37408 in trouble!

jpantera · Post by **jpantera** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:27 pm

As reported on wnnx.com (but not much info yet) 37408 has had a smash at Newport which may be the end of it, 37427 is coming south possibly to cover its duties.

117305 · Post by **117305** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 11:47 pm

oh dear another one gone and its my faverite tracter as well

phat2003uk · Post by **phat2003uk** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:23 am

Why can't a bloody shed collide with a freight

37427 will make a change in South Wales.

Christopher125 · Post by **Christopher125** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:48 am

phat2003uk wrote:Why can't a bloody shed collide with a freight
37427 will make a change in South Wales.

Oh, most definately - the fact that a 66 has no nose threfore the driver is at more danger is irrevalent when talking about heritage traction isn't it

Chris

allypally · Post by **allypally** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:52 am

It's also built more crashworthily than a 37, so unless it is something like unto the East Coast accident involving 66521, the driver should still be OK.

Christopher125 · Post by **Christopher125** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 9:02 am

A 66 is more vulnerable from the front than a 37 - the whole front end of the 66 is designated as a crumple zone - the driver has to get in behind the bulkhead. The point is that saying a 66 should have a crash is incredibly stupid - was phat happy about what happened at Heck? Sometimes modern traction enthusiasts are just unbelievable

Chris

allypally · Post by **allypally** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 9:05 am

True, true. Point there is taken.

staticxfreak · Post by **staticxfreak** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 12:53 am

Christopher125 wrote:A 66 is more vulnerable from the front than a 37 - the whole front end of the 66 is designated as a crumple zone - the driver has to get in behind the bulkhead. The point is that saying a 66 should have a crash is incredibly stupid - was phat happy about what happened at Heck? Sometimes modern traction enthusiasts are just unbelievable

Chris

Hows about... a driverless runaway shed hitting the back of a loaded bogie oil tank and bursting into flames... that alright?

ianmacmillan · Post by **ianmacmillan** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:19 am

Hows about... growing up!

allypally · Post by **allypally** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 7:41 am

No, it isnt better. It could weld itself to the track, not to mention causing a huge explosion that injure plenty of people!

phat2003uk · Post by **phat2003uk** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 7:47 am

Oh god..............

trainlover123 · Post by **trainlover123** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:07 am

Aw,

I like them, 37's had a distinct growl to them.

BUT, I would never say for any train to crash, my Dad would go on that train whenever he went to London, just lucky he wasn't goin the day of Great heck...

Christopher125 · Post by **Christopher125** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:09 am

staticxfreak wrote:
Christopher125 wrote:A 66 is more vulnerable from the front than a 37 - the whole front end of the 66 is designated as a crumple zone - the driver has to get in behind the bulkhead. The point is that saying a 66 should have a crash is incredibly stupid - was phat happy about what happened at Heck? Sometimes modern traction enthusiasts are just unbelievable

Chris
Hows about... a driverless runaway shed hitting the back of a loaded bogie oil tank and bursting into flames... that alright?

hows about..... learning there's more to life than hating a piece of metal, which in a few years time diesel enthusiasts will like anyway because most other types will have been consigned to the scrapheap - in fact this childish response by many a 'crank' is because they can't actually find any proper faults in the loco so all they can do is descend into childish statements like that one.

If I said 'I don't like the new A380', it wouldn't be alright for me to say it ought to crash - it may lead to loss of life. plus, the 66 is what is keeping railfreight going - if duffs were being used on all the trains companies like EWS wouldn't be getting any customers because their trains would be failing every 5 minutes; good for diesel enthusiasts, bads for everyone else.

Time for people around here to grow up methinks....

Chris

staticxfreak · Post by **staticxfreak** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 10:46 am

This message has been edited by a Moderator

Nobody can take a joke on this board... which is was... hence me sticking my tongue out at the end of the post.

[Moderator Comment: allypally - Edited for language. Maybe if the joke was better it would find a better reception.]

This message has been edited by a Moderator

jdjonny · Post by **jdjonny** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:09 am

I'm guessing, and I don't know the extent of the damage as theres no pics circulating yet, that 408 will be pulled. Not financially viable for EWS to carry out structure repairs if it's gonna be withdrawn in 3-4 months anyway... unless, of course, it's purely cosmetic damage - in which case there's a chance of a comeback... I suppose.

Lets hope they dig one out of the stored pool to give some variety on the tractor front... 402 please?

Something not EWS livery would be appreciated (!)

Thank god it wasn't a duff/shed/gronk or the driver might have come away with some bad injuries. 37 noses are purely framework with panels that folds in on itself in the event of a collision (see nats fot of 2 cornish tractors mashed up after a numpty incident - http://southwestrailphots.fotopic.net/p11800727.html ). A flat fronted loco has no protection - plus you sit lower in a 66. When you're in a 37 cab and the loco is next to/behind a 66, you see right over the roof, which is odd.

Jon