On 02/10/2023 22:06, Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 21:08:16 +0100, ColinR
> <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 02/10/2023 20:32, Scott wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 13:31:32 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 15:31:28 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 22:22:44 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BBC News
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Two injured after Flying Scotsman crash at station
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Two people have been taken to hospital after a collision involving the
>>>>>>>> Flying Scotsman locomotive and the Royal Scotsman carriages at a station
>>>>>>>> in the Highlands.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can I take it the locomotive was coupling to the carriages, passengers
>>>>>>> were on-board the carriages and the driver misjudged the speed of the
>>>>>>> manoevre?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it looks like it:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://x.com/alastairdalton/status/1708260835594846209?s=61&t=hpa_q__1jHKBKNmX
>>>>>> nN44ZQ
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats a hell of a misjudgement. Did he fall asleep?
>>>>
>>>> As it happened on a preserved line, I wonder if it was a driver without
>>>> much experience of powerful, high speed main line locos?
>>>
>>> I am wondering: should all passengers have been detrained before such
>>> a manoevre could take place?
>>
>> Not done on mainline so why change the rules??
>
> Because volunteer drivers may be less experienced than mainline
> drivers?

Was it a volunteer driver?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:39:01 -0000 (UTC)
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:55:39 +0100
>> Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
>>> On 02/10/2023 16:18, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 12:58:46 +0100
>>>> JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> One of carriages being taken away by road.
>>>>>
>>>>> Investigators reviewing Flying Scotsman collision
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66982388
>>>>
>>>> "Police Scotland said it had concluded its inquiries, and had found there
>was
>>>
>>>> no criminality involved."
>>>>
>>>> Why would they assume there might have been in the first place?
>>>
>>> Because they're more used to dealing with road collisions, where one of
>>> their first thoughts is whether they can do the driver(s) for some
>>> offence or other. In this case, they quickly decided that they couldn't.
>>
>> Don't get me started on how plod behaves with RTAs. They can't be arsed to
>> stop shoplifters or burglers but they have enough manpower to close a road
>> for half a day, fuck over god knows how many 100s or 1000s of people who are
>> stuck in the jams resulting from that and for what? So they can do someone
>> for some minor driving offence.
>>
>> On the continent you'd essentially need a bomb to go off for a major road to
>> be closed, not some stupid shunt.
>>
>>
>
>Wouldn’t the driver being under the influence constitute criminality?
>Surely that has to be ruled out?

They don't need to close a motorway to breathalyse someone.

On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 07:51:14 +0100, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 02/10/2023 22:06, Scott wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 21:08:16 +0100, ColinR
>> <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/10/2023 20:32, Scott wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 13:31:32 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 15:31:28 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 22:22:44 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BBC News
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Two injured after Flying Scotsman crash at station
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Two people have been taken to hospital after a collision involving the
>>>>>>>>> Flying Scotsman locomotive and the Royal Scotsman carriages at a station
>>>>>>>>> in the Highlands.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can I take it the locomotive was coupling to the carriages, passengers
>>>>>>>> were on-board the carriages and the driver misjudged the speed of the
>>>>>>>> manoevre?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it looks like it:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://x.com/alastairdalton/status/1708260835594846209?s=61&t=hpa_q__1jHKBKNmX
>>>>>>> nN44ZQ
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thats a hell of a misjudgement. Did he fall asleep?
>>>>>
>>>>> As it happened on a preserved line, I wonder if it was a driver without
>>>>> much experience of powerful, high speed main line locos?
>>>>
>>>> I am wondering: should all passengers have been detrained before such
>>>> a manoevre could take place?
>>>
>>> Not done on mainline so why change the rules??
>>
>> Because volunteer drivers may be less experienced than mainline
>> drivers?
>
>Was it a volunteer driver?

I don't know but I would suggest there would need to be a consistent
rule for heritage lines as I don't think the assessment could be based
on who the driver was for the day.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:39:01 -0000 (UTC)
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:55:39 +0100
>>> Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
>>>> On 02/10/2023 16:18, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 12:58:46 +0100
>>>>> JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> One of carriages being taken away by road.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Investigators reviewing Flying Scotsman collision
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66982388
>>>>>
>>>>> "Police Scotland said it had concluded its inquiries, and had found there
>> was
>>>>
>>>>> no criminality involved."
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would they assume there might have been in the first place?
>>>>
>>>> Because they're more used to dealing with road collisions, where one of
>>>> their first thoughts is whether they can do the driver(s) for some
>>>> offence or other. In this case, they quickly decided that they couldn't.
>>>
>>> Don't get me started on how plod behaves with RTAs. They can't be arsed to
>>> stop shoplifters or burglers but they have enough manpower to close a road
>>> for half a day, fuck over god knows how many 100s or 1000s of people who are
>>> stuck in the jams resulting from that and for what? So they can do someone
>>> for some minor driving offence.
>>>
>>> On the continent you'd essentially need a bomb to go off for a major road to
>>> be closed, not some stupid shunt.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn’t the driver being under the influence constitute criminality?
>> Surely that has to be ruled out?
>
> They don't need to close a motorway to breathalyse someone.

The powers that be should insist that there be 3 lanes plus a hard shoulder
on all heritage lines. In each direction.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 03/10/2023 09:32, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 07:51:14 +0100, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 02/10/2023 22:06, Scott wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 21:08:16 +0100, ColinR
>>> <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 02/10/2023 20:32, Scott wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 13:31:32 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 15:31:28 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 22:22:44 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> BBC News
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Two injured after Flying Scotsman crash at station
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Two people have been taken to hospital after a collision involving the
>>>>>>>>>> Flying Scotsman locomotive and the Royal Scotsman carriages at a station
>>>>>>>>>> in the Highlands.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can I take it the locomotive was coupling to the carriages, passengers
>>>>>>>>> were on-board the carriages and the driver misjudged the speed of the
>>>>>>>>> manoevre?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, it looks like it:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://x.com/alastairdalton/status/1708260835594846209?s=61&t=hpa_q__1jHKBKNmX
>>>>>>>> nN44ZQ
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thats a hell of a misjudgement. Did he fall asleep?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As it happened on a preserved line, I wonder if it was a driver without
>>>>>> much experience of powerful, high speed main line locos?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am wondering: should all passengers have been detrained before such
>>>>> a manoevre could take place?
>>>>
>>>> Not done on mainline so why change the rules??
>>>
>>> Because volunteer drivers may be less experienced than mainline
>>> drivers?
>>
>> Was it a volunteer driver?
>
> I don't know but I would suggest there would need to be a consistent
> rule for heritage lines as I don't think the assessment could be based
> on who the driver was for the day.

Actually, if there was consistency with main line operation, the driver
should have brought the loco to a stand just short of the train and then
gently backed down on to it. I'm wondering if he missed his braking
point, forgetting he hadn't got a train to assist with the braking. I
did that at Didcot once, was driving Burton Agnes Hall on 8 road,
checked my braking point only I was used to it being the point with
three carriages on. As a light engine we were still moving a bit fast.
Had to make a very full application much to the consternation of the
supervising driver. Fortunately that ended well.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 03/10/2023 09:52, Sam Wilson wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:39:01 -0000 (UTC)
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 16:55:39 +0100
>>>> Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 02/10/2023 16:18, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 12:58:46 +0100
>>>>>> JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> One of carriages being taken away by road.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Investigators reviewing Flying Scotsman collision
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66982388
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Police Scotland said it had concluded its inquiries, and had found there
>>> was
>>>>>
>>>>>> no criminality involved."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would they assume there might have been in the first place?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because they're more used to dealing with road collisions, where one of
>>>>> their first thoughts is whether they can do the driver(s) for some
>>>>> offence or other. In this case, they quickly decided that they couldn't.
>>>>
>>>> Don't get me started on how plod behaves with RTAs. They can't be arsed to
>>>> stop shoplifters or burglers but they have enough manpower to close a road
>>>> for half a day, fuck over god knows how many 100s or 1000s of people who are
>>>> stuck in the jams resulting from that and for what? So they can do someone
>>>> for some minor driving offence.
>>>>
>>>> On the continent you'd essentially need a bomb to go off for a major road to
>>>> be closed, not some stupid shunt.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn’t the driver being under the influence constitute criminality?
>>> Surely that has to be ruled out?
>>
>> They don't need to close a motorway to breathalyse someone.
>
> The powers that be should insist that there be 3 lanes plus a hard shoulder
> on all heritage lines. In each direction.
>

Somebody would soon suggest you could use the hard shoulder as a normal
track.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

More serious that I thought.

Santa Express on hold after Flying Scotsman shunt

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66993845