New Jersey Crash

[The Stationmaster]

If it became airborne and ended up on the concourse as reported, then much of the collision energy would have been dissipated in bending bits of the roof and then scraping along the ground.  The damage to the train would have been greater if it had stopped dead at those very solid-looking bumpers.  Also if the FRA standards mean anything at all then the damage ought to have been less than to a British train in the same collision. 

 

The only passenger train stop block collisions that involved a high enough speed to carry the train over the block that I have seen direct evidence of all involved dmus and in each case there was minimal damage to the bodywork but the bogies and various underframe fittings were removed by collision with solid walls beyond the stop block, usually the station roof came off worse than the body of the unit.  But even then we are talking about low speed collisions, less than 10 mph at impact, whereas anything faster will involve much greater damage.

 

Collisions where a train does not ride over the stop blocks do involve more damage to the train and or passengers - we had a low speed collision at Paddington where a D10XX hauled train hit the blocks at probably no more than 3-5 mph and over 40 people needed First Aid treatment although some of that was down to people standing waiting to get off.

[Tim H]

What was the speed of the Cannon Street crash in the 1990s?  Over 500 injured and two dead, with telescoping of the fifth and sixth coaches of the 10 car train.

[Metr0Land]

Widely reported as around 10mph. The investigators were horrified at the amount of carnage from a slow speed impact. This prob pushed the button for eventual Mk1 coach withdrawal, as investigations showed far too much flying debris and doors flying open etc etc.  Also did the body become detached from the frames?  Am sure there's less sensationalist reporting tahn me somewhere but can't find specifics at the mo.

[Glorious NSE]

Cannon St report here: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=177