If you would have read his post, you would have seen that what you quoted was part of an example for an idea Nick was proposing, rather than something which actually did (or didn't) happen.
-
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!
Pendolino derailment at Greyrigg
- Thread starter Julian G
- Start date
- Status
If you would have read his post, you would have seen that what you quoted was part of an example for an idea Nick was proposing, rather than something which actually did (or didn't) happen.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I was watching the News last night so I don't know if anyone has mentioned it in this thread. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing as the previous pages are going on about some form of irreverent IT Spreadsheets or something like that....
Just before the accident a few days before the 'offending' set of points were used by the P-Way Gang in the improper way. The points are controlled by a Groundframe near the points but cannot be operated unless released Carlisle PSB. Many rural points are like this so it's nothing out of the ordinary. The P-way gang who were inspecting the line for some reason couldn't be bothered to use the points properly as they didn't want to contact the PSB for some reason. They needed to use the points to change lines for the P-Way Trolley. So in turn they removed the stretcher bars and did the whole things manually. In theory I guess it could work but I'm not P-Way expert. They only placed two stretcher bars back in place with the 3rd missing. Heavy Trains would place a lot of pressure and strain onto the bars until eventually they buckled when the Accident Pendolino Train ran over them.
It was something along those lines anyway.
It was something along those lines anyway.
neonison
Member
"Couldn't be bothered...for some reason"
It cannot excuse what was done (if indeed that is the case) but one must now question what made it so difficult or onerous for the P-way gang to contact Carlisle that they would rather disconnect the points. There isn't a charge for each release of something, is there?
Would it be too harsh to note that another P-way gang only a few miles north took short cuts with safety also, with tragic consequences?
adambro
Member
- Joined
- 2 Dec 2006
- Messages
- 311
If this is the case, then the P/way gang responsible should be up on charges of manslaughter.
Looks like some good might come out of this accident...
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2026515,00.html
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2026515,00.html
Read 'Informed Sources' articles by Roger Ford in MR for more info on this.
Basically, if Virgin were to buy the carriages then they'd have to repay the cost over the length of the franchise, which means extortionately high rental costs. After the franchise has ended, the ROSCO would still want a lot of profit, they don't like reducing prices even for equipment that has fully paid for itself.
So, a long lease needs to be negotiated. The only way that can be done is if the DfT procure the stock and guarantee that whoeever runs the franchise will be forced to use that rolling stock.
However, this has many drawbacks and actually pushes up prices in the long term due to a lack of competition. But it's the only way out of the mess.
Privatisation is flawed, and has resulted in massively increased costs and there is no way round the fact that the ROSCOs are absolutely wallowing in several million pounds of taxpayers money, year-on-year. The ROSCOs are literally laughing all the way to the bank... oh wait, they are banks, after banks realised how lucrative being a ROSCO could be, and they bought them all out!
adambro
Member
- Joined
- 2 Dec 2006
- Messages
- 311
I was somewhat amused to read that TransPennine Express had won a number of awards at the HSBC Rail Business Awards this year. Who is it who TPE are leasing their 51 Class 185s from.... HSBC. Hmm.
voyagerdude220
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 3,277
I've just read this weeks forthcoming RAIL magazine, and in the oepn access section, an off-duty guard who travelled between Warrington, and Glasgow 3 hours earlier than 390033 did on the Friday, reports that he was thrown across the vestibule whilst going from the toilet, around 5 minutes after leaving Oxenholme Lake District. (I assume he's talking about the 13:46 ex Euston)
I was personally thinking that there would surely be a bad ride quality/ shake around the area of the derailment with previous trains which went northbound before the Pendolino.
Seeing this appears to be the case, couldn't any of the previous train crew which were on previous services, report a rough ride?
Also, would any train drivers on here be put off if you were one of the first trains going over the section involved in the derailment? (e.g. The 05:10 Manchester to Glasgow Voyager)
I was personally thinking that there would surely be a bad ride quality/ shake around the area of the derailment with previous trains which went northbound before the Pendolino.
Seeing this appears to be the case, couldn't any of the previous train crew which were on previous services, report a rough ride?
Also, would any train drivers on here be put off if you were one of the first trains going over the section involved in the derailment? (e.g. The 05:10 Manchester to Glasgow Voyager)
westcoaster
Established Member
they could have, but it depends on what there adaptation of it is, person a might think bad bump , person two might think thats normal, if you go over a section of track all the time you might get used to a bump gradually getting worse.
i highly doubt it mate, if you think like that then you would not get out the station, i can understand if the driver had died then i would not like to work in that same cab , sit in that same seat, i believe that the class 43 involved in the ufton incident was scrapped for that reason
voyagerdude220
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 3,277
Thanks for your reply West Coaster.
IMO I probably wouldn't be put off driving a train over the section , if anything, as myself and many other people have allready said, it shows just how crash worthy the Pendo was.
I've allways been a big fan of Voyagers & Pendolinos, and if i ever travel SC on a 220/221 or 390 sometime in the future, and have to sit next to one of the pillars, i wouldn't complain one bit, as it's been proven to be extremely good.
IMO I probably wouldn't be put off driving a train over the section , if anything, as myself and many other people have allready said, it shows just how crash worthy the Pendo was.
I've allways been a big fan of Voyagers & Pendolinos, and if i ever travel SC on a 220/221 or 390 sometime in the future, and have to sit next to one of the pillars, i wouldn't complain one bit, as it's been proven to be extremely good.
It wasnt anything to do with Ballast filling the cab and engine compartment then and repairs being uneconomically viable?
Hentis
westcoaster
Established Member
i did say I BELIEVE, if thats the case, then that's the case.
Wouldn't have thought so, as if you think about it the section of track involved has just been relaid so is probably now one of the safest sections of line at the present time.
And chanes are as it is newly re-laid there will be a TSR
But there are some places where you always get a 'rough ride', for example anyone attempting to walk down the gangway with a cup of coffee in one hand going over Colton Junction who is not expecting it is unlikely to have a full cup by the time they're over the points.
You'd have to be extremely knowledgable of the route (and it's harder in the dark to know where you are), and what to expect, to notice anything out of the ordinary, and even then it would be difficult to know something was wrong.
- Status