal said:
'Lessons will be learnt'
I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Yup I hear this on a monthly basis, nothing ever changes, too much paperwork and too much money needed in order to successfully implement it and make the changes needed.
Network Rail seem to be going the way of their predcessor, Railtrack, in having precious little grasp of their own infrastructure. I can't see it getting any better.
The accident has sadly brought into sharp focus the shortcomings of the design of the HST (High Speed Train / "Intercity 125") power car (loco) cabs, which are a separate fibreglass unit bolted onto the chassis and main body of the loco. The leading power car cab became completely detached in the impact, leaving the driver little chance of survivial; although it was commented that the forces involved were far in excess of any design parameters, and there was no absolute certainty that a newer train would have avoided the driver becoming a fatality. Aslef, the train drivers' union, is now pressing hard for the removal of all remaining HSTs from service ASAP.
Edited by Southerner on Friday 11th March 12:28
There were no cries from Aslef about banning 'units' after the recent Salisbury crash. Had a HST been involved in the Salisbury crash then there would have perhaps have been a better outcome?...
Had it been a 'unit' that left the track at Carmont then I'm sure the outcome would have been worse?
It only took Aslef until the conclusion of the inquiry to seemingly work out it was a HST that hit a landslip at over 70mph and call for a ban on the train type...instead on focusing on preventing accidents like this happening again. Classic 'them and us' mentality.
BlimeyCharlie said:
Locomotives and rolling stock are not designed like cars. They are principally designed to transport people and freight etc around efficiently.
There were no cries from Aslef about banning 'units' after the recent Salisbury crash. Had a HST been involved in the Salisbury crash then there would have perhaps have been a better outcome?...
Had it been a 'unit' that left the track at Carmont then I'm sure the outcome would have been worse?
It only took Aslef until the conclusion of the inquiry to seemingly work out it was a HST that hit a landslip at over 70mph and call for a ban on the train type...instead on focusing on preventing accidents like this happening again. Classic 'them and us' mentality.
Hmm. The difference, in this context, between an HST power car and a "unit" is that the unit won't shed its cab, with it coming away in one piece and ending up in a different place to the rest of the locomotive that it was previously attached to. It might be smashed to buggery, but it'll still be attached as it's an integral part of the structure of that vehicle. The driver also has the option of leaving that cab and walking into the passenger accomodation immediately behind it if they've done all they can, as opposed to an HST where the route out would involve passing through the hot innards of a diesel loco, which is the last place you want to be when you're about to connect with something at high velocity!There were no cries from Aslef about banning 'units' after the recent Salisbury crash. Had a HST been involved in the Salisbury crash then there would have perhaps have been a better outcome?...
Had it been a 'unit' that left the track at Carmont then I'm sure the outcome would have been worse?
It only took Aslef until the conclusion of the inquiry to seemingly work out it was a HST that hit a landslip at over 70mph and call for a ban on the train type...instead on focusing on preventing accidents like this happening again. Classic 'them and us' mentality.
I'm a huge fan of the HST, they're absolutely superb trains and I miss working them every bit as much as I dislike the utter turds that have replaced them. That being said, the lack of protection for the bloke driving it in a big smash can't be disregarded in this day and age.
As for Network Rail taking decent preventative measures to stop this sort of thing happening in the first place, I think we all know how likely that is!
Edited by Southerner on Saturday 12th March 23:52
Southerner said:
As for Network Rail taking decent preventative measures to stop this sort of thing happening in the first place, I think we all know how likely that is!
yeah, well, one can blame nr for a lot of things but when the next fatal rail accident caused by Edited by Southerner on Saturday 12th March 23:52
driver error happens you won't hear nr taking the opportunity to ask that driver training be reviewed.
Network Rail plead guilty to several criminal charges in connection with the derailment.
BBC said:
Network Rail has admitted a series of failings which led to the death of three people in a train derailment near Stonehaven in 2020.
The company pleaded guilty to criminal charges at the High Court in Aberdeen.
Three people died and six were injured when a train struck a landslide at Carmont after heavy rain.
Network Rail admitted failing to impose a speed restriction, warn the driver that part of the track was unsafe, or ask him to reduce his speed.
It also admitted a number of failures over the maintenance and inspection of drainage in the area, and in adverse and extreme weather planning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-...The company pleaded guilty to criminal charges at the High Court in Aberdeen.
Three people died and six were injured when a train struck a landslide at Carmont after heavy rain.
Network Rail admitted failing to impose a speed restriction, warn the driver that part of the track was unsafe, or ask him to reduce his speed.
It also admitted a number of failures over the maintenance and inspection of drainage in the area, and in adverse and extreme weather planning.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff