Flying Scotsman has an Accident

[kevinlms]

20 minutes ago, Trestrol said:

 

Looking at the video I can't see a shunter waving him back.poor practice.

You would have thought that having FS around, would mean volunteers are 10 a penny. Major events usually bring out existing, but normally MIA members out in droves.

[6990WitherslackHall]

37 minutes ago, Trestrol said:

Looking at the video I can't see a shunter waving him back. Poor practice.

At the 'moors' we always have someone to assist with coupling up. Why they didn't have one is beyond me. 

 

Had they had someone helping them, this collision could have been avoided. 

[KeithMacdonald]

20 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Obviously a slow news day....

 

Yes. When I were a lad, a Scotsman running into a bar and knocking tables and bottles over was an everyday occurance.

[adb968008]

28 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

Yes. When I were a lad, a Scotsman running into a bar and knocking tables and bottles over was an everyday occurance.

 

Reminds me of the film “Trainspotting”… i’d post the link but its extremely language explicit.

Go on Youtube enter “Trainspotting Bar Scene”.. spoiler… theres no trains, but there is a friday night in a Glasgow pub.

 

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by adb968008

[Mallard60022]

Just as an aside, the usual sh1te FB threads about this are incredibly useless and pathetic. Try Rail Advents one!

The 'innocent/average JoeJane' Public are totally conned by this sort of moronic crap.

Phil

[Steamport Southport]

9 hours ago, Glencoe Model Railway said:

Belmond don’t operate the loco when on the Strathspey. Under normal circumstances it’s Strathspey drivers (volunteers) but not sure who was driving the FS. On the mainline, the traction provider is GBRf 

 

Cheers

 

I'm talking about the people who were injured who according to reports were catering staff on the Royal Scotsman train.

 

I doubt that Belmond are letting volunteers run their bars/catering franchises.

 

 

Jason

[roythebus1]

Just catching up on this news, having looked at the video the loco appears to be going back a bit too fast, seemingly not stopping the regulation distance from the stationary train then being seen back onto the train by the shunter or person in charge of the move. I'd also have insisted that the people on the balcony end move either inside or onto the  station platform. we have an "observation car" on my local heritage line and as a shunter I would politely ask people not to stand on the observation platform when a loco is buffering onto the train.

[Ian Hargrave]

It certainly was quite a spectacle with startling sound effects and I do wonder if it’s only a matter of time before it appears as a crash spectacular on YouTube. I’m assuming that the two standing on the veranda platform  of the observation car were Belmond bar staff. They must be traumatised.Then we have just two …a man and a boy…watching from behind the fence as the only unscathed witnesses to this debacle. I’ll speculate no further. I’m sure we all have individual views on the event. 
   I believe IIRC the train was facing South at the end of a day spent on the Speyside Railway. So where was it intended that 60103 would then be taking it ? The 66 being of screen somewhere and generated power being needed. 

[stewartingram]

Just a couple of points?

Out of interest only, do we know where the cars were rebuilt? (I have my suspicions but I'm not wanting to spread any rumours!).

People saying no-one is asking about the state of people involve. Well, we;'ve had reports about that, nothing else to be said. As for the rolling stock, we've had plenty of media hype, but little factual engineering statement, that is why  questions are asked.

[adb968008]

51 minutes ago, roythebus1 said:

Just catching up on this news, having looked at the video the loco appears to be going back a bit too fast, seemingly not stopping the regulation distance from the stationary train then being seen back onto the train by the shunter or person in charge of the move. I'd also have insisted that the people on the balcony end move either inside or onto the  station platform. we have an "observation car" on my local heritage line and as a shunter I would politely ask people not to stand on the observation platform when a loco is buffering onto the train.

Ive not done a verandah ride in this country, closest is a brakevan ride.

non of the various lines Ive been on, allowed “normal” people in the brakevan before the loco was attached.
 

Overseas, I have to say have been more “general” about letting people move about the verandahs during loco attachments.. of course the “common” standard would be German Thunderboxes where anything goes anytime.

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, Boris said:

So much on social media about the "poor locomotive" never mind the people who ended up injured or in hospital.  I'm a bit confused why the buckeye is relevant when the coach in question no longer has the buffing plate or similar fitting to accept a buckeye?  

 

Also when the class 20 got humpy at the NYMR the railway reopened but the coaches had to be lifted to check for centre casting damage on the mk1s, I think the main reason the job was still stopped was because it is likely RAIB wanted to take a look at the scene in the daylight, its a mandatory report if people are sent to hospital, the NYMR were lucky in that nobody was injured.

 

  

Enough was going wrong for me to wonfder if 'somebody' didn't even know which coupling they would be using.  Having now seen a video of the way in which the engine approached the train somebody has got some serious questions to answer despite the fact that it was no more than a 'heavy bump' when the engine hit the train.

 

If the old procedures still hold good the coaches will definitely have to lifted to check for centre casting damage.

 

11 hours ago, Glencoe Model Railway said:

T

It also serves as a lesson that rail

safety is just as important on preserved lines as it is the mainline, in some cases more so, as some volunteers may not have the same levels of experience as those that work day in day out for mainline companies. Whilst that may appear sweeping, my experience of helping out on a preserved line certainly made me realise how many things could be tweaked to improve them. 
I hope all involved are ok and get the support they need going forward. 

 

Quite agree - having had various involvements with, and audit of, operational safety standards in the heritage/leisure sector.  But the lesson relevant to this incident was learned some years ago - unfortunately through a fatality -  and the correct procedure was universally promulgated by the HRA following official recommendations plus many railways were sent copies of my standard Rules to be applied when attaching an engine to a train (but I don't know if Strathspey received the former although they probably weren't circulated. with the latter as they weren't a customer of my oppo.

 

Apart from that it is simple common sense and the railway has a legal duty to ensure that safety procedures such as this are not only in place but are properly trained in and then monitored to ensure that they are being followed.  For whatever reason they were clearly not being followed in this case and, as can be seen, even a slow speed movement can cause damage and minor injuries lus it has the potential to cause material damage to rolling stock etc

 

 

 

[KeithMacdonald]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Just as an aside, the usual sh1te FB threads about this are incredibly useless and pathetic.

 

Isn't that normal for FaecesBorg?

[caradoc]

The Emergency Services response to this incident is surely understandable, given that the most recent railway accident in Scotland was Carmont, and that the initial 999 call would have been made before the extent of damage and injury was known.

 

 

[Boris]

3 hours ago, 6990WitherslackHall said:

At the 'moors' we always have someone to assist with coupling up. Why they didn't have one is beyond me. 

 

Had they had someone helping them, this collision could have been avoided. 

Unlikely, when the class 20 humped the back of the coaches at Grosmont the root cause was nobody watching where they were going.

 

12mph has been quoted as the collision speed which would indicate that the footplate crew a) couldn't see the stock/weren't looking or b) were disoriented/distracted and weren't where they thought they were.  That's too fast to be anywhere near stock in poor lighting conditions (it's nearly sunset at 1815 in Aviemore) and they in theory in should have been expecting to stop short of the stock and then go on.  Had a shunter been present they MAY have been able to attract the crew attention but more likely they would have had a first class view of the bump and possibly needed clean underwear.

[The Stationmaster]

28 minutes ago, Boris said:

Unlikely, when the class 20 humped the back of the coaches at Grosmont the root cause was nobody watching where they were going.

 

12mph has been quoted as the collision speed which would indicate that the footplate crew a) couldn't see the stock/weren't looking or b) were disoriented/distracted and weren't where they thought they were.  That's too fast to be anywhere near stock in poor lighting conditions (it's nearly sunset at 1815 in Aviemore) and they in theory in should have been expecting to stop short of the stock and then go on.  Had a shunter been present they MAY have been able to attract the crew attention but more likely they would have had a first class view of the bump and possibly needed clean underwear.

Having seen. a stop block collision of a loaded passenger at a lower speed than that, and knowing the number of people who required First Aid and/or were attended by an emergency medical team or sent to hospital (and not immediately released) I'd be surprised if the impact speed was 12 mph  - that is quite serious damage to any humans standing up  territory. 

[adb968008]

A longer version has appeared here

 

there appears to be people on the footplate looking out on the drivers side also, and you hear a call out from the person on the firemans side too as the loco passes… so the crew were watching…

 

looks like 4 on the verandah.

 

 

Is the real story not the impact, but why the kitchens fell down ? Had this been ordinary Mk1’s would this have been news ?

 

Not defending it, but I reckon I’ve been in a rough shunt or two like that, one sent me a window length down the corridor and a little off balance but I still hand my beer in my hand afterwards and several other enthusiasts muttered expletives, but the job carried on.

Edited October 1, 2023 by adb968008

[pete_mcfarlane]

You also have to wonder about how well those MDF and kitchen unit conversions will perform in the event of a fire. 

[Boris]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Having seen. a stop block collision of a loaded passenger at a lower speed than that, and knowing the number of people who required First Aid and/or were attended by an emergency medical team or sent to hospital (and not immediately released) I'd be surprised if the impact speed was 12 mph  - that is quite serious damage to any humans standing up  territory. 

That's what's been quoted in the media, maybe be wrong though

[jcredfer]

53 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

A longer version has appeared here

 

there appears to be people on the footplate looking out on the drivers side also, and you hear a call out from the person on the firemans side too as the loco passes… so the crew were watching…

 

looks like 4 on the verandah.

 

 

Is the real story not the impact, but why the kitchens fell down ? Had this been ordinary Mk1’s would this have been news ?

 

Interesting bit of video editing there.  Timing the appearance of the con rods, the first two shots of the loco reversing, were about twice the speed of the last one.  It's difficult to see whether the first were speeded up, or the third one slowed down.  The smoke and steam looked more of a familiar pattern of velocity and expansion patterns in the third one, but that's not entirely reliable.  Also the speed it actually hit the carriages in the first two, also looked to be such that there would have been more displacement of the coaches, again, maybe just an impression.

 

Perhaps the journalists were in a hurry to get the story out.....

 

[The Stationmaster]

55 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

A longer version has appeared here

 

there appears to be people on the footplate looking out on the drivers side also, and you hear a call out from the person on the firemans side too as the loco passes… so the crew were watching…

 

looks like 4 on the verandah.

 

 

Is the real story not the impact, but why the kitchens fell down ? Had this been ordinary Mk1’s would this have been news ?

Quite agree about the shambolic catering installations - I wonder if they were ever discussed properly and safety assessed as they should have been.  Where were HMRI when it came to their installation I wonder?  They're normally very interested in vehicle mods on heritage lines - were they even advised by whoever it was who was responsible for the installations on this train?  Are we looking at some sort of cowboy concern yet again - I do hope not.

 

As for the movement of the engine that must go down in history as the ultimate example of how not to do it, reckless and stupidly dangerous..  BTW is the chap in orange overalls riding on the engine the Shunter I wonder?  That Driver should never be allowed on a footplate again in my view

[Fair Oak Junction]

I would expect a locomotive such as Scotsman to have an experience crew, who must be very well versed in carrying out procedures such as this.

It's shocking that they could show such disregard for safety and good practice.

Nothing in that video in any way indicates they were distracted or had any problems on the footplate, so it can only come down to either complacency or competence.

This was a 100% avoidable collision and questions need to be raised about their actions.

Edited October 1, 2023 by Obsidian Quarry

[SM42]

2 hours ago, caradoc said:

The Emergency Services response to this incident is surely understandable, given that the most recent railway accident in Scotland was Carmont, and that the initial 999 call would have been made before the extent of damage and injury was known.

 

 

 

Most likely the initial call was to the ambulance service and they will have been told about a train collision and would have asked if people are trapped and how many. 

 

If someone was under some dislodged interior fittings the answer may have been yes or maybe the answer was dont know / not sure. 

 

The ambulance service will go with worst case if information is unclear and request fire service assistance to extract potential trapped casualties. 

 

In the light of  sparse info from site and a reported collision (or train crash in layman's terms)  then a quite large  response in terms of  resources could be expected from both fire and ambulance. 

 

No doubt the police would also have been advised for both site secuity, general public order and for tracing and advising relatives amongst other things. 

 

The fire service will lead search  and rescue with ambulance dealing with casualty management, the police the public order, securing the site, evidence gathering for any possible prosecution and dealing with advising next of kin etc  as required.  

 

The general rule is advise the emergency service you need most first,  they will then arrange whatever other help they think is needed

 

Best to over react an scale back than find you've got far too little on scene to start with. 

 

Andy

 

 

[chris p bacon]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

A longer version has appeared here

 

I didn't realise it it hit it 4 times......🙄

[11B]

Just a thought/question?

 

Given that the loco is equipped for main line running, will the data recorder/black box still be running when in use in preserved lines?

 

Thanks Ian

[Mallard60022]

2 hours ago, Obsidian Quarry said:

I would expect a locomotive such as Scotsman to have an experience crew, who must be very well versed in carrying out procedures such as this.

It's shocking that they could show such disregard for safety and good practice.

Nothing in that video in any way indicates they were distracted or had any problems on the footplate, so it can only come down to either complacency or competence.

This was a 100% avoidable collision and questions need to be raised about their actions.

I can't disagree, but  I'll just say Innocent until proven. It is imperative to not condemn without the full evidence and Report.

Phil