Two Class 40s in "Mystery" Crash Photo

[Inversnecky]

(Sorry, just practicing my tabloid headline writing skills!)

I came across this intriguing photo that was through by many initially to be a fake, of two BR Green Class 40s "wrestling like crocodiles" in a crash that occurred in Granton, Edinburgh, in 1970.

Read all about it here.

 

[Peter C]

I remember reading about this a while ago - an interesting story. The railway seems to attract this sort of mystery: just have a look at the forums where people spend ages working out all sorts of lovely details!

-Peter

 

[Ashley Hill]

Are there any photos of D363 the other contender in this fight?

 

[Cowley]

Are there any photos of D363 the other contender in this fight?

Yes I was wondering about that.
You’d think that it might be a prototype contender for early cab streamlining looking at this one?

 

[70014IronDuke]

Are there any photos of D363 the other contender in this fight?

My first reaction on seeing this photo was: what happened to the footplate crew? Were they safe?

It may seem a long time ago to you, but talking glibly about "a fight" between locomotives when men may easily had died or been horribly injured is offensive to me. Conservative old fart that I may be.

Slight change of subject: what was on the other side of the tracks? A yard? A shed?

 

[Peter C]

My first reaction on seeing this photo was: what happened to the footplate crew? Were they safe?

It may seem a long time ago to you, but talking glibly about "a fight" between locomotives when men may easily had died or been horribly injured is offensive to me. Conservative old fart that I may be.

The article linked to in post one says the crews were not badly injured. People responding to the incident said the engines looked like "two fighting crocodiles".

-Peter

 

[Richard Scott]

Looks like there must be a weak spot by the cab doors then? Not seen that happen with a peak with the similar designed bogies (appreciate noses much shorter on a peak so less likely anyway). Any other images of 40s with front end collision damage or was it just this collision had just the right forces to make that happen? Must be honest still looks fake (seems enough evidence to say it's real) and can't believe they repaired the loco, can't have been an easy job?

 

[Strathclyder]

Another image of D368 after it's collision with D363 from another angle, this time in B&W (from the Kenneth G. Williamson Flickr collection; originally taken by G. N. Turnbull).

BR Class 40, No. 368, diesel locomotive which was involved in a collision on the Granton branch with No. 363 on 27 August, 1970. (Copyright G. N. Turnbull).

Explore Kenneth G Williamson's 5977 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Inversnecky]

My first reaction on seeing this photo was: what happened to the footplate crew? Were they safe?

It may seem a long time ago to you, but talking glibly about "a fight" between locomotives when men may easily had died or been horribly injured is offensive to me. Conservative old fart that I may be.

Slight change of subject: what was on the other side of the tracks? A yard? A shed?

I would obviously have treated it in a different manner had the outcome been more serious, and I took my cue from the contemporary commentary referenced in the article, as someone else mentioned.

I can appreciate those unfamiliar with the episode may not appreciated this, though.

 

[d9009alycidon]

Solution to the story here https://www.railexpress.co.uk/1663/class-40-mystery-solved/

 

[EbbwJunction1]

Where's the photo of both Class 40s, please?

 

[tomatwark]

If you put their later numbers into Flickr there are images of both in Crewe works

 

[swt_passenger]

Solution to the story here https://www.railexpress.co.uk/1663/class-40-mystery-solved/

That’s actually linked in post #1, you may not have realised because it’s embedded in the last word, (under the photo).

 

[EbbwJunction1]

That’s actually linked in post #1, you may not have realised because it’s embedded in the last word, (under the photo).

But that just shows 40168, doesn't it?

 

[swt_passenger]

But that just shows 40168, doesn't it?

Yes, but I was only replying to post#10, commenting on the fact the same Rail Express article was already there...

 

[Inversnecky]

But that just shows 40168, doesn't it?

Look a bit closer

 

[EbbwJunction1]

What, the bit that's raised is part of the body of one, and the rest of it is the other one?

 

[xotGD]

What, the bit that's raised is part of the body of one, and the rest of it is the other one?

No. But it needs a moment to realise that it isn't!

 

[EbbwJunction1]

I thought that it wasn't ... so where's the photo of both of them, please?

 

[43096]

But that just shows 40168, doesn't it?

Try this: 40163 p | Also involved in the same accident as 368 (see bel… | Flickr

 

[EbbwJunction1]

Try this: 40163 p | Also involved in the same accident as 368 (see bel… | Flickr

Thanks .... wow!

 

[Cowley]

Thanks .... wow!

It’s quite amazing that both crews only suffered minor injuries looking at the damage.

 

[Gloster]

The locos were probably not travelling very fast, so even though it was foggy, the crew probably had a chance to dive into the engine compartment, or at least out of the seats. With 368 it looks as though the passage behind the drivers’ seats came off worst.