Carmont (near Stonehaven) derailment - 12 August 2020

[LowLevel]

Scotrail HST's don't have a buffet I'm sure, but there may have been a trolley worker onboard.

They do have a microbuffet, but that's not relevant - I believe the answer to the original question is known to the authorities but I don't think the details have been released, I assume the media personage in question is commenting based on information from leaked internal documents.

 

[Journeyman]

Scotrail HST's don't have a buffet I'm sure, but there may have been a trolley worker onboard.

There's a buffet counter at the end of the first class coach, but even before COVID they were hardly ever open.

 

[Mojo]

Is that right? I thought it had been determined that the alarm was raised by a member of staff.

It was reported (cannot recall if in this thread or elsewhere) that the first Network Rail knew about this was from being informed by Police Scotland. A member of the public, not on board the train, reported to Police Scotland that a train had derailed and caught fire. The local police then subsequently informed the BTP and Network Rail.

 

[BrianW]

Forgive me if I have missed something (it's hard reading back over 660 posts, esp with so much trauma)- am I missing something about the gap between the train leaving Aberdeen at 0638 and Stonehaven at 0653 and 'response' at 0943? I see a lot of 'issues' here that may be factors or not including the ORR reports regarding slope instabilities and what is speculated to have been work in progress. I note a lot of scouring of the river bank in one of the photos. Stopping there.

Really feeling for all involved; and strangely thanking God for Covid in this tragic instance. May all sleep in some peace.

 

[Mathew S]

News at 10 continued the really poor reporting. Some reporter interviewed by Sophie Raworth in the studio, firstly said the driver "asked for permission to move onto another track". Then he went on a rant about how "questions must be asked should trains have been running at all in those weather conditions".
Dreadful standard of reportage. Turned the TV off.

I have to say I think that is - or will be, in the inquiry that will inevitably come from this - a perfectly reasonable question. Given the exceptional weather conditions of last night, were the safety checks/precautions/procedures which were in place adequate? Should more be done to ensure the safety of the network following severe weather before trains are allowed to operate? Etc. etc. etc. At the end of the day, something, somewhere, somehow has gone catastrophically wrong. It may be that investigations show that this has been such a freak incident that nothing could ever reasonably have been done to prevent it. However, that doesn't mean it's not right to ask the question.

 

[Lucan]

the general "railways in this country are terrible" opinion that many people hold, comes an opinion that they're also death traps. ....It's going to be a challenge to reassure people now.

You could point out that there are around five deaths every day on UK roads. They don't generally attract much media or political attention though.
DfT Report for year ending June 2019

 

[bramling]

Forgive me if I have missed something (it's hard reading back over 660 posts, esp with so much trauma)- am I missing something about the gap between the train leaving Aberdeen at 0638 and Stonehaven at 0653 and 'response' at 0943? I see a lot of 'issues' here that may be factors or not including the ORR reports regarding slope instabilities and what is speculated to have been work in progress. I note a lot of scouring of the river bank in one of the photos. Stopping there.

Really feeling for all involved; and strangely thanking God for Covid in this tragic instance. May all sleep in some peace.

It seems to be the case that the train was initially halted in its southbound (up) journey somewhere in the Carmont area due to an unrelated landslip (not sure if it was stopped by the driver or by the signaller as a result of a report from someone else?).

At some point the decision was made to return the train to Stonehaven, presumably to prevent the passengers being stuck in the middle of nowhere. It’s not quite clear whether this involved a wrong direction move back to Carmont, or if the train had initially been halted at Carmont signal box, however the train appears to have been shunted over the trailing crossover there, and then continued under normal signalling northwards (down) from Carmont signal box towards Stonehaven, presumably with the intention of alternative arrangements being made regarding the passengers’ journeys. The derailment seems to have occurred roughly a mile or so into this journey.

I should add that the above is my interpretation of everything, others may be able to add to or correct, however no doubt all of the above will have taken time, so should account for quite a bit of the missing time.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Trying to piece together the decidedly confusing media reports of this sad incident.

Here's my take. Would appreciate confirmation / clarification.

0638 Aberdeen -> Glasgow Queen Street service departs.

HST set formed of four carriages and a power car / driver's cab at the either end.

Nine folk on board, three staff and six passengers.

Service calls at Stonehaven and then encounters landslip somewhere in the Carmont area at some time after 7.00 a.m.

Can't proceed Southbound so decision made to return towards Aberdeen. Not many places to switch from Southbound track to Northbound track on the 14 miles between Stonehaven and Laurencekirk, so presumably the train must have passed beyond the points near to Carmont Manned Crossing (five miles beyond Stonehaven), so there must have been some (short?) element of wrong line working, before crossing back on to the Northbound track at Carmont (?)

Train derails on way back towards Aberdeen. Sadly three fatalities, later confirmed as the driver, the conductor, and one passenger.

Other six folk on board all eventually taken to hospital.

One carriage and end unit still (more or less) on the track. One carriage crushed, another partially catching fire. That leaves a fourth carriage and the other end unit.

Alarm raised at c. 9.31 a.m. Not sure who by, maybe the third (?) crew member, maybe a passenger, maybe a passer by seeing the smoke (?).

(Sadly, as we now know, the driver and conductor have been killed in the incident).

What I don't quite follow is, was the train at a halt for some time before then setting back towards Aberdeen, what time did the derailment actually take place, was the train wrong line running when it came to grief (or had it been switched on to the Northbound track having been switched over at Carmont) and was there a delay in it being possible to raise the alarm?

Looks like Bramling is asking similar questions.

 

[Amaranthe]

I posted this on Twitter earlier... just my thoughts on what MIGHT have happened...

Absolutely gutted by the #Stonehaven accident. I'm not a rail accident investigator but this is my guess as to what happened. We also need to be truly grateful that the local lockdown in Aberdeen meant the service was lightly loaded but of course thoughts are with all affected.

 

[Murph]

Diesel is far less flammable than petrol in normal circumstances, but becomes explosive when released under high pressure as a vapour (such as when a tank is ruptured under a heavy impact). I seem to remember that this was a significant factor at Ladbroke Grove.

There's also ongoing research by HSE into oil mist fire and explosion risks, starting somewhere around the turn of the century. It is basically fairly new scientific understanding of the subject, with a particular focus on the offshore industry but applicable anywhere. I've not read the latest papers on it, but part of it was looking like ignition was possible below the expected flash point. I.e. once you generate a fine mist of diesel, as is quite likely in a high kinetic energy tank rupture, it's higher risk for fire and explosion than was previously thought.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There's also ongoing research by HSE into oil mist fire and explosion risks, starting somewhere around the turn of the century. It is basically fairly new scientific understanding of the subject, with a particular focus on the offshore industry but applicable anywhere. I've not read the latest papers on it, but part of it was looking like ignition was possible below the expected flash point. I.e. once you generate a fine mist of diesel, as is quite likely in a high kinetic energy tank rupture, it's higher risk for fire and explosion than was previously thought.

That's probably the research I was thinking of: I have a vague memory of a documentary about the investigation into the Ladbroke Grove disaster where they tried to replicate the conditions of the tank rupturing.

 

[najaB]

I posted this on Twitter earlier... just my thoughts on what MIGHT have happened...

Absolutely gutted by the #Stonehaven accident. I'm not a rail accident investigator but this is my guess as to what happened. We also need to be truly grateful that the local lockdown in Aberdeen meant the service was lightly loaded but of course thoughts are with all affected.

Large image snipped

I think it more likely that the track that you've marked as "washed away" was in fact damaged in the crash. If that area was the cause of the derailment then somehow the leading power car would have to have changed direction of motion to end up where it is.

 

[bramling]

Trying to piece together the decidedly confusing media reports of this sad incident.

Here's my take. Would appreciate confirmation / clarification.

0638 Aberdeen -> Glasgow Queen Street service departs.

HST set formed of four carriages and a power car / driver's cab at the either end.

Nine folk on board, three staff and six passengers.

Service calls at Stonehaven and then encounters landslip somewhere in the Carmont area at some time after 7.00 a.m.

Can't proceed Southbound so decision made to return towards Aberdeen. Not many places to switch from Southbound track to Northbound track on the 14 miles between Stonehaven and Laurencekirk, so presumably the train must have passed beyond the points near to Carmont Manned Crossing (five miles beyond Stonehaven), so there must have been some (short?) element of wrong line working, before crossing back on to the Northbound track at Carmont (?)

Train derails on way back towards Aberdeen. Sadly three fatalities, later confirmed as the driver, the conductor, and one passenger.

Other six folk on board all eventually taken to hospital.

One carriage and end unit still (more or less) on the track. One carriage crushed, another partially catching fire. That leaves a fourth carriage and the other end unit.

Alarm raised at c. 9.31 a.m. Not sure who by, maybe the third (?) crew member, maybe a passenger, maybe a passer by seeing the smoke (?).

(Sadly, as we now know, the driver and conductor have been killed in the incident).

What I don't quite follow is, was the train at a halt for some time before then setting back towards Aberdeen, what time did the derailment actually take place, was the train wrong line running when it came to grief (or had it been switched on to the Northbound track having been switched over at Carmont) and was there a delay in it being possible to raise the alarm?

Looks like Bramling is asking similar questions.

It seems to be fairly certain the train was crossed over at Carmont signal box, so was on the right road at the time. The only bit which seems unclear is how long all this took (possible wrong road move back to Carmont plus crossing over - both in terms of deciding to do it, arranging it, and carrying it all out).

I don’t think there’s anything untoward - one would expect all of that to take some time.

None of this necessarily points to a delay in raising the alarm.

 

[Amaranthe]

I think it more likely that the track that you've marked as "washed away" was in fact damaged in the crash. If that area was the cause of the derailment then somehow the leading power car would have to have changed direction of motion to end up where it is.

I'll bow to your obvious more experience than me.

My thoughts though were that having come over the bridge the first power car and first coach ran out of track and were thrown over the embankment, coach 2 flipped as everything decoupled along with coach 3 which along with coach 4 came to rest on top of coach 2

 

[najaB]

My thoughts though were that having come over the bridge the first power car and first coach ran out of track and were thrown over the embankment, coach 2 flipped as everything decoupled along with coach 3 which along with coach 4 came to rest on top of coach 2

That sequence of events makes sense, just it's likely that it started further up along the line.

 

[Amaranthe]

Ahh just found out I knew Donald through my dad who used to be a Conductor from Aberdeen depot before he retired

That sequence of events makes sense, just it's likely that it started further up along the line.

Further north or south?

 

[Energy]

I am waiting for the report considering how varying the details currently are. Other rolling stock may have fared better but there are many variables, just looking at the image above it isn't similar to the Grayrigg derailment which others have compared this to. How long did the report for the Grayrigg derailment take? In the meantime I hope everyone treats the people involved and their families with respect, tabloids have a habit of pestering people for information or being inaccurate.

 

[bnm]

They ought to be using informed commentators like Tony Miles, who will be clear and accurate.

Tony hardly covered himself in glory on The World at One.

 

[najaB]

Further north or south?

Further south, since the train was heading north. Speculation, but my guess is that the power car derailed on or just before the bridge and the guard rail did it's job and stopped it going over the side. Then when it reached the end of the guard rail, the lateral forces were to great for it it keep going straight.

By the way, by guard rail I don't mean on the bridge parapet, but rather the 'extra' rail that you often see in the four-foot (between the rails) on bridges. It's purpose is exactly to keep a derailed train from impacting the sides of the bridge.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guard_rail_(rail)

n rail transport, guard rails or check rails are rails used in the construction of the track. placed parallel to regular running rail, and keep the wheels of rolling stock in alignment in case of derailment.

Image link: https://www.google.com/search?q=gua...wZAUgQ_AUoAXoECAsQAQ&biw=412&bih=718&dpr=2.63

Edit: Looking on Google satellite view, if this accident happened where I think that it did, then the bridge doesn't appear to be fitted with a guard rail. The question of if the presence of one would have changed the outcome will likely form one line of investigation.

 

[Amaranthe]

That must have made it even more frightening for those on board but yes that actually makes more sense.

Truly horrific circumstances but if it is as you say then we have to be grateful that the bridge held.

 

[Amaranthe]

Thinking of loadings again...

Normally when people board in Aberdeen they go to the rear coach as that is closest. But given that the train was heading back north to Aberdeen we have to be glad this wasn't the case.

 

[theageofthetra]

There's also ongoing research by HSE into oil mist fire and explosion risks, starting somewhere around the turn of the century. It is basically fairly new scientific understanding of the subject, with a particular focus on the offshore industry but applicable anywhere. I've not read the latest papers on it, but part of it was looking like ignition was possible below the expected flash point. I.e. once you generate a fine mist of diesel, as is quite likely in a high kinetic energy tank rupture, it's higher risk for fire and explosion than was previously thought.

Very interesting. One question I do have is regarding the vinyls. Is this the first major fire following a collision where the train had vinyls over most of the bodywork? Would they be more flammable than say a conventionally painted body?

 

[rebmcr]

I posted this on Twitter earlier... just my thoughts on what MIGHT have happened...

Absolutely gutted by the #Stonehaven accident. I'm not a rail accident investigator but this is my guess as to what happened. We also need to be truly grateful that the local lockdown in Aberdeen meant the service was lightly loaded but of course thoughts are with all affected.

View attachment 82159

I reckon with the leading power car dragging the front of the train down the bank, the rear power car's weight continuing to push, and the temporary strength of the couplings, the jacknifing caused carriage 2 to spin 180° and carriage 3 to spin 90° and roll under — swapping their labels from your image.

 

[Banana]

I have examined all the aerial footage and stills that I can find. This accident does not appear to be straightforward to explain away. The leading power car has exited the track shortly after the bridge and performed what appears to be a complete 180 turn. This then has caused the leading carriages to also leave the track. The trailing power car thenappears to have pushed the remaining carriages into each other under power over the 2nd and 3rd carriages which (I expect) would have been derailed into their final positions.

Unexplained is the damage to the parapet of the bridge on the up side, with no corresponding damage to the track. Likewise there appears to be no evidence of a major landslip to the trackside on the up side - all the trees are intact and upright.

Could the leading power car already have been derailed before it reached the bridge? Ballast is covering the inner rail of the down line on the bridge, but does this indicate that the train was off the road before the bridge? or was this was caused by carriages jack-knifing as a result of the leading power car leaving the road immediately after the bridge?

Again I can see no evidence of a landslip before the bridge (but the aerial shots don't cover the area extensively therefore this cannot be ruled out). However I would have expected the driver to be braking hard if his power car was derailed and the track is plain line here with no appreciate curvature.

Then there is still the unexplained up-side bridge parapet damage. Perhaps the parapet damage was caused by one of the vehicles rotating through the air missing the down road?

There is a scar to the landscape where the power car left the track, and the ballast on the crash-site side of the down line appears to be absent. Did the train cause this, or had the land slipped beforehand? It's difficult to establish if the permanent way is intact or not. However, the trailing power car is on the road, as is the part of the rearmost bogie of the rearmost carriage. If the track had been undermined then why does the trailing power car appear to be upright? Is it because the PW is good, or because by the time it had arrived it was travelling at a significantly lower speed?

Occam's Razor says to me that the land had slipped away a little from under the track but sufficient for a train travelling a speed to leave the road - I wouldn't expect a land scar and complete absence of ballast to be caused by the train alone. The violence with which the train has departed the PW however must mean that the landslip would have been substantial to create a material dip or gap in the track, which isn't borne-out by the final positioning of the trailing power car.

No doubt we will learn more in the coming days.

Thanks.

 

[43096]

I admit this is pure conjecture, but to what extent has the Wabtec refurbishment interfered with the structure of the vehicles? certainly the roofs look to be a mess of old and new welded together. Is the refurbishment deep enough to impact the structure of the vehicle? for example if part of the structure was corroded, cut out and replacement metal put in, could that affect the overall strength of the vehicle?

How about those guessing about crashworthiness wait for the experts to do their thing and issue the report? No-one on here is going to be able to add any facts to it.

 

[RichSwitch]

First and foremost my thoughts are with those who have sadly died or been injured, and their families and friends at this difficult time. And those involved in dealing with the aftermath.

Just some thoughts:
1. “Why was this accident not reported until 0943?” - If all members of crew on board are incapacitated (say), one assumes that those who manage to get out would look for the nearest house/farm to raise the alarm. People with shock/injuries could take time to get to a place to do this given both the challenging terrain and the weather.
2. This accident has many parallels with previous accidents involving HSTs at Southall, Ladbroke Grove, and Ufton level crossing. The rear power car still carrying momentum means there is a lot of energy to be absorbed in a very small time. To be clear, all of these accidents had different causes. However, what I am saying is that the end effect in each case is similar: carriages overriding others (little protection; will raise questions about older carriages and crashworthiness); cab destruction (again raising protection and crashworthiness); fire (we all remember the ensuing fire at Ladbroke Grove; questions around fuel tank strength and durability in accidents; presumably new hybrids are better in this regard).

Regarding the cause of this particular appalling accident, I won’t speculate. RAIB etc will do their work and either the police or official rail people will provide updates.

 

[357]

Tributes coming in from other parts of the country and Railway Family.

For the person who complained about Facebook profile photos - it's a commonly used way of showing your respect after an event. Paris, Orlando, and many more.

Many staff would have thought at some point after seeing this accident "that could have been me" - I know that thought crossed my mind. It's a horrible event and to loose any passengers or staff is horrible. We turn up at work every day to transport people or goods from A to B in a safe, efficient and reliable way. Yesterday, for whatever reasons, that didn't happen.

 

[GB]

First and foremost my thoughts are with those who have sadly died or been injured, and their families and friends at this difficult time. And those involved in dealing with the aftermath.

Just some thoughts:
1. “Why was this accident not reported until 0943?” - If all members of crew on board are incapacitated (say), one assumes that those who manage to get out would look for the nearest house/farm to raise the alarm. People with shock/injuries could take time to get to a place to do this given both the challenging terrain and the weather.

No one here know what time the derailment happened. For all we know it happened at 0940. If there was such a big gap then this will come out in the report.

 

[Banana]

No one here know what time the derailment happened. For all we know it happened at 0940. If there was such a big gap then this will come out in the report.

It's a 1km walk to the signalbox. That's probably the most accessible building from the accident scene.

 

[brick60000]

Thoughts with all of those involved. Horrific news to watch unfold yesterday, even more horrific for anyone involved in the incident and subsequent recovery.