How valid were the criticisms that the 1984 Old Dalby nuclear flask test was too staged?

[rogerzilla]

9 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 

And yet the Bank of England only have a 15% base rate for 3 weeks in October 1981. Of course to even the Politics up it also shows it being 15% for 7 weeks in October & November 1976 when Labour were in office.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boeapps/database/Bank-Rate.asp

Mortgage rates, as opposed to base rates, were 15.4% for much of 1990, and fell to 14.5% in the autumn shortly before Thatcher was deposed in December.  The base rate was 20% for a few hours on Black Wednesday before Lamont gave up and abandoned the ERM, but that was two years later.

[chris p bacon]

1 hour ago, rogerzilla said:

Mortgage rates, as opposed to base rates, were 15.4% for much of 1990

Having had my mortgage hit the heights of 15%+ at the time I certainly remember those times. I was just making the point that the quoted post was politically biased without understanding that rates had been just as high in the 70's under a previous administration.

[chris p bacon]

10 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

I wasn’t really aiming to make a political point, more to set a historical scene - and of course the base rate was in the hands of politicians back then to manipulate as they wanted - it took Blair’s Government to place it completely in the hands of the now independent BoE.  

Irony?

 

10 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

However the point of this was simply to use one (of many pointers) to the need for grandiose PR exercises like the Old Dalby crash in that rather difficult period (for many although not all) in our history. 

 

You have either forgotten (or wasn't aware at the time) that there was a lot of feeling at the time that the arms race was getting out of hand. I remember several dramas on tv about how a nuclear war could easily start and just what conditions would be like in a nuclear winter. The PR exercise was to ease concerns a lot of people had, that should a flask be involved in an accident, it wouldn't create similar conditions. 

[New Haven Neil]

6 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

Sorry I must have missed that post

 

Which was my point.

 

5 hours ago, The Johnster said:

I reckoned at the time it was the engine block

 

 

Photos posted above in the thread clearly show the engine still in the locomotive body.

 

Edit - it was a link, sorry - Crash Test Old Dalby (nigeltout.com) 

Edited March 3, 2023 by New Haven Neil

[jjb1970]

13 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

You have either forgotten (or wasn't aware at the time) that there was a lot of feeling at the time that the arms race was getting out of hand. I remember several dramas on tv about how a nuclear war could easily start and just what conditions would be like in a nuclear winter. The PR exercise was to ease concerns a lot of people had, that should a flask be involved in an accident, it wouldn't create similar conditions. 

 

One of the problems that nuclear energy has always faced (and still does) is that many equate nuclear reactors with nuclear weapons. I used to work at Sellafield and it always ceased to amaze me how ignorant the loudest voices criticising the plant were about what it did. 

[New Haven Neil]

From nigeltout.com

 

[jjb1970]

Checking tappet clearances after the crash to make sure they're still fine, that's what I like to see.

[New Haven Neil]

1 minute ago, jjb1970 said:

Checking tappet clearances after the crash to make sure they're still fine, that's what I like to see.

 

Would all be fine - it's a Sulzer!  Now if it had been a Paxman......💥🤬

[jjb1970]

Just as long as it wasn't a Ruston AO, it has always filled me with pride to know a British engine has a good claim to be the worst engine ever to go into production 🦾

[Hibelroad]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

 

One of the problems that nuclear energy has always faced (and still does) is that many equate nuclear reactors with nuclear weapons. I used to work at Sellafield and it always ceased to amaze me how ignorant the loudest voices criticising the plant were about what it did. 

Another common misconception is that radiation spreads like a disease or virus. Obviously it doesn’t and it’s a lot easier to detect and control than a virus. 

[jjb1970]

Radiation is a weird thing, some people have absorbed huge doses and barely noticed and haven't suffered long term health impacts. Others exposed to the same dose suffer horrible effects. But, it is true, radiation can be contained and managed. 

[Reorte]

45 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

Radiation is a weird thing, some people have absorbed huge doses and barely noticed and haven't suffered long term health impacts. Others exposed to the same dose suffer horrible effects. But, it is true, radiation can be contained and managed. 

Seems like anything that can affect the body at a cellular level can be like that, it's things that produce a probability of harm but not a certainty, so some get lucky. It's like someone who smokes heavily all their life living for a century with no ill effects. It can happen, but such people are extremely lucky.

[Edwin_m]

2 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

 

One of the problems that nuclear energy has always faced (and still does) is that many equate nuclear reactors with nuclear weapons. I used to work at Sellafield and it always ceased to amaze me how ignorant the loudest voices criticising the plant were about what it did. 

Perhaps not surprising when one of the main purposes of the British nuclear programme was to create the materials needed for the nuclear deterrent.  And the tendency of various authorities to cover up past nuclear accidents doesn't help with public confidence either.  

 

Another problem is the public's perception of risk - rare but high-consequence events like train and plane accidents are seen as worse than frequent but lower-consequence events like road accidents, even when (as in this case) the total casualties are greater in the latter.  The same applies with the risk of a large nuclear accident versus the many smaller accidents that happen in coal mines, oil rigs etc and the people suffering due to pollution.  Having said that, a major incident would rationally be worse than a series of minor ones over time with the same total of casualties, due to issues such as overwhelming of hospital facilities (perhaps leading to suffering of people unable to receive treatment for other things) and the general disruption to society from a large event.  

Edited March 3, 2023 by Edwin_m

[Simon Lee]

16 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

Compared with various other traffics which at various times have been conveyed by rail and some of the distinctly dodgy stuff which travels by road the contents of the nuclear flasks are many, many, more times better protected from creating any sort of hazard in the event of something like a derailment or collision.l 

Working at Dover until the demise of the Train ferry, we had regular visits from assorted protest groups, when the flasks from France and Germany were arriving. BTP and various other interested parties would keep them under survellance starting at Brenley Corner services.

 

Plod were always amused that the protesters hid among the lorries, and would show us a list of the UN numbers of the tankers and drums etc they were close to. The protesters seemed totally oblivious to the potential for serious damage to life and pollution that these substances could cause.

 

 

11 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

I suppose the simple fact is that people don;t realise how substantial the flasks are and the thickness of the material which inevitably means ina collision of any sort they are going ro be the least likely thing to be punctured.   Don't forget the older pattern f;asks weighed something in the region of 40-50 tons which speaks for itself when you looked at the size of them.   The level of radiation checking which goes on with flasks transported by rail is exhaustive.  First when they are loaded they they are cleanedfdown, then checked all over for radiation level all over, then they are loaded to the ropad vehicle taking them to the rail terminal and are checked again before being taken off the road vehicle and finally checked yet again after loading to the rail vehicle (that was the procedure back in the days when one of my freight terminals dealt with flasks on a regular basis.

As part of the run up to privatisation, we as Freight South and later RFD took on responsibility for loading and unloading at Dungeness.  As Mike says the amount of testing before, during, and after any movement takes is phenominal, and the amount of radiation permitted on a wagon or flask is miniscule. IIRC, in the 9 or so years l was involved, there was only 1 flask ever rejected by the power station physicist working with us at the railhead purely due to around a 2cm area of the foot exceeded the allowed reading. 

 

 

[MidlandRed]

5 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

Irony?

 

 

You have either forgotten (or wasn't aware at the time) that there was a lot of feeling at the time that the arms race was getting out of hand. I remember several dramas on tv about how a nuclear war could easily start and just what conditions would be like in a nuclear winter. The PR exercise was to ease concerns a lot of people had, that should a flask be involved in an accident, it wouldn't create similar conditions. 

No irony - just stating fact. 
 

And yes I remember and was fully aware of the public feeling regarding the potential for nuclear Armageddon - in that era you couldn’t fail to notice the televised reports of protests of various types against nuclear weapons, not least Greenham Common. To spell it out, people’s concern, as well as the more general one regarding nuclear war at the time (which had been around since the 50s in the U.K.), was fuelled by the decision in the 80s

to permit nuclear weapons at various US bases in the U.K. at the time, many people being concerned this would make those parts of the U.K. direct targets. 
 

Although this background against nuclear existed (as did arguments that nuclear power was far too expensive), I think it’s rather fanciful to think the PR exercise at Old Dalby was not a direct result of public mistrust of the Government and nuclear power industry caused by previous issues in the industry and the fact the flasks were being transported through highly populated areas - any leak being likely to affect a very large area. It probably fulfilled its purpose, although as I said previously, I recall a documentary where various experts said the flask had sustained damage (contrary to official statements). It can’t have been significant enough to cause a leak I guess. The use of Sellafield to process other country’s nuclear waste in that era was also something of public concern - a multi-faceted issue in reality. I thought the protestors at Dover were as likely to be surrounding lorry loads of sheep and the like (live animal import/export) - however somewhat off topic, sorry!! 

Edited March 3, 2023 by MidlandRed

[Mark Saunders]

It was the time that many councillors were declaring nuclear free zones and getting themselves in a tizzy about spent fuel flasks but not saying anything about HCN , Chlorine, Ammonia and other dangerous goods.

[petethemole]

21 minutes ago, MidlandRed said:

To spell it out, people’s concern, as well as the more general one regarding nuclear war at the time (which had been around since the 50s in the U.K.), was fuelled by the decision to permit nuclear weapons at various US bases in the U.K. at the time, many people being concerned this would make parts of the U.K. direct targets. 

As if they weren't anyway!  Some of my friends and colleagues at that time were somewhat put out when I pointed out that they actually lived in a primary target area.  The Port of Southampon, which included Marchwood Military Port and the then US port at Hythe, was a REFORGER port (REinFORce GERmany) and was expected to be a first strike target in the event of war with the Soviets*, yet the protesters were all over at Greenham Common.

 

*According to the president of our Military Modelling club, a senior Reserve officer with some involvement with Intelligence.

The City Council had Disaster Plans based on nuclear stikes of various strengths in the area; I've seen some of the maps. 

[jjb1970]

1 minute ago, petethemole said:

As if they weren't anyway!  Some of my friends and colleagues at that time were somewhat put out when I pointed out that they actually lived in a primary target area.  The Port of Southampon, which included Marchwood Military Port and the then US port at Hythe, was a REFORGER port (REinFORce GERmany) and was expected to be a first strike target in the event of war with the Soviets*, yet the protesters were all over at Greenham Common.

 

*According to the president of our Military Modelling club, a senior Reserve officer with some involvement with Intelligence.

The City Council had Disaster Plans based on nuclear stikes of various strengths in the area; I've seen some of the maps. 

 

When I lived in Carlisle most people thought they were in a quiet backwater that'd be below any Russian plans, genuinely oblivious to their proximity to the ULF transmitters that maintain comms links with the submarines, being close to major arms dumps, as well as being a major transport hub. Meaning that if not the city itself, the immediate area had some very high priority targets (particularly the ULF transmitters which would probably be hit in any first strike).

[MidlandRed]

22 minutes ago, petethemole said:

As if they weren't anyway!  Some of my friends and colleagues at that time were somewhat put out when I pointed out that they actually lived in a primary target area.  The Port of Southampon, which included Marchwood Military Port and the then US port at Hythe, was a REFORGER port (REinFORce GERmany) and was expected to be a first strike target in the event of war with the Soviets*, yet the protesters were all over at Greenham Common.

 

*According to the president of our Military Modelling club, a senior Reserve officer with some involvement with Intelligence.

The City Council had Disaster Plans based on nuclear stikes of various strengths in the area; I've seen some of the maps. 

I agree - however the decision to permit cruise missiles at those US bases was a current matter at that time, in the public eye (as was the transportation of nuclear waste, and the import of nuclear waste - the strap line at the time was U.K. was the dirty man of Europe, nuclear dust bin etc etc). I guess the irony is the bases concerned were all closed down within a decade or two!! 

Edited March 3, 2023 by MidlandRed

[Ben B]

On 01/03/2023 at 23:47, ChrisH-UK said:

Which iirc most 'footage' of the 31 was actually two shunters and some plywood. (The loco "bogies" had connecting rods and there was roll between the two body halves) 

 

Diesel shunters and some plywood, yes- shot on the Middleton Railway in Leeds. I'd guess because of the urban setting and proximity to Yorkshire Televisions studios? There's a shot of the 'loco' in the book "rags to railway" about the history of the preserved Middleton. It's clear a lot of work went into it, and to be fair with the film-stock of the day, and careful angles, the articulated nature of it isn't bad. I think the flasks were on Weltrols, with PMV vans as spacers?

 

 

shot by Paul Corrie on flickr.

 

There's a nice model link too- in the BBC visual effects book, the section on "Edge of Darkness" shows the miniature built for the rear-projection shot of the underground power station; a pre-formed pond liner, and there's a Triang yellow Dock Shunter in it too :)

[Simon Lee]

1 hour ago, Mark Saunders said:

It was the time that many councillors were declaring nuclear free zones and getting themselves in a tizzy about spent fuel flasks but not saying anything about HCN , Chlorine, Ammonia and other dangerous goods.

Indeed and the lack of understanding also spread to other organisations.

 

We had an exercises at Dover involving Kent Fire and Rescue, as there was a high number of retained fire crews in the area.

 

One involved Anti Knock Compound UN1649. At the end of the evening, the Octel rep handed out stickers that wiped out 65% of the East Kent retained force, such was the overlooked/ignored potency of the substance. 

 

We never once saw any protests about or any other of the "nasties" we carried.

[45125]

14 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

Depends how much you believe in the transparency and honesty of the British Government and the Nuclear Power industry, both of which are, I submit, moot.  Increased levels of radiation appeared some days after the main Chernobyl leak in Welsh, Cumbrian, and Irish lamb, and there is a significant nuclear facility with a history of problems in the middle of that area.  The Gwynedd levels were significantly higher to the east, downwind, of the Trawsfynydd plant, around the Arenig area, while little effect was recorded on Anglesey, also in the path of the alleged Chernobyl cloud, and with it's own nuclear plant, Wylfa.  I'm not saying this is what happened, as there is no definitive evidence, but it must have been a temptation for some material to be released from Sellafield and Trawsfynydd while there was an opportunity to blame the Russians, who paid massive compensation to the British government to enable paying the farmers for unsellable radiated sheep.

 

 

 

I reckoned at the time it was the engine block or the main generator, and I am still of that opinion.  It looked to me to be far too big to be the steam heating boiler!

Having watched the video over and over again and studied the photos, it could be the battery box and external air reservoir frame that is getting knocked forward by no1 bogie. The power unit is intact , and the control cubicle looks to be only slightly dislodged.

 

Al Taylor.

Edited March 3, 2023 by 45125

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

Sorry I must have missed that post - so you’re saying it hit the abutment of an overbridge head on, or was it a glancing blow whilst passing under? It would have likely knocked a parapet over, and although that wasn’t the scenario I had in mind I suppose the wagon falling off a viaduct or bridge in a built up area might create more force when it landed. An Interesting scenario anyway. I don’t doubt there are lots of procedures - I just wouldn’t have fancied dealing with a freight train derailment involving a collision with a flask train back in those days - although I guess the days of mounds of splintered wagons and loads mixed together in such circumstances had probably gone largely by the early 80s - that’s usually what confronted investigators when they arrived on site in earlier times. 

 

I guess it’s only natural for the public (and even professionals) to be interested and even sceptical about official or political statements - after all it wasn’t too many years later the same Government was attempting to assure the public BSE couldn’t be transmitted to humans and a rather foolish Secretary of State participated in a televised PR stunt where he fed a burger from a mobile van at an agricultural show to his young daughter, in a bid to assure the public it was safe to do so. What could possibly go wrong 🙃

I understand that it was the result, or rather a result, of a derailment.   I think from memory that it probably tied in with various amendments that came along regarding dealing with flasks in certain situations which were 'just another lot of amendments' until I found out about the incident several years after it had happened.  The story didn't even get widely talked about around the railway although from what I was told nobody was told tp keep their mouth shut (they mostly didn't need to be told that anyway in those days)

 

Internally of course it was just something else which helped probe the integrity of the flasks.  and if nothing else it showed that even hitting one very hard didn't cause it much trouble.  I'd far sooner be near to a wagon carrying one of those than I would like to be near various chemical carrying tank cars or in the wrong place when the securing bands fail on a roll of steel coil.  

[Northmoor]

On 03/03/2023 at 02:11, MidlandRed said:

I guess it’s only natural for the public (and even professionals) to be interested and even sceptical about official or political statements - after all it wasn’t too many years later the same Government was attempting to assure the public BSE couldn’t be transmitted to humans and a rather foolish Secretary of State participated in a televised PR stunt where he fed a burger from a mobile van at an agricultural show to his young daughter, in a bid to assure the public it was safe to do so. What could possibly go wrong 🙃

While John Selwyn Gummer's PR stunt was amateurish, I seem to remember that the BSE risk to humans was vastly over-stated.  There were claims by some researchers - perhaps hoping to gain research funding? - that within a decade, the transfer to humans would see hundreds of thousands infected with human variant CJD.  I think the actual number of confirmed cases was much nearer six (i.e. counted on your own fingers, with some left over) than six figures.

 

Sorry, OT.

[New Haven Neil]

On 03/03/2023 at 09:57, jjb1970 said:

Just as long as it wasn't a Ruston AO, it has always filled me with pride to know a British engine has a good claim to be the worst engine ever to go into production 🦾

 

Hedemora?  Ask the Aussie Navy about their subs....