Re: English Railway Accident

[tom.clifton@REMOVEvirgin.net (Tom C)]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 12:51:28 +1000, "Roy Wilke"
<roywilke@notabitlikeanisp.net.au> wrote:

>
>"Tom C" <tom.clifton@REMOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message
>3a9fd634.628793@news.ntlworld.com">news:3a9fd634.628793@news.ntlworld.com...
>> The XPT is based on the diesel InterCity 125 (HST) which used Mark lll
>> (not l or lV) coaches. Mark l was BR's standard post-nationalization
>> coach dating from the 50s. Then came Marks ll and onwards featuring
>> monocoque construction as opposed the the Mkl's separate underframe
>> and body.
>>
>> The passenger train at Selby was a more modern electric 225 (built for
>> 225 km/h). GNER does run some HSTs but this wasn't one of them.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tom C
>> W Sussex, UK
>
>Thanks. Now for the rather horrible question: and that is how would a MkIII
>coach stand up to a sudden deceleration and dramatic derailment? In short,
>how safe are they?
>
>Roy Wilke
>
Pretty well. In previous accidents the strength of MkIIIs (and MkIIs)
has been cited as one of the reasons casualties were not far worse.
MkIs and similiarly-constructed vehicles would have separated from
their underframes and sliced through each other.

It's also worth noting that most British passenger stock uses Buckeye
or bar couplers which are much more rigid than the screw couplings
still used on most continental hauled stock.

Tom C
W Sussex, UK