St. Simon Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Hi Guys, Just heard that a South West Trains Class 159 has run into the back of a First Great Western 'Pacer' at Exeter St. Davids this evening, don't know anything else! The Days been full of accidents! Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudley Dodger Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Bally poor luck. I thought signalling was beyond this? And not another pacer dead! NOOOOOO! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Two trains in platform 1 using calling on signals is a frequent move at Exeter St Davids Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitbull1845 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Local gen site says 6 people believed injured, driver of one suffered whiplash, latest is that the units have been separated and no visible damage to either.. "Reports coming in that 2F53 the 1813 Barnstaple - Exmouth has rear ended 1L76 1927 Exeter SD 2F53 is unit 142029, 1L76 is a pair 159022 and 159010 on the back." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
great central Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Indeed it is....or will that be was after this? NA used to be permissive platforming till such an inccident ... Many (most) large stations have permissive platforms, if you stop using them as such you will reduce the service in many areas by at least 50%. Nottingham, for example, sometimes has 3 trains in one platform, make that 1 per platform and see what it does to the service. I'm sure there is a reasonable explanation for this, quite likely weather related. In the mean time, best wishes to all involved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 5, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2010 Scott is correct 2F53 Pacer rear ended SWT's 1L76 the 159's as no brakes. RAIB investigating the Pacer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted January 5, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2010 RAIB investigating the Pacer RAIB are investigating the whole incident. Let's not speculate until the investigation has been completed and published. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted January 5, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2010 RAIB are investigating the whole incident. Let's not speculate until the investigation has been completed and published. Quite agree Cap'n, uninformed speculation is no more than that - uninformed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted January 5, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 5, 2010 Quite agree Cap'n, uninformed speculation is no more than that - uninformed. Any incident is horrible. Hope all are OK soon. Slight change of subject; the ECML seems closed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Richard E Posted January 5, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 5, 2010 Any incident is horrible. Hope all are OK soon. Slight change of subject; the ECML seems closed! Agreed re the incident. ECML is OK at present, it has been horrid with delays of up to 3 hours on a couple of trains. Live Departure Board info is not reliable showing trains as 'missing' when a replacement is actually running. Quite often the replacement is also shown as 1 minute after the true due time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 6, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 6, 2010 RAIB are investigating the whole incident. Let's not speculate until the investigation has been completed and published. Captain I feel it strange you quote my post as speculation when it clearly states RAIB is investigating the Pacer. The other posts about permissive working etc include speculation but mine stated a specific statement not they probably will. There is nothing about the cause mentioned in my post just what actually happened which anyone on the platform could have posted too. It is informed fact as they are. The SWT 159 was released by RAIB and returned to Salisbury depot as it was stationary. As with my post on the DBS incident it states facts not speculation and that fact came from the Depot at Salisbury and our control before it was posted. It has to be done before the 159 could be returned to traffic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 6, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 6, 2010 One crew member has whiplash but as with the DBS incident fortunately nothing life threatening for anyone involved. Let's not speculate until the investigation has been completed and published. Isn't it impossible to speculate once the facts are published? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 One crew member has whiplash but as with the DBS incident fortunately nothing life threatening for anyone involved. Isn't it impossible to speculate once the facts are published? With respect Paul, are you not being just a tad pernickety ? I don't think it is helpful to foster all kinds of comment and speculation on an internet forum when it is possible that employees are under investigation for railway incidents of this kind. It is too easy to voice an opinion which might not subsequently be correct - but which might be used by others as a benefit. How many times have we criticised the media for incorrect reporting of railway "happenings" when that same media might be using our forum as a source of information ? Google can be a powerful tool !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod6 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 If an investigation is now underway, further comment on here does not seem appropriate. Topic closed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.