Great Western Coffee Shop

Dundee - Glasgow HST cab smashed by a fallen tree but no injuries

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/scottish-news/24014008.storm-gerrit-scotrail-train-glasgow-smashed-tree/

From JenOnTheMove on Twitter (https://x.com/JenOnTheMoveUK/status/1740059460062830751?s=20)


She was commenting on:

From Paul Sweeney on Twitter (https://x.com/PaulJSweeney/status/1740042888929476824?s=20)

I would still defend HSTs on comfort grounds, better on board facilities, and being Dawlish proof, unlike the more modern alternatives.
The limited crash worthiness is a cause for concern, but accidents are very rare.
I would be pleased to travel in one. I would be pleased to drive one, after suitable instruction of course.

Seriously? What if this had happened at night, with the driver having no chance to react?

It's time for the HSTs to be consigned to history - nostalgia never saved a life.

ANOTHER victory for my famous crystal ball. Near the beginning of the IET  saga I stated that as soon as as some IETs were in service, that the HSTs would rapidly become "dangerous and non compliant"
In general, once new shorter trains have been delivered, the old and full length trains suddenly become "dangerous"

Once 4 car and 6 car networkers were available, then the old 8 car slam door units that has been used for decades were declared to be dangerous.

Once 3 car DMUs were available for Waterloo to Exeter services, the full length loco hauled trains became dangerous.

Rail vehicles are designed far more robustly than road vehicles, the driving cabs on a train are far stronger than any road cab.  I've not seen a photo of the tree the train hit by the looks of the damage it was a fairly substantial tree I'm not sure even a modern cab would have done any better, if anything the space in a modern cab for a driver to move to will be less than in an HST cab

I have seen the photos and it seems miraculous that the driver escaped unhurt......again if it had happened at night the outcome may well have been different.

I'm unclear as to the relevance of a comparison with a road vehicle in this context, however I'd be surprised if there are many cars left on the roads with the same level of crashworthiness that  sufficed in the 1970s.

Could be of course that Network Rail need to look again at their management of lineside vegetation too?

Gareth Dennis has indicated elsewhere that several Scotrail drivers had already contacted him unhappy that these trains were still running without strengthening modification to the drivers cabs, which has apparently been ruled out on cost/obsolescence grounds.

Perhaps we have to wait for a driver to be decapitated?

Trying (and failing) to avoid commenting on this as my involvement with railways is as a passenger, I'm not required to drive them: descriptions on social media of the HST cab as 'The equivalent of a bathtub' are unhelpful to everyone but particularly rail staff.

Setting this against 'Oh, but the comfort'. Please, twitter commentators, rethink that: it's embarrassing that the 50 year old HSTs in terms of passenger environment often compare favourably with current trains.

Also me: ages ago, someone advised me that if driving a car, involved in an accident, and have a choice that doesn't involve maiming someone else, make it a priority not to hit a tree as they have brutal resilience to impact and will take whatever they can from any amount of the impactor's crumple zone.

The train driver, of course, does not have that choice: society needs to risk assess and maintain trees of a size that can fall and obstruct railways - which is complicated as this will extend to 'Lineside but not on railway property' - how that works I don't know.

Mark

Firstly, a very lucky escape (and thank goodness) for the driver and everyone on that train.

No matter how robustly a train is built, if an obstruction substantial enough is put in its way (or the railway line removed) and it's run into fast enough, there is going to be a problem.  It's Network Rail's primary responsibility to ensure that the line is kept clear, and where there is doubt for them to use systems of regulation (they are the signalling authority too) to prevent trains running or to have them stop short of obstructions.   Others have pointed out that this is no easy task, made harder by climate change, harder again by maintenance backlogs, harder again by a lack of funding to do the job, and harder again by pressure from operators and the public to continue to provide open routes even in the direst of conditions.

If a line that was 100% safe was provided by Network Rail, there would be no need for trains to be collision proof.  Of course, 100% will never be achieved and there are other aspects outside Network Rail's direct control - neighbouring land owners (at Lavington the tree that toppled stood off rail property), level crossing users, other trains passing signals at danger, bits falling off trains, and sadly people on the track where they should not be.  And so because of reasons such as those, trains need to be robust.

Why was the HST apparently considered safe (enough to use) in the past, but that is called into question these days?    Is it because we had nothing safer in the past?  Is it because the operating environment provided is now less safe?  Is it because our call for safety is to a higher standard?  Is it because we value life more highly? Is it because those with an interest in getting money spent on new trains call into question the safety of those they wish to replace?

Edit - just correcting a couple of my typos

In terms of passenger doors, appreciation of risk has moved on: hence central door locking.

Regarding the HST cabs, did someone comment that when introduced, driver trainers would advise, whether informally or not I don't know, words to the effect: 'In the event of an impending impact with an obstruction, this isn't a good place to be: both of you leave the cab'.

Mark

Yes, informal advice was to leg it as far as you could into the clean air compartment behind the cab area!

Meanwhile, on the roads, 7 photos from the A82 through the Great Glen. The tree in photo number 6 might be a particularly unpleasant prospect for any vehicle road or rail. (Recollections of any similarly wild night on the line to Fort Augustus will probably be outside of human memory as that route closed amost 80 years ago...)

Mark

https://twitter.com/NWTrunkRoads/status/1740335560403849438

I believe it was as a result of the crash in Aberdeenshire a couple of years ago where the unexpectedly poor performance of the HST stock made it clear that their time was up, despite the investment that had been made in refurbishing them into 2+5 sets for Scotrail and GWR.

I'm no expert but I suspect that corrosion and the deterioration of materials like plastics and fibreglass cabs take their toll over time and of course modern stock is designed, built and maintained to far higher technical standards thanks to computer-aided crash simulation, better materials and construction techniques etc.      

"How safe is safe enough" is an interesting question. Whilst the railway is generally very safe per mile traveled, the UK has some of the oldest and most intensively used mixed railway in the world. When things go wrong the consequences can be awful. Whilst I'd love to see an Italian-style programme of vintage rail vehicles being restored and run on the mainline in the UK, the thought of traveling in a Mk1 or older fills me with horror.

Was the tree on Network Rail land?

Network Rail's neighbours or others of course never complain when Network Rail carried out a de-veg (cut down trees)

I don't know.  I chose my words carefully - note my second paragraph referring to the Lavington accident a decade back where I'm pretty sure it was NOT on Network Rail.


Thank you.  To give a comparative, is there any advice for drivers being trained on IETs?   Thank goodness I don't think we have yet had such a major tree hit, have we?  Hope we never do but the law of averages suggests that with so many of them running around ...

No advice that I am aware of as such.

IET’s have a quite long thin corridor to the door that leads into the saloon or kitchen (depending which way round it is).  That would offer better in cab protection than a HST, and if you had time to get through that door then much better protection. 

That is in addition to the protection afforded by a stronger front end.

Despite all the comments, that isn't true; the HST's crash performance was generally good. The final report on the Carmont accident said this about the damage to the power car:

I think people had noticed, in that report, a lot of analysis and discussion of the changes in standards with some said to have the potential to have made the outcome worse. But only a few were found to be relevant, and as many other issues were common with newer trains. Most of these were secondary ones, such as the sharp corners on the folding tables (now not permitted), or the splintering of windows into long sharp shards when the bodyshell is twisted (an issue with current standards).

The only important factors were those that would have held the train close to the track and all the vehicles in line. That means bogie retention and anti-climb features between vehicles, introduced since the HSTs were designed. It also covers the rather surprising lack of guide rails at this bridge on a curve - some have been installed since.

This latest collision with a tree is more likely to provide relevant evidence about the safety of HST cabs than Carmont. You would need to compare it with newer trains hitting similar trees at similar speeds. Even then, quantifying such things is inevitably inexact, and incidents are quite rare, so the results, viewed objectively, might not support any useful conclusion.

Slam door trains were safe, but far from idiot proof. I suspect they were not deemed unsafe, in spite of incidents, simply to hide the fact that the replacements had been postponed.

A long but informative thread on Twitter about the HSTs and the cab.

It gives a more balanced account of what needs to be done but looks at the timescale needed for this.

https://x.com/reasonablescot1/status/1740415486842868215?s=61&t=VlafMC5gF9tidw36b1Y8JQ

Judging by the posts on Twitter it has stirred up a hornets nest!

Trying to think whether any of my contemporaries as children or teenagers were instructed how to use slam doors and what to avoid, either by parents or by railway staff. Apart from the safety advertisements, sort of not... they were just a feature of life that had always been present.

One issue was the number of doors on London suburban trains meaning that no one was very far from one - something that had both and up and a down side. An inappropriate exit was close at hand, but perhaps if a fellow passenger needed to intervene they, also, were close at hand.

But people tend not to intervene: a tale told to me of a somewhat inebriated passenger on a train off the North London Line that, in the winter dark, drew to a halt close to Richmond station, at a time when station lighting was not as it is now.

He got to his feet, opened the carriage door and stepped into the dark, disappearing onto the trackbed. A pause, before his head and then the rest of him reappeared as he clambered back in, closing the door, profusely apologetic to his fellow passengers, he then crossed the carriage and apparently before anyone else moved, thinking he'd stepped out on the wrong side for the platform, opened *that* door and once again stepped into thin air.

Mark

One wonders why the Scottish Government haven't looked to procure replacements earlier?

A simple matter of priorities. There's no money left after the independence spending and court costs for arguments with the UK government.

A former work colleague of mine, sadly now a late friend, had rather poor eyesight despite driving to work more often than not because of the then infrequent rail service. When not using the car, he came in on the train from Yatton to Bedminster. In those days, the trains were slam door. On the way home, it seems that everyone except him heard the announcement that because of engineering work on the down line, the train would stop on the opposite side at Yatton. While the others disembarked safely, my friend opened the door and suffered what physicists term a rapid decrease in potential energy. He wasn't badly hurt, and made his way to the rear of the train, to a point where he could get back onto the platform. I am told he made quite an entrance to the Firebox, covered in grease, cut by brambles, and trailing toilet paper from a shoe.

Of course. They prioritised trans above trains.

That's not quite correct, the Scottish Government are spending quite a lot of money on electrification, they confirmed £140M spend in Sept 2023.  The class 253/4 were only a stop gap until electric / bimode are available

I was brought up on 4EPB slammers - don't recall ever being taught - just picked up from parents.

Times HAVE changed - I recall being on platform 4 in Swindon when there were only a handful of HSTs (slam door) still running and watching a couple of young ladies panicking as the other doors to let people on had been opened but theirs hadn't.  Had to show them how to use a handle  :D

And all commuter trains arriving at Waterloo in the high peak were empty by the time the train came to its final standstill.

It's alleged that a member of the public 'phoned Network rail about this fallen tree 10 minutes before the collision...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/31/train-scotland-storm-gerrit-driver-not-warned-hit-tree-line/
(might be behind a paywall)

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/train-driver-who-cheated-death-in-storm-gerrit-was-not-warned-of-tree-on-line/ar-AA1mhhBo?ocid=msedgntp&pc=ASTS&cvid=f9dc373d90f34bc5ae129e302783b0c5&ei=12

Saw this being discussed on the RailUK forum too - going to be a busy New Year for the RAIB it seems!

And other London Terminii - I & many others used to do this back in the 70s. First through the ticket barrier before the train came to a standstill. It was nothing unusual back then & very few, if any, failures to remain upright on stepping onto the platform.

Surely 10 minutes is not long enough to be passed along a long chain of command.

Should the RAIB pick this up - they haven't yet - this I'm sure will be featured. If the rumour is indeed true.