A train has derailed near Stonehaven.
 

A train has derailed near Stonehaven in Aberdeenshire, sparking a major response from emergency services.

About 30 emergency vehicles - including air ambulance support - are at the scene, with more continuing to arrive.

Smoke can be seen coming from the area. It is not yet clear if anyone has been injured.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...tland-53751678


PS Reports suggest the train has 'fallen down an embankment' with early images from the scene showing smoke billowing across the area.

They're suggesting that an overnight flood may have something to do with it.

Latest news is 3 fatalities including the driver and may have run into a landslide.

Yes, it made the late nite tv news here.
Sad indeed.
Will hafta await the RAIB incident report to be published.

As I heard it they were backing up to return to Salthouses when they ran into something. Can those sets be controlled from either end or could someone look out of a rear window to see if the way was clear?
John.

I believe that this was a short-form HST, so there was a cab at either end. So the driver would have been driving normally. I've heard that the train was turned back from a first landslide, so I don't know whether he was running Wrong Road or it was a signalled move.

We'll find out in time, no doubt.

BW

From the photos, the rear power car is still on the track and is on the correct line. It was reported that the train had initially set back 'wrong road' from the first landslip, but was then able to crossover to the right road at some point.
Whilst not wishing to speculate on the cause, it must be the case that this train had passed this location on the outward trip (on the opposite line) and so there must have been nothing obviously wrong here when they passed earlier. At least two other northbound services had earlier passed this location without incident.
As you say BW, the facts will come out in time.
Condolences to the families of the driver, conductor and passenger who were killed in the accident.

Tony

Latest news.

A derailment which left three people dead happened after the train struck a landslip covering the track, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...tland-53778891

Here is the official description of the events leading up to the incident

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/p...-aberdeenshire

Very sad. I saw the detailed report at the Daily Mail. R.I.P.

The RAIB has posted some of it's initial findings which reveals the the HST was travelling at 72.8 mph when it hit the landslide. It also gives details of the movements of the train leading up to the derailment.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/p...dated-21082020

Investigations are still taking place with further information to be published in due course.

Tony

Ouch, I didn't realise it was going that quickly. It explains alot. :(

Maybe it would be a good idea in future for trains to run at caution whenever a landslide has occurred anywhere on the line? Makes it tedious, but better than wrecking a train.

Just a thought.

BW

Yes I was a bit surprised by the speed. What sort of speed would it be if you were instructed to run under caution BW?

Tony

G'day,
Yes, the speed could be presumed by the derailment damage sustained along the perway and across the brick viaduct evident in the photo.
The NSW Illawarra is prone to landslip, and many moons ago land slip detectors were installed.
These being connected to the train control signal panel and putting signals back to stop when the sensors trip.
A rigmarole to then be granted permission to pass such a signal at stop within land slip detection territory.
This all was implemented after an interurban derailed where the track had been damaged due to landslip.
That interurban emu stomping its way towards a nearby house and knocking on the loungeroom windows.
Here we did have Caution Speed (aka 25 kph) to be implemented when ever signals had to be passed at stop due to failures.
But, after the Glenbrook Indian Pacific prang in 1999, that got hurled out of the rule book.
We now have RESTRICTED SPEED which has NO associated speed limit.
Trains MUST now travel at a speed which would permit stopping before any obstruction or track fault.
SO, all on the train hoggers head be it if he travels too fast and cannot stop in time.
Steve.

Interesting that you say it's all on the driver's head, as this driver's widow has complained about the reporting of this derailment (particularly the BBC) which she says has only taken parts of the initial RAIB report, whilst leaving some details out, making it sound like the driver was at fault. She has said that he was driving completely in accordance with his instructions.

https://news.sky.com/story/stonehave...-book-12054543

Tony

Not sure who that was directed at, but that's not what I was suggesting. A train driver is required to drive at full speed when running under clear aspects. Any less than that and they'll be pulled up for not keeping to time.

I meant my comments to be directed towards Company Driving Policy / Rulebook requirements. And I stand by it - I believe drivers should be INSTRUCTED to run at caution whenever there is a significant risk of landslide or track damage.

I'm not looking to blame anyone for this, but these weather events seem to be increasing. Network Rail (who run the infrastructure) should have carried out a risk assessment of rivers and culverts in hilly country. I believe they should automatically impose blanket speed restrictions in heavy and continued wet weather, just as we regularly get them imposed in high winds out here on the Flatlands.

As regards to what speed to do under caution - I would drive at a speed which enabled me to stop short of any obstruction, EG maybe 30-50mph on a long straight, coming down to 15 or less on a tight curve if necessary. It's a judgement you make at the time.

But just to make it clear - the driver carries no blame for this if he has driven within the rules, and I don't believe anybody here is suggesting that he didn't.

As a side comment, we have a rule of thumb at my depot that we don't do Twitter or any other of the nasty Social Media - they seem to be full of nasty, angry people. It's very upsetting for a traincrew member or their family to read untrue and hurtful comments written by ignorant and misguided peole after an event they were involved in.

HTH, BW

Sorry, not at you BW, this was reference to the last part of Steve's post where the Oz rail authorities have implemented "RESTRICTED SPEED which has NO associated speed limit.
Trains MUST now travel at a speed which would permit stopping before any obstruction or track fault.
SO, all on the train hoggers head be it if he travels too fast and cannot stop in time."
And it was this which seemed interesting considering the press reports which could be construed as scapegoating the driver in the Stonehaven accident.
Apologies for any offence, none intended.

Tony

Thanks for answering the question BW - as a non-railwayman, I was curious if there was a specified speed for running under caution and whether it would be given as an instruction in situations such as these.

Tony

Hi Tony. Absolutely none taken. I always enjoy our discussions.

I hadn't appreciated that it was part of AS's post you were commenting on.

As usual, the media has hyped this and whipped up the lynchmob. We seem to be living in very angry and troubled times. I blame Murdoch for much of it, but I must bite my lip because as we've said before this is not the place for politics. :eek:

And here in Blighty, in the Good Book 'proceed with caution' requires you be able to stop short of any obstuction without mentioning a specific speed, except that you are required to (1) pass over points and crossings at 15 max, and (2) ensure that facing and trailing points are set for your intended route (which involves slowing down to walking pace as you get to one ).

Whereas Blanket Speed Restrictions do specify a given maximum speed.

Best wishes, BW.

G'day Tony and BW,
Any time that fatalities occur within the transport industry, it is natural for the media to focus on the actions of the crew.
Such media attention can be more traumatic for the relatives of those crew members when those crew members are killed.
Society does like to apportion blame.
All accidents, road, rail, air and sea are tragic.
Nothing is totally perfect and never will be.
But, safety does tend to improve after the results of each accident.
I count myself fortunate to not having been personally involved in any fatal rail accident during my footplate career.
I have witnessed the inquests of a couple of fatal rail accidents, and such is not pleasant.
Steve.

That's a very high speed and explains the destruction.

Stonehaven derailment: Line to reopen next week.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...tland-54749304

wat
 

kinda stupid if you ask me :confused:

:confused:

That remark confused me as well.:confused:

:confused:Likewise - it's an odd choice of wording. All I can offer as an explanation of how I read this comment is "how can a flood/landslip be allowed to occur on the track?" But, we all know that things like this are not within the rail operators' control, and the report will tell us if anything could/should have been done differently.

Tony

Latest update.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...tland-56799613

It would be interesting to know the difference in speed between this train and the TGV that hit a landslide from Cologne to Paris, the driver was injured, but there were no fatalities. Incidentally I was on a TGV to Paris from Bordeaux at the same time.

The RAIB have published their Interim report, https://www.gov.uk/raib-reports/inte...nt=immediately ,which makes interesting reading.

Is this the incident, at Ingenheim, 5th March 2020?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingenheim_derailment
https://www.railjournal.com/passenge...s-tgv-service/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...astern-france/

If so, the wiki entry states the TGV was travelling at 270kph (170mph), but I suspect that the geography of the area has a lot to do with the outcome. The RAIB report into the Stonehaven crash states that the train remained upright for 60m following the derailment before hitting the parapet of the bridge and falling down the embankment. I suspect if the area had been straight and level, with no embankments or bridges, then there would have been a good chance that the train may have possibly stayed upright.

Tony