• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Collision and derailment at Neville Hill Depot (13/11/2019)

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheEdge

Established Member
Joined
29 Nov 2012
Messages
4,489
Location
Norwich
I think i would be more concerned about the Hitachi derailing at a low impact speed of 9 mph rather than the damage at the front end. Imagine if this was at a higher speed derailing into the path of a train coming from the opposite direction at speed.

Is what people are missing. They are focused on the impressive but less concerning nose damage and not the fact a brand new train has derailed in a collision with a closing speed of 9. It really shouldn't have. An Azuma could foreseeably hit the stops at KGX at 9, it really shouldn't fall off.

As to crumple zones and energy absorbtion of trains. Generally its through the coupler head and into the spine of the unit.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

158756

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
1,426
If the linespeed was 15mph I would have thought the Azuma would be capable of slowing to less than 14 before impact if everything was working correctly?
 

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
If the linespeed was 15mph I would have thought the Azuma would be capable of slowing to less than 14 before impact if everything was working correctly?
Another intreiging question.
One assumes the HST tail lights were operational at the time of impact.
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Another intreiging question.
One assumes the HST tail lights were operational at the time of impact.

On train monitoring equipment or Azuma CCTV would soon prove the HST tail lamps were on or off plus the HST should have been stopped departing from Leeds if tail lamps out.
 

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
On train monitoring equipment or Azuma CCTV would soon prove the HST tail lamps were on or off plus the HST should have been stopped departing from Leeds if tail lamps out.

Indeed.
I do hope this whole incident doesn't lead to a situation where these types of moves are not permitted to occur.
 

aleggatta

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2015
Messages
537
If the linespeed was 15mph I would have thought the Azuma would be capable of slowing to less than 14 before impact if everything was working correctly?
This does require the relevant intervention from the Driver... Speculating, I would say that someone wasn't paying attention to the hazard in front of them to stop short...
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
Indeed.
I do hope this whole incident doesn't lead to a situation where these types of moves are not permitted to occur.

That'll not happen, permissive working is a safe form of working more than one train in a section at a time as long as no equipment or human failure!!

Let's not speculate too much as nobody goes out to have an incident at any time.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Is what people are missing. They are focused on the impressive but less concerning nose damage and not the fact a brand new train has derailed in a collision with a closing speed of 9. It really shouldn't have. An Azuma could foreseeably hit the stops at KGX at 9, it really shouldn't fall off.

As to crumple zones and energy absorbtion of trains. Generally its through the coupler head and into the spine of the unit.

Agreed - most of the energy has gone through the coupler (missing a chunk but tube looks straight so not that big an impact).

Longer coaches with more overhang beyond the bogie centers, dampers set for high speeds and less than perfect track geometry (even at low speeds) might not be a good mix?

Could the 800 driver have initially thought that the HST was on the adjacent headshunt?
 

EE Andy b1

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
1,212
Location
CLC
I wonder if the blend of brake between Dynamic brake (electric re-generative) and air brake (discs) at that speed was a contributing factor as that was what happened to a couple of pendolinos at Liverpool Lime Street quite a few years back now when they both hit the blocks. I think the blend at speed was too low at 15 mph so it was raised to 25 mph. So from 25 to 0 mph it was just air brakes.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
I wonder if the blend of brake between Dynamic brake (electric re-generative) and air brake (discs) at that speed was a contributing factor as that was what happened to a couple of pendolinos at Liverpool Lime Street quite a few years back now when they both hit the blocks. I think the blend at speed was too low at 15 mph so it was raised to 25 mph. So from 25 to 0 mph it was just air brakes.
I had been thinking similarly before the RAIB brief but the line speed is 15mph and they were doing 14 at impact...
Difference in braking between motor and unmotored axles might be part of the which axles derail conundrum.
The 2 bogies where both wheelsets derailed were motor bogies and 1 wheel set on a non-motored bogie
 
Last edited:

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
That'll not happen, permissive working is a safe form of working more than one train in a section at a time as long as no equipment or human failure!!

Let's not speculate too much as nobody goes out to have an incident at any time.
Not saying that over reactions don't occur (to limit these permissive moves), but the human factor is possibly the biggest fallible element that could (easily) be factored out of the equation.

How many permissive working incidents have there been within the last five years?
(It is probably a very small percentage of the overall number of moves, but could it be enough to trigger a red-think amongst the corporate bean counters?)
 

TheEdge

Established Member
Joined
29 Nov 2012
Messages
4,489
Location
Norwich
How many permissive working incidents have there been within the last five years?
(It is probably a very small percentage of the overall number of moves, but could it be enough to trigger a red-think amongst the corporate bean counters?)

Well they could try but they'd probably cripple the entire rail network overnight...
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
How would you couple two units if you didn't allow permissive working ?
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,124
I had been thinking similarly before the RAIB brief but the line speed is 15mph and they were doing 14 at impact...
Difference in braking between motor and unmotored axles might be part of the which axles derail conundrum.
The 2 bogies where both wheelsets derailed were motor bogies and 1 wheel set on a non-motored bogie

Who said there was any braking involved? The report is going to make for very interesting reading.
 

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
2,902
Location
Leeds
Who said there was any braking involved? The report is going to make for very interesting reading.
But that’s the point they’re making. Was the speed too low for the train to break effectively a la Liverpool Lime Street.
 

DerekC

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2015
Messages
2,107
Location
Hampshire (nearly a Hog)
But that’s the point they’re making. Was the speed too low for the train to break effectively a la Liverpool Lime Street.

It would be surprising if the Class 800 designers had made the same mistake as on the Cl 390s - but stranger things have happened, We will just have to wait and read when the report comes out!
 

Alan2603

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2016
Messages
125
But that’s the point they’re making. Was the speed too low for the train to break effectively a la Liverpool Lime Street.

But the Azuma did break, very effectively - it de-railed and smashed its nose.

Or did you mean ''Was the speed too low for the train to brake effectively?'
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Who said there was any braking involved? The report is going to make for very interesting reading.
It would be surprising if the Class 800 designers had made the same mistake as on the Cl 390s - but stranger things have happened, We will just have to wait and read when the report comes out!

It is going to be one of those RAIB reports that is published along time later, has a list of causal factors longer any ones arm and is a long read...
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,124
But that’s the point they’re making. Was the speed too low for the train to break effectively a la Liverpool Lime Street.

Ummm. Wait for the report! If what I understand about the OTDR download is accurate, it’ll blow your mind! [it certainly blew mine!]
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
If what I understand about the OTDR download is accurate, it’ll blow your mind! [it certainly blew mine!]

OOooooH Juicy... Is it the same kind of thing that happened with the 700 braking ?
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,124
OOooooH Juicy... Is it the same kind of thing that happened with the 700 braking ?

Not sure it is. But, file this incident in the box marked “Bizarre”. To be fair, there’s a clue in the wording of the RAIB statement. They say they are looking into the ergonomics/cab design.
 

Grumpy Git

On Moderation
Joined
13 Oct 2019
Messages
2,125
Location
Liverpool
Not sure it is. But, file this incident in the box marked “Bizarre”. To be fair, there’s a clue in the wording of the RAIB statement. They say they are looking into the ergonomics/cab design.

Maybe the driver thought he was in the blunt end of a class 91.
 

LWB

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2009
Messages
240
So it might behove the RAIB to issue a fairly prompt interim report then?
 

w1bbl3

Member
Joined
6 Mar 2011
Messages
325
Not sure it is. But, file this incident in the box marked “Bizarre”. To be fair, there’s a clue in the wording of the RAIB statement. They say they are looking into the ergonomics/cab design.

I'm going to guess there is a sightlines issue when in close proximity to a train with another sculpted nose that makes judging distance ahead difficult if not impossible resulting drivers effectively driving "blind" as to how near or far they are?
 

heedfan

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2017
Messages
277
I'm going to guess there is a sightlines issue when in close proximity to a train with another sculpted nose that makes judging distance ahead difficult if not impossible resulting drivers effectively driving "blind" as to how near or far they are?

Nah that's not it. You can't see exactly where your nose is from the cab but an HST is the same though admittedly the nose is less pronounced. You drive accordingly though.

Speculation helps no one, and cryptic messages about what may or may not be on the OTDR don't particularly help either. The report will get to the bottom of it.
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,124
Speculation helps no one, and cryptic messages about what may or may not be on the OTDR don't particularly help either. The report will get to the bottom of it.

Well, it’s only messroom rumour after all. What I’ve been told certainly fits what the RAIB say in their statement though, so I’m inclined to believe it is accurate. We can pick the bones out of it when the RAIB make their report public!
 

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
1,057
Location
London E14
Well they could try but they'd probably cripple the entire rail network overnight...

That's my point.

It's perfectly within thier power, surely.
The response to Hatfield demonstrated that crippling the entire rail network overnight is very much within their power.

I'm not saying it was the right or wrong thing to do in that situation or that it would/wouldn't in this situation, merely that they did it and could do it again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top