Not sure if this has been posted before, but here is an interesting article about the accident at Grantham in 1906.
I have stood many times at the spot on the platform watching northbound (steam & diesel etc) trains thunder through, so it is easy to imagine the horrific events unfolding............
Does anyone know if this was ever solved? I have heard many versions of this story each with its own slightly different content.
I thought we'd had a discussion on this some time ago but I can't find it. We'll never know for sure but that Railway Magazine article that link refers to made a very convincing circumstantial case for the brakes not having been connected at Peterborough.
Yes, I thought so too, but could not find anything specific before posting.
How should we check for previous content as it would take forever to look through all the forum.....?
Can't see any lengthy discussion on here but have since found this fascinating link, an absorbing read........
As you would expect every techinical & human aspect has been recorded and of particular interest is the diagram at the end showing points of contact during the derailment.
jwealleans wrote:We'll never know for sure but that Railway Magazine article that link refers to made a very convincing circumstantial case for the brakes not having been connected at Peterborough.
There was an accident in the fifties where a passenger train did crash because of the brake not being connected. This was on 25 August 1956 on ex-LNER territory at the Filey Holiday Camp terminus station. Certainly the 1956 accident is evidence that this is a possible answer. However the crew in the 1956 accident reacted by use of the whistle once the problem was discovered and thanks to the prompt action of a signalman the scale of the subsequent crash was reduced. Both train crew survived, the fireman subsequently admitting that he had not connected the brake pipe between the tender and the train. But there was no sign of any crew reaction at Grantham and particularly no use of the whistle even though the train had been running at faster than usual speeds for some distance.
There is a web page dedicated to this accident http://www.hunmanby.com/harrycrash.html which shows the result of Gresley K3 no 61846 hitting a concrete buffer stop at 25 mph. 61846 was subsequently repaired and soldiered until withdrawal at the end of 1962.
I remember a case in the 1970s in Central Scotland where the down sleepers ran for miles with the only brake force being the leading class 25 The rear one was exhausting the brakes and the two loos were not properly coupled.
It was and is the reason to do a brake continuity test
Would that be Invergowrie, Micky? With 47208 that was withdrawn afterwards?
Very sadly, both the driver and the secondman perished on that locomotive; but reading the official report, it appears that both guards survived. There were a number of other passenger fatalities.
Last edited by strang steel on Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It could well have been John. If it's the accident that I'm thinking about I think it was caused by a semaphore stop signal that was 'hanging wrong' (not quite at danger) and the driver passing this signal (he SPAD it using modern railway terminology although the driver took the signal as being off?) and collided with the train in front!!.
I believe the accident happened on the railway that run a long a sea wall in Scotland.
Last edited by Mickey on Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Micky wrote:It could well have been John. If it's the accident that i'm thinking about i think it was caused by a semaphore stop signal that was 'hanging wrong' (not quite at danger) and a driver passing this signal (he SPAD it using modern railway terminology although the driver took the signal as being off?) and collided with the train in front!!.
I believe that accident happened on the railway that run a long a sea wall in Scotland.
