RMweb Gold PhilH Posted May 12, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 12, 2014 This .....could have been a lot worse Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltic17 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Oh dear - that's not good at all - I see from the photo there is evidence of bodyside ripples which means the nose of the 37 has dropped in the accident (which they often portray after accidents). Could be the end of the 37? - hopefully not - a real shame though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 From a preservation point of view, I'd be happy if: No one was hurt, It didn't happen again, And the TPO rake wasn't too badly damaged. There is a lot of wobble on Frothbook with people concerned about the 37, which was due to leave anyway and has low preservation merit in the grander scheme of things. If it is written off, it'll be interesting to see what Network Rail replace it with... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Thankfully it would appear nobody was hurt. Hopefully the TPO isn't badly damaged, as for the yellow peril, well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest B Exam Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 DBS have several ex-NS6400's spare. About half the age of the 37 (build 1990's) Eurotunnel has a few too (5 from new, 3 ex-NS as spare part donors/replacements/extra's) Can be used up to 4 loco's in multiple traction. Modern, efficient tri-phase AC traction motors. Units from 2nd order (6461-6520) can be converted to mobile power gen-sets. Quite versatile But only one slight problem.... They will be out of gauge for normal UK lines.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted May 12, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 12, 2014 But only one slight problem.... They will be out of gauge for normal UK lines.... They are only 2.4M wide with a 20t axle load and don't look too tall either. Keith Edit the cab may be 4.2M high which would be too tall! (If I have read the info correctly!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 12, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 12, 2014 Not nice and alas the GCR figure yet again which will no doubt result in a visit by a 'man from the Ministry' - and if it doesn't it ought to. Regrettably it is seemingly minor incidents such as this which get the preservation world a bad name and which, rightly, continue to cause the ORR to take a major interest in this area of UK rail operations. Shame for the owners, very black mark for those responsible, and fall-out possibly spreading even further. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 It's another of these preserved railway cock-ups that could've been far more serious had circumstances been slightly different, someone's for the knack though. On a different note I was horrified to hear someone on a different preserved railway (with a less than stellar record recently) taking the line "Ho ho ho, look at what the GC have done this time". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
avonside1563 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Whilst we might have a secret chuckle at other peoples misfortunes, anyone involved with railway operations, be it heritage or national network, should take a good look at any incidents with a view to learning from them and, hopefully, preventing them from happening again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 No loss - its only a 37 - plenty more to go. (still, glad no one was hurt) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted May 13, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 13, 2014 On a different note I was horrified to hear someone on a different preserved railway (with a less than stellar record recently) taking the line "Ho ho ho, look at what the GC have done this time". I suspect that the sort of narrow-minded fanaticism that exists in some rank-and-file members of preservation societies is not unlike that of footie fans. So delighting in others' misfortunes is part of the fun. Little concept of the bigger picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supaned Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 No loss - its only a 37 - plenty more to go. (still, glad no one was hurt) and what would the answer have been if it was a steam loco that had run away with similar results , and a bent frame causing it to be condemned? Another multi-million pound appeal through the media for money? or perhaps more lottery money? "it's only a Black 5 , - there's plenty more to go" I'm glad that nobody was hurt during this incident, however, many hours of hard work by volunteers has now at the very least been badly damaged. I would hope that lessons are learnt from this episode and that it isn't repeated , either on a preserved line or on the mainline network. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Lets not point fingers too soon, it was a NR loco on the GCR, was any one from NR with the loco? Or were the GCR hiring it and using there own drivers? Most E.E. locos are know for having problems with the (air / vac ) parking brakes and are normal chocked, if left standing for any length of time (in the old days). IF! the loco was a runaway how far did it run and why, trap points at the exit of the yard should have stopped it. Some reports are now saying that it was propelling the coach, if that is the case what did it hit? Now lets start to get some facts before we all start making up the cause of the incident. OzzyO. PS. thank god no one was killed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roythebus Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I can comment (not on this incident) but from experience that EE handbrakes are not the bet in the world. They are applied by the swing link you see just below the cab and the chain which link that to the centre brake cylinder, so are only effective on one axle. I once had a class 40 run away in FP depot, when preparing the loco. The driver told me to go in the other cab and release the handbrake. I did. the loco rolled up to the exit signal, back again nearly to the stops...back again...by which time the driver had got the engine started and built enough air to apply the loco air brake. It has been suggested in another forum that this incident was part of a propelling move. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Richard E Posted May 13, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 13, 2014 Well, from what I can find out 37 198 has a bit of a chequered past. She is (was?) the last locomotive built at Stephensons in Darlington. She was sold into preservation in 2004 and moved to the Wensleydale Railway where it was restored to working order and repainted BR blue - it worked its first passenger trains in preservation in May 2005. In 2006 it moved to the Dartmoor Railway, where it was often used on passenger workings. However, its owners (BRE Ltd) went bankrupt in November 2007 and 37198 was sold for scrap and moved to EMR at Kingsbury.37198 was sold again to Network Rail and moved to Rothley on the GCR, where it was repainted in NR yellow, and had a number of repairs carried out. It is currently on long term loan to the GCR in the care of the Type 1 Locomotive Group but is (was) supposed to return to Network Rail later this year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Lets not point fingers too soon, it was a NR loco on the GCR, was any one from NR with the loco? Or were the GCR hiring it and using there own drivers? Most E.E. locos are know for having problems with the (air / vac ) parking brakes and are normal chocked, if left standing for any length of time (in the old days). IF! the loco was a runaway how far did it run and why, trap points at the exit of the yard should have stopped it. Some reports are now saying that it was propelling the coach, if that is the case what did it hit? Now lets start to get some facts before we all start making up the cause of the incident. OzzyO. PS. thank god no one was killed. We know what the cause of the incident was: GRAVITY!!! :locomotive: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I thought it was momentum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I thought it was momentum Indeed, although it got it's momentum from gravity Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffP Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 What a shame for all concerned. Thank God no-one was hurt. I do hope that it doesn't all go bad for the GCR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I would have thought the main cause was forgetfulness (ASKA human error). That is if all of the things that are being mentioned are true? OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted May 13, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 13, 2014 Both are correct and Boris summed it up nicely Dr Purnell my physics teacher would have me remind you Gravity = potential energy Momentum = kinetic energy O level physics - MxGxH=1/2 x M x V x V M = mass G = Gravity H = Height V = velocity Energy losses due to friction and air resistance apply of course. And have to echo JeffPs sentiments too Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catkins Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 No loss - its only a 37 - plenty more to go. (still, glad no one was hurt) There aren't all that many 37s left available to buy for the national network! On a wider, and more practical, note - if Network Rail are now short of type 3 power, how will that affect the ETRM testing on the Cambrian Coast, and how will that in turn affect any steam specials on the Cambrian Coast? Also, as the issue regarding EE handbrake efficiency needs to be broadcast, and learnt again, will that lead to 'H&S' overkill? And finally I would just like to echo the points above regarding injury, damage and poor luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted May 13, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 13, 2014 Some reports are now saying that it was propelling the coach, if that is the case what did it hit? . there are some pics on wnxx forum of the TPO/37 crashed into a couple of green mk1 coaches, both of which appear to have damage too, certainly appear to have ridden up slightly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Simon Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 No loss - its only a 37 - plenty more to go. (still, glad no one was hurt) Hi, In theory no great loss, but it could be indirectly. I believe the loco is used as a source of spare parts for the 97/3's for Network Rail. If some parts are damaged or the whole thing scrapped, it could mean the issue of finding 37 spares could become even more pressing, which could result in Network Rail being tight for locos fitted with ERTMS to work engineering trains over the Cambrian, thus effecting the line. Small accidents like this can have bigger consequences down the line in the future... Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Delamar Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 GCR Runaway 37 aftermath by Sam Tait, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.