Old report / mainline safety concerns. Have they been addressed?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Here's an interesting quote on the report into the 1999 collision between a class 142 unit and an express passenger train at Winsford.

The railway inspectors say lightweight rail-bus trains do not meet current safety standards and they are concerned that some of them are now being used on the same tracks as conventional heavyweight inter-city and freight trains.

See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/383785.stm

Have any alterations been made to these units in the 8 years since that collision so that they now meet mainline safety standards?

[vacman]

I think any unit would have been demolished if hit at high speed by a loco! remember the remains of the 165 in the Paddington rail crash after the HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) hit it??

[simonw]

Hi

If you mean has the glass been replaced with laminated glass. I think the answer is no, shame on you FGW^▸ (First Great Western) if not. Spending ^200M on refurbishing the rolling stock and not looking at the type of glass used.

On the plus side, the removal of the glass luggage rack/separator in the middle of the carriage and the introduction of the tall seats will improve safety.

I find it hard to imagine how anyone can imagine that a 1950's carriage design can be as safe as a modern design with the use of roll bars for safety, compression zones to absorb energy. If Virgin had not replaced their HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) fleet with the Pendelino, what would have happened in Cumbria?

It's a scandal that FGW are running some of the oldest, least safe, rolling stock in the country on some of the oldest and badly maintained track and signals in the country.

[devon_metro]

Despite the middle partition of the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) reducing the effects of a fireball in coach H in the Labdroke Grove crash.