Flying Scotsman

I read elsewhere that the two people who were injured were Belmond staff. Like you say, if they'd been kitchen staff it could've been very nasty, especially the way everything has collapsed. Normal Mk1 kitchens are pretty solid internally, not made up of lightweight units that fall over with a rough shunt.

 

I saw the Royal Scotsman coaches when they were originally being rebuilt at Dairycoates and would not have set foot in them if I'd been paid! The interiors were put together by a firm of shopfitters and were flimsy in the extreme. I believe they subsequently underwent some rectification, but the damage to the Gresley kitchen car ((which I think this observation car may have replaced) after it was damaged in an incident at Millerhill showed that some of the fundamental issues had not been addressed by that time - and from what I can tell they don't seem to have been in the balcony car.

 

Digressing slightly, the one time I've been in an incident where rail staff were injured was an overspeed. It was a Hertfordshire Railtours 125 Special, booked via Corby, and the driver took the pointwork at Kettering really rather fast.

The ambulance was waiting at Melton Mowbray for the chef, who got a grill of hot mushrooms all over him.

The risks aren't always the obvious ones.

 

What I think we can agree on is that the outcome of the collision clearly shows that on train kitchen/catering stores need to be checked for there 'crashworthiness' for want of a better term.

 

Mot sure I agree with that. There have been, what, two crockery smashing occurences in how many years? How much of a compromise to operational (of the kitchen) efficiency would there be if all the storage had to be capable of surviving such an event? I reckon such storage would be a bitch to work with, and, counter intuitivel, probably make for a lot more dropped items in one and twos over the years just because of all the extra awkwardness.

 

It works on kitchen cars that cater for dozens of covers, so surely it's not impossible to design something that's sturdy enough for the needs of 28 passengers?

I can fully understand something happening like @35B mentioned, or a few bottles of wine falling over. But the whole kitchen to collapse like a pack of cards is worrying. Crockery, pots and pans etc. are going to move about. When the storage units themselves are in a heap, that's a worry.

 

If anyone has watched the TV series following Saphos on their trips, the kitchen car on there looks fabulous and very good to work in, whilst also looking far more study than the photos from Royal Scotsman would suggest.
Heavy shunts, wobbly track and sharp braking are not uncommon occurrences, if not quite as extreme as the Strathspey incident. It would be reasonable to mitigate for such occurrences I would suggest, if only to protect your crockery as well as your staff!

 

I wonder what the LMS did in July 1937 after 6220 Coronation and its special train went through the reverse curves south of Crewe station at over 50 mph. The speed restriction was 20 mph. Apparently, hardly any crockery was left in one piece.

 

I gather the rail chairs were pretty much like that, as well.

 

Assume everything is ok as ticket arrived by email for Tuesdays trip to Aberdeen with Flying Scotsman. Be interesting to see how it performs.

 

Just seen this article, which includes the balcony footage …..

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/her...VHSVPF5IOniqZvXUBWDKADNYpAJpokHoA#5ls0w9k1jgl

 

That video certainly was alarming, but other than that its best to not come to conclusions until the report and its findings are made public, but it does ask several very important questions though,

 

What struck me in the video is that whilst there is clearly some alarm at the speed the loco is approaching and that it appears not to braking the person filming simply stood there are carried on filming rather than try and take any evasive action. It is not the only occasion I have come across where it appears that somebody filming on a phone is of the opinion that it is more important to carry on filming than try and get themselves out of harms way. Either that or as they are watching through a screen they forget what is unfolding is real and they are part of it so act as if they are simply watching something being played on the screen.

 

I saw that video, and the engine appears to be approaching to fast, If the buffer extensions were out of the coach, so that would indicate the buckeye wasn't being used so i can't think of any reason for that speed, unless the driver misjudged the position of the coaches, thinking they were further along the platform, but i'm sure , that the report into the incident will hopefully give a clear explanation as to what happened both on the footplate, and at platform level.

 

Not sure why you'd be approaching any faster to couple up a buckeye, if you need to approach it with that much momentum I think your buckeye needs a service!

 

You'll also struggle at any speed to couple to a vehicle that doesn't have a buckeye...

 

Cripes, that collision did a lot of damage to the Mark 1 - it's swiped away most of the end structure ...

Tom

 

I think the lack of end structure is down to corrosion. Mark 1’s are notorious for it. Simply fell off in the impact. Never realised the body framework was like that, though.

 

The one at the GCR was even worse, especially after it crashed into the local branch of B&Q.

 

How much strength on a MK1 is derived from the end pillars? would the removal in such a conversion leave a weak point in the crash worthiness of the vehicle? I mentioned buckeye, because i thought the vehicle would have been so fitted, In answer to Alex's post, i can remember a situation on NR, at Woking, back when we had slam door stock, in NSE days, and the driver was attaching another unit to the rear, and the buckeye wouldn't lock, in the end the shunter had to push the unit in front to get it to lock, it shunted it forward by a few feet,