Previous 158/159 accident performance

[IanXC]

Reading and looking at how the 158s and 159s performed in the Salisbury/Fisherton Tunnel incident got me thinking about how these units have performed in previous incidents, and nothing really came to mind.

I wonder if anyone can recall any relevant incidents?

Discussion of today's incident is here, and we'd probably best avoid discussing that here:

Collision and derailment near Salisbury (Fisherton Tunnel) 31/10/21

Mod note: Please take care when posting; any speculation should be reasonable, proportional and clearly identified as such. As this incident is being reported in the mainstream media, we need to ensure speculation posted here isn't picked up and reported as fact. Additionally, this is a...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[JonathanH]

I wonder if anyone can recall any relevant incidents?

A few nose drops where they have run into the back of something and had something of a failure point around the bottom of the front set of doors.

This shows what happened to 158861 at Hazel Grove that required one coach to be replaced.

This one at Newton Abbot didn't come off as bad as the HST power car.

Not sure of that many incidents though

 

[dosxuk]

The Barrow-upon-Soar collision between a 158 and footbridge comes to mind, with the RAIB reporting the following on the crash protection offered.

Therefore, both in terms of static strength and energy absorption, the Class 158 cab structure would not have been lacking in the protection afforded to the driver, compared to the minimum requirements of current crashworthiness specifications. However, cab structures of more modern rolling stock, which often exceed the minimum specifications in similar laboratory tests, are likely to have performed better.

Report 18/2008: Collision at Barrow upon Soar

Collision of a train with a demolished footbridge, Barrow upon Soar, 1 February 2008.

www.gov.uk

 

[43096]

Reading and looking at how the 158s and 159s performed in the Salisbury/Fisherton Tunnel incident got me thinking about how these units have performed in previous incidents, and nothing really came to mind.

I wonder if anyone can recall any relevant incidents?

Discussion of today's incident is here, and we'd probably best avoid discussing that here:

Collision and derailment near Salisbury (Fisherton Tunnel) 31/10/21

Mod note: Please take care when posting; any speculation should be reasonable, proportional and clearly identified as such. As this incident is being reported in the mainstream media, we need to ensure speculation posted here isn't picked up and reported as fact. Additionally, this is a...

www.railforums.co.uk

There was the collision involving 158861 and a runaway 47 back in 1992 which wrote off one of 158 cars:

More recently there was the collision of 158856 with a displaced bridge at Barrow-upon-Soar: https://assets.publishing.service.g...24100018f/R182008_080925_Barrow_Upon_Soar.pdf

 

[LOL The Irony]

The Barrow-upon-Soar collision between a 158 and footbridge comes to mind, with the RAIB reporting the following on the crash protection offered.

Report 18/2008: Collision at Barrow upon Soar

Collision of a train with a demolished footbridge, Barrow upon Soar, 1 February 2008.

www.gov.uk

I was reading about this the other day and thought of it instantly the moment I found out at least one of the units involved was an Express Sprinter. The SWR 159 appears to have behaved in a similar way.

 

[Kneedown]

The Driver involved in the Barrow on Soar incident was trapped for several hours, and was extremely fortunate that the unit contacted the main part of the bridge below solebar height, and not above it. He gradually recovered from his severe injuries, although still feels the effects. He is now my boss!

 

[dubscottie]

Yesterday's incident must be the first for this type that did not involve hitting something head-on.
As we unfortunately know, vehicles made from aluminium extrusions don't seem to fair well under certain collisions but are excellent in others.

As I mentioned of the other thread, the bodyside of the GWR unit from the door to the inner end (part that has the toilet window) is now in the cab of the 159.

 

[Wyrleybart]

This one at Newton Abbot didn't come off as bad as the HST power car.

To save anyone trying to figure it out without watching the clip, it was 158833. Is that one of the TfW fleet now based at Machynlleth ?

IIRC 158751 had a collision and rebuild back in the late 1990s or early oughties. Not sure of the circumstances though

 

[Leeds1970]

158 & 159 units the crumple zones are the entire cab/toilet & vestibule area at both ends of each car to enable the passenger saloon to remain (hopefully) intact bar maybe some slight rippling

 

[D365]

158 & 159 units the crumple zones are the entire cab/toilet & vestibule area at both ends of each car to enable the passenger saloon to remain (hopefully) intact bar maybe some slight rippling

The cab and toilet are crumple zones?

 

[Ken H]

The cab and toilet are crumple zones?

the vestibule on Mk3's is the crumple zone. tough luck for the standees there.

 

[LOL The Irony]

the vestibule on Mk3's is the crumple zone. tough luck for the standees there.

This is the case with all end door stock nowadays.

 

[James284]

Another incident that happened not too long ago.

ScotRail train hits tree on railway between Dundee and Perth

A ScotRail train was returned to its depot after colliding with a tree on the line between Dundee and Perth on Friday afternoon.

www.thecourier.co.uk

 

[Towers]

The 158/159s have been quite blessed in having relatively very little exposure to major accidents really, given that they've operated pretty much everywhere and in large numbers for the past 30 years.

I am, of course, primarily concerned for the welfare of all passengers and crew, but I must admit I'm also a little sad that the stock has been destroyed. GWR in particular will feel the loss of a DMU in what is already a stretched fleet.

 

[D365]

GWR in particular will feel the loss of a DMU in what is already a stretched fleet.

The one (minor) positive is that EMR and TfW will be off-leasing their 158 fleets relatively soon.

 

[D2007wsm]

The 158/159s have been quite blessed in having relatively very little exposure to major accidents really, given that they've operated pretty much everywhere and in large numbers for the past 30 years.

I am, of course, primarily concerned for the welfare of all passengers and crew, but I must admit I'm also a little sad that the stock has been destroyed. GWR in particular will feel the loss of a DMU in what is already a stretched fleet.

If not all carriages are damaged the odd carriages could be attached to other 2 car units too make a 3 car

 

[LowLevel]

The one (minor) positive is that EMR and TfW will be off-leasing their 158 fleets relatively soon.

I'll be surprised if the EMR 158s go anywhere any time soon, which is a bit unfortunate as most of them are the same type as GWR's. The TfW units are the Perkins variety.

 

[USRailFan]

I notice there are some gaps in the 158 number series, but I take it that these are the FGW(?) units that were rebuilt to 3-car and got new numbers in the /9 subseries, and that no 158s have been otherwise retired until now?

 

[JonathanH]

I notice there are some gaps in the 158 number series, but I take it that these are the FGW(?) units that were rebuilt to 3-car and got new numbers in the /9 subseries, and that no 158s have been otherwise retired until now?

Correct - none retired

The missing units in the 158701-872/901-910 series are:

158737/42/43/44/72/75/79/81/802/808/814 renumbered as 158880-890

158800/01/03/04/05/07/09/11 renumbered as 159101/08/02-07

158761/64/68/71/76/78 reformed as 158950/51/56/57/58/59 with 158751/48/46 disbanded for the additional coaches.

 

[swt_passenger]

Correct - none retired

The SWT renumbering of 158880-90 being a perfect example of something done mostly at the whim of the TOC, just to give them a neat set of numbers. Because they could.

 

[D6975]

I notice there are some gaps in the 158 number series, but I take it that these are the FGW(?) units that were rebuilt to 3-car and got new numbers in the /9 subseries, and that no 158s have been otherwise retired until now?

Only one 158 vehicle has been scrapped, which was one half of 158861. One of the spare bodyshells kept at Litchurch lane was fitted out with parts rescued from the scrapped vehicle and given the same number as it. The work done was, for insurance purposes a repair, but was in reality closer to being a new vehicle.

 

[swt_passenger]

I notice there are some gaps in the 158 number series, but I take it that these are the FGW(?) units that were rebuilt to 3-car and got new numbers in the /9 subseries, and that no 158s have been otherwise retired until now?

The GWR 3 car units aren’t really expected or intended to be permanent, the idea is that anytime it suits the TOC or owner they’d revert them to 2 car with their original numbers, in fact that’s already been done with a few of them in the last few years.