On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:11:31 +0000, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
On 20/01/2026 16:56, Recliner wrote:
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so >>> where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion >>> joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed, >>> just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of theI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled >>> a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Whenever there is a serious accident in the UK, there are always people
on here following the official line that we should not speculate on the cause.
But foreign accidents seem to be fair game for speculation!
It was only in the following conversation with the Iryo driver that they started to understand the scale of the disaster, four minutes after their first call.
Clearly in distress, the driver said: ?There?s a derailment and I?m encroaching on the adjacent track ? I need you to stop the traffic on the tracks urgently, please.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:24:41 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:16:24 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:11:31 +0000, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
On 20/01/2026 16:56, Recliner wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:I've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <J7ybR.25005$s_zc.16849@fx15.ams1>, at 22:21:29 on Mon, 19
Jan 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Oh, and one wheel of the Iryo train is missing, and not yet located. So
there remains the possibility of a wheel disintegration.
Some of the reports talk of a worn fishplate in the track. Do you get these
in cwr track? Or, only at points?
And if the track was replaced as recently as last May, would you expect
wear severe enough to cause a derailment so soon?
My GF comments "it's not unusual for recent maintenance to involve
not-doing-up-the-bolts-afterwards sufficiently". Indeed, it's common
cause of mechanical failure.
That?s certainly true, and if the accident had happened within a few weeks
of the new track being laid would point the finger at a track fault. But
eight months later? Wouldn?t you expect a fault to have been spotted by
then?
And, of course, the fault would be probably more likely in the points than
the rails.
How long did it take for the setup at Potters Bar or Grayrigg to come apart
after maintenance? The answer is that we don?t know. Both sites had had
recent inspections (allegedly[1]) but they may have been purely visual, and
it?s not clear when the last manual inspection was made of how tight the
nuts and bolts were.
[1] In the case of PB it seems that there was some doubt about whether the
previous day?s inspection was actually made, and at Grayrigg NR admitted
the previously scheduled inspection had not taken place.
I would think, based on their location, these crossovers are used
relatively infrequently, so the points probably don?t get used much. But
perhaps another train had used them earlier that day, and they hadn?t
locked properly when returned to their normal position?
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the
train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something >> >> >might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Trade union(s) calling for industrial action in order to get drivers'
protection from such accident. They said complaints had been addressed
for the given portion of track weeks ago...
That's odd, because that track is new.
Quality welding/repair yes/no? No pieces missing,
all screws or similar applied with the correct
torque?
It was installed eight months ago. Any such faults would have been found very quickly.
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so >>>> where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansionI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed, >>>> just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the >>>> train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled >>>> a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by
ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue
what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Perhaps someone (or a translation system) thought fishplate is a
generic term for joining rails. It's a weird enough word that people
might not question it as jargon.
In message <10kra2j$2cnvm$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:40:04 on Wed, 21 Jan
2026, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> remarked:
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, soI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the >>>> train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by
ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue >>what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Perhaps someone (or a translation system) thought fishplate is a
generic term for joining rails. It's a weird enough word that people
might not question it as jargon.
I've seen photos of the scene, and there's a roughly two foot length of
rail broken off, with fractures at each end.
In message <10kra2j$2cnvm$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:40:04 on Wed, 21 Jan
2026, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> remarked:
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so >>>>> where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansionI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed, >>>>> just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the >>>>> train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by
ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue
what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Perhaps someone (or a translation system) thought fishplate is a
generic term for joining rails. It's a weird enough word that people
might not question it as jargon.
I've seen photos of the scene, and there's a roughly two foot length of
rail broken off, with fractures at each end. On the opposite rail is a welded joint.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <10kra2j$2cnvm$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:40:04 on Wed, 21 Jan 2026, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> remarked:
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, soI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the >>>>> train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something >>>> might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by
ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue
what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Perhaps someone (or a translation system) thought fishplate is a
generic term for joining rails. It's a weird enough word that people
might not question it as jargon.
I've seen photos of the scene, and there's a roughly two foot length of rail broken off, with fractures at each end. On the opposite rail is a welded joint.
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity
of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <10kra2j$2cnvm$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:40:04 on Wed, 21 Jan
2026, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> remarked:
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, soI've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the >>>>>>> train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something >>>>>> might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by
ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue >>>>> what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Perhaps someone (or a translation system) thought fishplate is a
generic term for joining rails. It's a weird enough word that people
might not question it as jargon.
I've seen photos of the scene, and there's a roughly two foot length of >>> rail broken off, with fractures at each end. On the opposite rail is a
welded joint.
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of >> rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity
of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Bogie, or single wheel?
Spain suffers third serious train crash in five days as commuter service slams into crane
A third serious train crash has taken place in Spain in five days - after a commuter train hit a construction crane in the southeast of the country.
The ?crash ? in ?Cartagena in the Murcia region left several
Spanish rail operator Adif said on X that traffic on that line was interrupted ?due to "the intrusion ?into the infrastructure gauge by a
crane not belonging ?to the railway operation", without providing further ?detail.
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of >>> rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity >>> of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Bogie, or single wheel?
I think it highly unlikely that it?s the whole bogie. It?s more likely to
be a wheel, wheel debris, or an axle set.
On 22/01/2026 12:57, Recliner wrote:
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:'Section of undercarriage' in the New York Times article mentioned recently.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of
rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity >>>> of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Bogie, or single wheel?
I think it highly unlikely that it?s the whole bogie. It?s more likely to
be a wheel, wheel debris, or an axle set.
On 20/01/2026 13:47, JMB99 wrote:
Whenever there is a serious accident in the UK, there are always people
on here following the official line that we should not speculate on the
cause.
But foreign accidents seem to be fair game for speculation!
109.012
120.061
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:24:41 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:16:24 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:11:31 +0000, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
On 20/01/2026 16:56, Recliner wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:I've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <J7ybR.25005$s_zc.16849@fx15.ams1>, at 22:21:29 on Mon, 19
Jan 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Oh, and one wheel of the Iryo train is missing, and not yet located. So
there remains the possibility of a wheel disintegration.
Some of the reports talk of a worn fishplate in the track. Do you get these
in cwr track? Or, only at points?
And if the track was replaced as recently as last May, would you expect
wear severe enough to cause a derailment so soon?
My GF comments "it's not unusual for recent maintenance to involve
not-doing-up-the-bolts-afterwards sufficiently". Indeed, it's common
cause of mechanical failure.
That?s certainly true, and if the accident had happened within a few weeks
of the new track being laid would point the finger at a track fault. But
eight months later? Wouldn?t you expect a fault to have been spotted by
then?
And, of course, the fault would be probably more likely in the points than
the rails.
How long did it take for the setup at Potters Bar or Grayrigg to come apart
after maintenance? The answer is that we don?t know. Both sites had had
recent inspections (allegedly[1]) but they may have been purely visual, and
it?s not clear when the last manual inspection was made of how tight the
nuts and bolts were.
[1] In the case of PB it seems that there was some doubt about whether the
previous day?s inspection was actually made, and at Grayrigg NR admitted
the previously scheduled inspection had not taken place.
I would think, based on their location, these crossovers are used >> >> >> >> relatively infrequently, so the points probably don?t get used much. But
perhaps another train had used them earlier that day, and they hadn?t
locked properly when returned to their normal position?
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the
train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Trade union(s) calling for industrial action in order to get drivers'
protection from such accident. They said complaints had been addressed >> >> >for the given portion of track weeks ago...
That's odd, because that track is new.
Quality welding/repair yes/no? No pieces missing,
all screws or similar applied with the correct
torque?
It was installed eight months ago. Any such faults would have been found very quickly.
Hm. >https://www.lok-report.de/news/europa/item/64544-spanien-die-frage-wodurch-der-bruch-im-gleis-zustande-kam-wird-entscheidend-fuer-die-juristische-aufarbeitung-sein.html
Not all bad welds break up under the first train.
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/01/2026 12:57, Recliner wrote:
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:'Section of undercarriage' in the New York Times article mentioned recently. >>
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of
rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity >>>>> of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Bogie, or single wheel?
I think it highly unlikely that it?s the whole bogie. It?s more likely to >>> be a wheel, wheel debris, or an axle set.
Yes, that suggests something less than a full bogie. Presumably something that large would have been found much more quickly?
Elsewhere, I?d read that a wheel was missing, but that could, I suppose,
have been an axle set.
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 07:43:16 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:24:41 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:16:24 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:11:31 +0000, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
On 20/01/2026 16:56, Recliner wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:I've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <J7ybR.25005$s_zc.16849@fx15.ams1>, at 22:21:29 on Mon, 19
Jan 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Oh, and one wheel of the Iryo train is missing, and not yet located. So
there remains the possibility of a wheel disintegration.
Some of the reports talk of a worn fishplate in the track. Do you get these
in cwr track? Or, only at points?
And if the track was replaced as recently as last May, would you expect
wear severe enough to cause a derailment so soon?
My GF comments "it's not unusual for recent maintenance to involve
not-doing-up-the-bolts-afterwards sufficiently". Indeed, it's common
cause of mechanical failure.
That?s certainly true, and if the accident had happened within a few weeks
of the new track being laid would point the finger at a track fault. But
eight months later? Wouldn?t you expect a fault to have been spotted by
then?
And, of course, the fault would be probably more likely in the points than
the rails.
How long did it take for the setup at Potters Bar or Grayrigg to come apart
after maintenance? The answer is that we don?t know. Both sites had had
recent inspections (allegedly[1]) but they may have been purely visual, and
it?s not clear when the last manual inspection was made of how tight the
nuts and bolts were.
[1] In the case of PB it seems that there was some doubt about whether the
previous day?s inspection was actually made, and at Grayrigg NR admitted
the previously scheduled inspection had not taken place.
I would think, based on their location, these crossovers are used >> >> >> >> relatively infrequently, so the points probably don?t get used much. But
perhaps another train had used them earlier that day, and they hadn?t
locked properly when returned to their normal position?
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the
train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Trade union(s) calling for industrial action in order to get drivers' >> >> >protection from such accident. They said complaints had been addressed >> >> >for the given portion of track weeks ago...
That's odd, because that track is new.
Quality welding/repair yes/no? No pieces missing,
all screws or similar applied with the correct
torque?
It was installed eight months ago. Any such faults would have been found very quickly.
Hm. >https://www.lok-report.de/news/europa/item/64544-spanien-die-frage-wodurch-der-bruch-im-gleis-zustande-kam-wird-entscheidend-fuer-die-juristische-aufarbeitung-sein.html
Not all bad welds break up under the first train.
Agreed, but there would have been thousands of trains, and hundreds of thousands of wheels that have passed over this
track section since it was installed. One would expect a serious fault in the welding or heat treatment to have come to
light before now. So, we still don't know if this was cause or effect ? it could be either.
"For the determination of the responsibilities to the victims by a court, it is now crucial whether the gap in the rail
has arisen due to a faulty weld that has led to a breakage of the rail by train traffic, or whether it was caused by the
Frecciarossa of Iryo."
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 07:43:16 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:24:41 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:16:24 GMT, Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:11:31 +0000, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
On 20/01/2026 16:56, Recliner wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:I've not seen anything written other than by a general purpose
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <J7ybR.25005$s_zc.16849@fx15.ams1>, at 22:21:29 on Mon, 19
Jan 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Oh, and one wheel of the Iryo train is missing, and not yet located. So
there remains the possibility of a wheel disintegration.
Some of the reports talk of a worn fishplate in the track. Do you get these
in cwr track? Or, only at points?
And if the track was replaced as recently as last May, would you expect
wear severe enough to cause a derailment so soon?
My GF comments "it's not unusual for recent maintenance to involve
not-doing-up-the-bolts-afterwards sufficiently". Indeed, it's common
cause of mechanical failure.
That?s certainly true, and if the accident had happened within a few weeks
of the new track being laid would point the finger at a track fault. But
eight months later? Wouldn?t you expect a fault to have been spotted by
then?
And, of course, the fault would be probably more likely in the points than
the rails.
How long did it take for the setup at Potters Bar or Grayrigg to come apart
after maintenance? The answer is that we don?t know. Both sites had had
recent inspections (allegedly[1]) but they may have been purely visual, and
it?s not clear when the last manual inspection was made of how tight the
nuts and bolts were.
[1] In the case of PB it seems that there was some doubt about whether the
previous day?s inspection was actually made, and at Grayrigg NR admitted
the previously scheduled inspection had not taken place.
I would think, based on their location, these crossovers are used
relatively infrequently, so the points probably don?t get used much. But
perhaps another train had used them earlier that day, and they hadn?t
locked properly when returned to their normal position?
The reports of a loose fishplate joint confuse me. This is modern cwr, so
where would there be fishplate joints? Perhaps they are actually expansion
joints where the cwr connects to the switch? So, if such a joint failed,
just before a switch, it would explain why the derailed back end of the
train got pulled to the left, on to the other track. That, in turn, pulled
a couple of other carriages on to the other track.
journalist so I'd treat anything I've read with suspicion. Something
might have been lost or gained in the translation as well.
I've seen it in multiple reports. They're probably written by ordinary journalists, but it looks like they're quoting a
more expert source. After all, ordinary journos wouldn't have a clue what a fishplate was ? an item of crockery,
perhaps?
Trade union(s) calling for industrial action in order to get drivers' >> >> >> >protection from such accident. They said complaints had been addressed
for the given portion of track weeks ago...
That's odd, because that track is new.
Quality welding/repair yes/no? No pieces missing,
all screws or similar applied with the correct
torque?
It was installed eight months ago. Any such faults would have been found very quickly.
Hm.
https://www.lok-report.de/news/europa/item/64544-spanien-die-frage-wodurch-der-bruch-im-gleis-zustande-kam-wird-entscheidend-fuer-die-juristische-aufarbeitung-sein.html
Not all bad welds break up under the first train.
Agreed, but there would have been thousands of trains, and hundreds of thousands of wheels that have passed over this
track section since it was installed. One would expect a serious fault in the welding or heat treatment to have come to
light before now. So, we still don't know if this was cause or effect ? it could be either.
"For the determination of the responsibilities to the victims by a court, it is now crucial whether the gap in the rail
has arisen due to a faulty weld that has led to a breakage of the rail by train traffic, or whether it was caused by the
Frecciarossa of Iryo."
Looks like similiar damages to the wheels have been seen on
other trainsets too, and more trainsets will be looked at for
this purpose.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/01/2026 12:57, Recliner wrote:
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:'Section of undercarriage' in the New York Times article mentioned recently.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> posted:
Yes, as already mentioned, there was indeed a broken rail (in fact, lots of
rail damage), and points and one wheel that was missing from the vicinity
of the accident (but eventually found 900? away.
Bogie, or single wheel?
I think it highly unlikely that it?s the whole bogie. It?s more likely to >>>> be a wheel, wheel debris, or an axle set.
Yes, that suggests something less than a full bogie. Presumably something >> that large would have been found much more quickly?
Elsewhere, I?d read that a wheel was missing, but that could, I suppose,
have been an axle set.
It?s a whole bogie. Comparing the NYT images with examples of both types
of trainset it?s definitely from the Freccirossa 1000.
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson >><https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarri
age-key-investigation.html> >><https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-imag
e-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>find it again. It?s quite different.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>> find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>>> find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets
and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked >> by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>>>> find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed
power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan
shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both >> axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks
like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets
and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>>>>> find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed
power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both >>> axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such
a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the >> camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such >> a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
I think it?s the inside (front) bogie from the last coach, so probably the one that first derailed. It?s missing in images of the underside of that carriage.
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/18/europe/spain-trains-derail-adamuz-latam-intl
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>>>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>>>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>>>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s >>>>> doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the >>> camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such >>> a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
I think it?s the inside (front) bogie from the last coach, so probably the >> one that first derailed. It?s missing in images of the underside of that
carriage.
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/18/europe/spain-trains-derail-adamuz-latam-intl
Actually, your link has a better picture.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html
The bogie is simply missing, without major damage to the body around it.
I think that?s consistent with it first becoming derailed due to a broken track joint, moving slightly to the right, then clouting the diverging
points at almost 125 mph. That impact might be enough to shear the bogie right off, throwing it to the left at high speed, with that carriage also being jerked forcefully to the left, hard enough to also derail the two carriages ahead of it. A few seconds later the approaching Renfe train smashes into these carriages, which get pushed over to the right, while the Renfe train gets pushed off the embankment.
This happened on an embankment, so the flying bogie would have been
launched up into the air, and had a ballistic trajectory, hence the long distance it travelled.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t >>>>>> find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed
power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both >>> axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such
a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
On 22/01/2026 17:55, Sam Wilson wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s
doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the >> camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such >> a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/01/2026 17:55, Sam Wilson wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>>>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks >>>>> like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for
another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>>>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s >>>>> doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other,
along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the >>> camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such >>> a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
We know that one isn?t attached; we don?t know if that?s the one they couldn?t find. It seems to be fairly common for bogies to come away from vehicles when there?s a major crash.
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/01/2026 17:55, Sam Wilson wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan >>>>>> shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks
like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for >>>>>> another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets >>>>>> and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s >>>>>> doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other, >>>> along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the
camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such
a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
We know that one isn?t attached; we don?t know if that?s the one they
couldn?t find. It seems to be fairly common for bogies to come away from
vehicles when there?s a major crash.
It?s almost certainly the one that derailed first ? we know it started with the last car. The car?s other bogie remains in place, as does the adjacent bogie of the seventh car (which is much less damaged). So that?s probably
the first bogie to have derailed, and also at the point of impact of the
two trains.
To fly that far, it must have taken a huge lateral force, either during the derailment itself, or when the other train collided with it. I don?t think
we here know enough about the relative positions of the bogie, the point of derailment and the point of collision to say which.
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
We know that one isn?t attached; we don?t know if that?s the one they >couldn?t find. It seems to be fairly common for bogies to come away from >vehicles when there?s a major crash.
On Fri, 23 Jan 2026 11:32:52 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> gabbled:
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
We know that one isn?t attached; we don?t know if that?s the one they
couldn?t find. It seems to be fairly common for bogies to come away from
vehicles when there?s a major crash.
With USA stock it doesn't even need to be major since they don't attach their bogies to the vehicles at all, the latter just sit on top of them. A good demonstration here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFLJvpwm52Q
As stated now, 39 fatalities, derailment involving
at least the loading gauge of the other track where
another high-speed train was approaching.
I know it's not UK but such events are normally
mentioned also by UK posters.
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
As stated now, 39 fatalities, derailment involving
at least the loading gauge of the other track where
another high-speed train was approaching.
I know it's not UK but such events are normally
mentioned also by UK posters.
Early confirmation of probable cause.
Spanish track was fractured before high-speed train disaster, report finds ><https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1m77dmxlvlo>
On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 14:34:44 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:
As stated now, 39 fatalities, derailment involving
at least the loading gauge of the other track where
another high-speed train was approaching.
I know it's not UK but such events are normally
mentioned also by UK posters.
Early confirmation of probable cause.
Spanish track was fractured before high-speed train disaster, report finds >> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1m77dmxlvlo>
With cwr under tension, I assume that when a rail completely fractures, a
gap opens up? How big might it be?
I wonder if the previous wheels that got notched as they passed over the
rail break made loud banging noises as it
happened? Would passengers have felt bumps?
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/01/2026 17:55, Sam Wilson wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
<boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:52:09 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> gabbled:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 15:29:51 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/world/europe/spain-missing-part-undercarriage-key-investigation.html>
<https://www.railway-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/10/3-image-33.jpg>
I found a good image of a RENFE Class 120 bogie earlier, but now I can?t
find it again. It?s quite different.
Looks quite similar to me if you look at the remaining bogie of the power car.
Similar to.. .? Neither train has power cars, they both use distributed >>>>> power. The class 120 uses all 1A bogies with one axle powered by cardan
shaft from a body mounted motor. The FR1000 uses Bo bogies, i.e. with both
axles powered, and some unpowered bogies. The NYT image shows what looks
like one traction motor attached to the bogies and the mounting for >>>>> another, now missing. The class 120s also have gauge changing wheelsets
and I don?t see any evidence of that in the photo.
I wonder what could cause a whole bogie to get detached, and then fly so far?
Maybe after it derailed the bogie was sticking out sideways then got whacked
by 200 tons moving at 180mph.
Difficult to say without seeing the intermediate terrain, but that?s >>>>> doesn?t seem impossible.
Wouldn?t the bogie look more damaged in that case?
It?s missing a traction motor at one end and the wheelset at the other, >>> along with various fittings visibly broken or absent on the side facing the
camera. Not sure if the bogie frame might have been bent or broken in such
a collision. It?s also upside down.
Do we know which coach the bogie is missing from?
The trailing driving car is missing the inner bogie, failrly obviously
that one.
We know that one isn?t attached; we don?t know if that?s the one they couldn?t find. It seems to be fairly common for bogies to come away from vehicles when there?s a major crash.
It?s almost certainly the one that derailed first ? we know it started with the last car.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 19:13:45 |
| Calls: | 117 |
| Calls today: | 117 |
| Files: | 367 |
| D/L today: |
547 files (254M bytes) |
| Messages: | 70,845 |
| Posted today: | 26 |
