Re: Granville Accident 1977

[Bob <gioia@fastlink.com.au>]

David Johnson wrote:

> I have been asked to do another posting on behalf of Vaughan Williamson.  It
> follows:
>
> Having dealt with the incongruity of the lack of criminal prosecution
> over the Granville accident, could I just tie up several loose ends.
>
> Without recalling who said what in the various posts, I would not
> have been surprised if blame could have gone higher than P.R Shirley.
> It is just that the historical evidence from Gunn, Fraser and
> contemporary accounts point us at Shirley. When there was a comment
> about blame never going past the crews etc in most events, we must
> ask about the level of justice that applies. More anon. The safety of
> timber bodied coaching stock has come up. Can I suggest that safety
> in railways is far more dependent upon the design and upkeep of the
> overall infrastructure viz signalling and trackwork etc rather than
> the design of carriages. Rolling stock is not built like a
> modern car where samples are crash tested for occupant safety! I don't
> want to press the point, but our preservation societies rely
> heavily on timber bodied (and framed) carriages. It would be a great
> pity if the view was taken that the stock was intrinsically unsafe
> and should be banned. One could only guess about what the upshot of
> that view would be. Just think of the less than modern crash standards
> of vintage cars. Should they be off the road? And what of vintage
> aircraft, including the wood, wire and fabric copies?
> Personally, I don't have any difficulties in riding in timber bodied
> carriages, but I can appreciate that the experience of seeing problems
> could well influence others' opinions on the matter.
>
> Could I address three further issues over the Granville accident namely
> 1. Social issues, 2. political issues and 3. legality; before conclud-
> ing. Again, I have not seen any very similar comment on these things.
>
> 1. I mentioned in my previous post how I felt that the accident was
> a low point in Australian social history. Whilst there was a very
> courageous rescue and recovery effort, and note that on the day
> apparently in the order of thousands came forward to donate blood,
> there was a very ugly side as well. Whilst some people may have "just
> had to be there", and some may have been awaiting anxious news on
> relatives, there was a multitude of others who had no business in
> the matter, but came for a good look anyway. In what amounted
> to hundreds, there was a crowd of spectators at the accident scene.
> I think it was tragic that this occurred. Part of the police duties
> on the day, consuming valuable resources, was crowd control. I seem
> to remember the well-known journalist Mike Willesee actually
> interviewed at least two of the spectator crowd with his typical
> cutting remarks, and asking what they were doing there. It was an
> excellent question, and neither respondent had a very good case to
> answer. How sad that an event of great trauma was seen as being a
> good morning's or afternoon's entertainment. What an ugly side of
> Australian social history...
>
> Whilst the engine crew were justly cleared of any wrong-doing, some
> months later the driver was subjected to harrassment in the form of
> a bomb hoax on the passenger train he was driving. I seem to remember
> that the train (ex Moss Vale) had to be emptied of passengers at
> Strathfield so that
> police, and the bomb-squad could investigate. Was this a mere coincid-
> encesome, or some form of sick joke by someone with access to crew
> rosters? Give a bloke who had been through a lot a bit more... When
> the're down, kick 'em......
>
> Of course previous posts mentioned how the train crew suffered rocks
> through windows, death threats, crank phone calls etc.
>
> I don't know now who it was in aus.rail who was going to dredge up the
> engine crew names for the record, and I am not now going to witchhunt
> who it was, but can they see why there was so much condemnation of
> that proposal by various contributors to the newsgroup? With a social
> history outlined above, it would be clear that the publication of
> the crew names and whatever else would only serve to wound further
> and not heal what was an extreme trauma to many involved and nearby.
>
> Finally on this issue of social history, what of the end of 1977 when
> the "Sunday Telegraph" advertised how its New Year's edition was going
> to contain the 1978 predictions of the clairvoyant who "predicted"
> the Granville accident! I remember that as a TV ad and thought how
> low can you go... But against this, could I also remark that the "Women's
> Weekly" magazine had a very good coverage of the "human side" of
> the tragedy immediately following the event.
>
> 2. Unfortunately, politics does go hand-in-hand with the history of
> the Granville accident. Public transport had been a hot issue in the
> May 1976 NSW state election. This was only about six months after the
> dramatic sacking of the Federal Labor government under Whitlam by the
> Governor-General, Sir John Kerr. It is significant here because of
> the statements and leanings of the media, and in particular, the
> newspapers. The Sydney morning Herald utterly condemned the Whitlam
> government, and I remember one of its editorials at the time of the
> state election. It remarked something along the lines that the election
> of Wran would see New South Wales slide back into socialism, from which
> the nation had reacted against recently. Its conservative leanings
> were plain. The leader of the Liberal/Country party coalition was
> Sir Eric Willis, both before the elction as Premier, and after, as
> leader of the opposition. If public transport was an election issue,
> whose side was on the backfoot??
>
> But now turn to the events of the
> 18th Jan, 1977 and Sir Eric is interviewed and remarks something of the
> order "Mr Wran has a lot of explaining to do, for in the first six
> months of his Government,..." and went on to compare the number of
> deaths in railway accidents under Wran and under the previous
> government (his and his predecessors). It was a cutting remark which
> did immense damage. Remember how the Herald backed him a little over
> six months before? Now the Herald condemned Sir Eric, in its editorial
> where it commented upon the inappropriatness of such a remark upon
> a "city in mourning" (or similar words). Sir Eric tried to retract
> his comment the next day, claiming that it was said "in a rage". The
> video evidence did not seem to support his excuse.
>
> Probably, it was the greatest bungle a politician had ever made. The
> comments cut, and the apology did not seem hearty. I suppose that the
> ongoing bungle was that Sir Eric did not promptly resign his
> position as leader of the opposition, and further, that the Liberal/
> Country party did not dump him anyway. (This occurred about six months
> later.) At this point of time, I cannot help but think that this was
> the catapult that launched Wran into a political longetivity that he
> would otherwise never have achieved. The electorate had great difficulty
> in forgiving (if they ever did) Sir Eric Willis.
>
> We should note that Sir Eric Willis was not dumb. He was an Army
> intelligence officer in WW2. A closer examination of his remarks
> could perhaps reveal that the seeds of a most emminent remark were
> present though. Suppose he said "someone" rather than "Mr Wran",
> and suppose he had not referenced time and government in his remarks.
> Suppose he said "Someone has a lot of explaining to do." Would that
> not have been such a valuable contribution to the effect that it
> points at criminal prosecution -- that incongruously neglected
> feature mentioned before! Tragically, Sir Eric said what he said how
> he said it. The comments were deeply hurtful to many. It was a very
> low point in Australian politics. Of course there is far, far more
> than what I have said, and on both sides of politics, but the above
> remarks are, to me, salient.
>
> 3. The failure of criminal prosecution has been mentioned. We have
> already discussed how Philip Raymond Shirley left a history which
> points at culpability. Doubtless, if he would have been charged
> though, he would not have gone down without a fight. He would
> have taken others with him. How potentially embarrassing eh? So why
> was there a failure to launch criminal proceedings. Was there a
> good legal ground under which this could not be done? Or could we
> enter that unhealthy, rumour-driven world of speculation?
>
> I am of the apprehension that many who were involved (as well as others
> besides) probably have had reactions to the trauma. Note how packed
> St Marks Anglican Church at Granville was at the 20th anniversary
> memorial service a bit over 12 months ago (I saw it on the news, as I
> did the event itself). Without prosecution for essentially what was
> criminal behaviour, the deliberate neglect of the railway system, I
> believe has in measure, contributed to the trauma. It has far less
> meaning than if we were able to identify the person, or persons respon-
> sible.
>
> Can we ask why there was no prosecution. Were the members of the
> investigating team and the legal team themselves so badly shaken that
> they simply forgot to go to the basic issue of responsibility? Or
> were there interests which had to be observed and preserved (don't
> worry about who suffers of course)? Not a healthy line to take, but,
> it is a possible scenario! Maybe criminal prosecution simply costs
> more in fees and compensation. Who knows??
> I seem to remember that whilst some of the injured and relatives of
> the deceased received substantial compensation, there were some
> who didn't.
>
> I have to remark that here was a low point in Australian legal
> history.
>
> So thus are some further thoughts. To conclude, just some remarks
> on 4620. Ian Strawbridge has commented upon its poor mechanical
> condition, though I note Mick Morahan's comment in the book
> "Early Diesels and Electrics of the NSWGR" wherein he says gen-
> erally "the 46 was a versatile and reliable locomotive". The
> Co+Co arrangement where a beam connects the bogies through which
> the tractive forces are imparted should not be a problem -- except
> when unmaintained. 4620's crowning glory was as assistant loco-
> motive to the famous Western Endeavour tour, ie 3801 to Perth in
> September 1970, assisted by 3813 to Pt Augusta. Now, film footage
> out of the rear cab of 4620 is present in the relevent segment
> of the video "3801 A Legend in Steam". Have a look and critically
> note the ride quality by comparing the relative roll of 3801. It
> is not much! Now, I might comment that about 10 days before the
> accident at Granville, I rode behind 4620 on the Mudgee mail late
> one Friday night. The train was something of the order of loco,
> several louvre vans, single FS car, mail and brake vans. (I am
> only recalling from memory, and could be incorrect about the
> train, but I was on a train to Mt Victoria at the time!) After
> Katoomba the train was barrelling along at about 90-100 kph and
> the ride in the FS was ROUGH! I went to the door and looked along
> the train and remember that the roll of the vans was great, but
> the loco's roll was almost violent. The roll was sillouetted in
> the reflection of loco headlight on the landscape. If it was
> 4620, which I am fairly certain was up front, it would testify
> to the poor condition it was in (nevermind the track it was
> riding on).
>
> I hope that the above comments are seen as a useful contribution
> to the history of the Granville accident. Any distress to anyone
> is sincerly regretted, but we should try to be honest about an
> event that etched itself so indelibally in history. 12 months or
> so ago, I understand Foxtel were looking at producing a TV
> miniseries. Whether they went ahead or not, I don't know.
>
> My observations essentially conclude that the Granville train
> accident was the product of a volatile cocktail of ignorance,
> arrogance and ineptitude; a cocktail of which I wonder whether
> any real lessons were learnt.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vaughan Williamson
> Teacher of Electrical Engineering, Wollongong TAFE
>
> e-mail: vaughan.williamson@tafensw.edu.au

  No matter how you look at it, worn flanges and worn track are a combination
for disaster on any railway.
Bob