Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

2/ the train would probably have remained upright if the points just
further on hadn't completely derailed it.

These two factors were not the fault of the suicidal car driver but
rather Railtrack's and First Great Western's.

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

SB

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0800, S.Byers wrote:

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by ...
1/ the rear power car, still under full power,

FO back under your stone, troll.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In article , S.Byers wrote:

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

So, we just get rid of rear engines, and all the problems will be solved?

Presumably you'd like there to a single track from each possible destination
to each other possible destination, thereby removing all those nasty
dangerous points, too.

If you're looking for someone to blame, blame the idiot in the car. The
incident was his fault, not the railway companies'.

Brian
--
* * * * ** * * ** ** * *
* ** * * ** * * * *
* * * * * *

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"Brian Widdas" wrote in message
...
In article , S.Byers
wrote:

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

So, we just get rid of rear engines, and all the problems will be solved?

Please don't feed the trolls!

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"S.Byers" wrote in message
om...
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

2/ the train would probably have remained upright if the points just
further on hadn't completely derailed it.

These two factors were not the fault of the suicidal car driver but
rather Railtrack's and First Great Western's.

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

Neither RT (should be Network Rail btw) or FGW had any hand in the design of
the HST, as it came some 20 years before the existence of either! Secondly,
the rear power car was NOT under the full power. The train's 'black box
recorder' that the power notch was at zero and the brake handle was in
'emergency'. It was simply the inertia of the rear power car (which had
already derailed) that kept it moving. Much of what you have posted is quite
wrong.

--
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

S.Byers wrote:
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and


An emergency brake application causes the power to be cut. Additionally it
is a natural reaction by an experinced driver to cut power as he applies the
brakes. On an HST this is done by pushing both the power and brake handles
forward to their fullest extent.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

yes i was just goin to say SHUT THE F UP mister.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

On 10 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0800 someone who may be
(S.Byers) wrote this:-

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

AFAIK it was not under full power.

Even if it was under full power the extra force that provided was
not enough to cause the damage. If it was then HSTs would be damaged
every time only the rear power car is working, which happens from
time to time. The forces the power cars produce are minor compared
to the forces involved in a crash.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
Even if it was under full power the extra force that provided was
not enough to cause the damage. If it was then HSTs would be damaged
every time only the rear power car is working, which happens from
time to time. The forces the power cars produce are minor compared
to the forces involved in a crash.

Quite. The maximum tractive effort is about 8 tons, which I guess (I don't
have a power curve) would be only about a quarter of that at 100 mph.
Compared to the momentum of its 70-ton weight at 100 mph, plus that of the
other carriages at the rear, the effect of any power it could produce is
negligible.

Roger

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , A.Lee
writes
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0800, S.Byers wrote:

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by ...
1/ the rear power car, still under full power,

FO back under your stone, troll.

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first. (It also had the advantage of keeping the coal dust out
of your eyes).
--
Clive.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message ,
hector writes
yes i was just goin to say SHUT THE F UP mister.


What an intelligent reply, have you ever been a trainman? I thought
not.
--
Clive.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , David Hansen
writes

Even if it was under full power the extra force that provided was not
enough to cause the damage. If it was then HSTs would be damaged every
time only the rear power car is working, which happens from time to
time. The forces the power cars produce are minor compared to the
forces involved in a crash.
I suspect the shape of the leading power car to have something to do
with gathering up the car instead of just shunting it to the side.
This is not a troll and unless you can add to the debate please don't
respond.
--
Clive.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Clive Coleman schrieb:

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first.

I guess the tenders didn't like speeds similar to 100 mph while running
first. However, they managed to order trains without tenders.

Secondly, there was a power car in front of the train when it hit the
obstacle.

Regards, ULF

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"Clive Coleman" wrote in message
...
In message , A.Lee
writes
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0800, S.Byers wrote:

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by ...
1/ the rear power car, still under full power,

FO back under your stone, troll.

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first. (It also had the advantage of keeping the coal dust out
of your eyes).
--
Clive.

Braking and power control not withstanding, a heavy weight at the rear of a
train is not good news when it has to stop in a hurry, but a heavy weight at
the front means a better chance of staying upright and, potentially, more
protection for the guy at the sharp end.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Rich Mackin wrote:

Neither RT (should be Network Rail btw) or FGW had any hand in the
design of the HST, as it came some 20 years before the existence of
either! Secondly, the rear power car was NOT under the full power.
The train's 'black box recorder' that the power notch was at zero and
the brake handle was in 'emergency'. It was simply the inertia of the
rear power car (which had already derailed) that kept it moving. Much
of what you have posted is quite wrong.

It's Stephen Byers feeling arsey ;-)

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Clive Coleman wrote in message:

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first. (It also had the advantage of keeping the coal dust out
of your eyes).

Generally 45mph now for tender engines working backwards (at least, in all
the tender engines I've been in).

However, do note that this was not due to the dange of derailment. It was
due to poor visibilty.

Do remember that push-pull services with tank engines existed for a long
time during the big-four period and continued into BR days. These were not
troubled with visibility problems, as the driver could control the engine
from a suitable front coach - something which could be called the very first
DVT, but better known as the auto-coach :)

Ronnie
--
Volunteer guard on the Great Central Railway, Loughborough, Leicestershire
Visit the world's only double track preserved steam railway!
http://www.gcrailway.co.uk

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

S.Byers wrote:

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

The rear power car was not under full power. It was actually giving an
emergency brake application.

2/ the train would probably have remained upright if the points just
further on hadn't completely derailed it.

Very true. It's about time all points were removed from the rail network to
safeguard against idiot car-drivers.

Ronnie
--
Volunteer guard on the Great Central Railway, Loughborough, Leicestershire
Visit the world's only double track preserved steam railway!
http://www.gcrailway.co.uk

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In article , S.Byers
writes
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

2/ the train would probably have remained upright if the points just
further on hadn't completely derailed it.

These two factors were not the fault of the suicidal car driver but
rather Railtrack's and First Great Western's.

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

SB
I take it you want a return to the steam era
But even then might have problems if no banking engine allowed on the
Lickey etc.

Do you also propose the end of DMU's and EMU's effectively all modern
day trains
How about banning 4x4 vehicles Front and rear axle powered.
--
Alan Osborn

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , Ronnie Clark
writes
These were not troubled with visibility problems, as the driver could
control the engine from a suitable front coach - something which could
be called the very first DVT, but better known as the auto-coach :)
I have not forgotten the Yatton- Clevedon shuttle.
--
Clive Coleman

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , dwb
writes
econdly, the rear power car was NOT under the full power.
The train's 'black box recorder' that the power notch was at zero and
the brake handle was in 'emergency'. It was simply the inertia of the
rear power car (which had already derailed) that kept it moving.
Do you KNOW that?
--
Clive Coleman

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as S.Byers
gently breathed:
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited view
of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

This is believed to be incorrect, but is in the interim HSE report which
might explain why it got posted here.

In reality, the power car of an HST weighs only the same as two coaches
(70 tons vs 35 tons), so in reality it was the combined momentum of the
whole train that caused the damage - as the HSE interim report does
comment. Stopping 350 tons in such a short space requires the
dissipation of a great deal of energy, and this is what caused the
damage.

--
- Pyromancer Stormshadow.
http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk -- Pagan Gothic Rock!
http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk -- Electronic Metal!
http://www.revival.stormshadow.com -- The Gothic Revival.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Pyromancer wrote:
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as S.Byers
gently breathed:
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited
view of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

This is believed to be incorrect, but is in the interim HSE report
which might explain why it got posted here.

The unfounded idea that the rear power car was still under full power
was certainly NOT in the interim HSE report. It was an ignorant rumour
that I believe was mentioned first on Sky News a few hours after the
crash.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"Alan Osborn" wrote in message
...

snip

Yet throughout the world we now have high speed passenger trains
pushed from the *rear* by high powered engines. There will be more
such crashes.

another snip

Do you also propose the end of DMU's and EMU's effectively all modern
day trains
How about banning 4x4 vehicles Front and rear axle powered.

I think you're being harsh. The OP was referring to pushed trains, not push
and pull.

Will.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Richard J.
gently breathed:

The unfounded idea that the rear power car was still under full power
was certainly NOT in the interim HSE report. It was an ignorant rumour
that I believe was mentioned first on Sky News a few hours after the
crash.

Aha, yes, I missed that bit, was just referring to the "pushing
momentum" idea.

--
- Pyromancer Stormshadow.
http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk -- Pagan Gothic Rock!
http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk -- Electronic Metal!
http://www.revival.stormshadow.com -- The Gothic Revival.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

"Richard J." wrote in message
. uk...
Pyromancer wrote:
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as S.Byers
gently breathed:
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited
view of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

This is believed to be incorrect, but is in the interim HSE report
which might explain why it got posted here.

The unfounded idea that the rear power car was still under full power
was certainly NOT in the interim HSE report. It was an ignorant rumour
that I believe was mentioned first on Sky News a few hours after the
crash.
--

I can see where this has come about. There is a BBC website report that
states "The front of the First Great Western train ploughed into the
embankment, while the rear power car on the train continued to propel the
train forward, investigators found."

What they have missed out is "momentum of", which is in the HSE report.


Dave

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In article ,
Tim Christian wrote:

"Clive Coleman" wrote in message
...
In message , A.Lee
writes
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0800, S.Byers wrote:

The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by ...
1/ the rear power car, still under full power,

FO back under your stone, troll.

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first. (It also had the advantage of keeping the coal dust out
of your eyes).
--
Clive.

Braking and power control not withstanding, a heavy weight at the rear
of a train is not good news when it has to stop in a hurry, but a heavy
weight at the front means a better chance of staying upright and,
potentially, more protection for the guy at the sharp end.


The momentum of one loco at the back is no different from three coaches at
the back (approx). So its one coach trains only from now on ?

David

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In article ,
Dave wrote:

"Richard J." wrote in message
. uk...
Pyromancer wrote:
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as S.Byers
gently breathed:
The extent of the damage in the Berkshire crash was caused by two
major factors apart from the speed of the train and the limited
view of the hero driver.

These we

1/ the rear power car, still under full power, caused much of the
crumpling and jack knifing, and

This is believed to be incorrect, but is in the interim HSE report
which might explain why it got posted here.

The unfounded idea that the rear power car was still under full power
was certainly NOT in the interim HSE report. It was an ignorant rumour
that I believe was mentioned first on Sky News a few hours after the
crash.
--

I can see where this has come about. There is a BBC website report that
states "The front of the First Great Western train ploughed into the
embankment, while the rear power car on the train continued to propel the
train forward, investigators found."

What they have missed out is "momentum of", which is in the HSE report.

....and the investigators might have pointed out that the momentum of the
rear eight coaches acting on the (derailed) leading power car was a lot
greater than the momentum of the rear power car.

David

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:08:02 -0000 someone who may be "Tim
Christian" wrote this:-

Braking and power control not withstanding, a heavy weight at the rear of a
train is not good news when it has to stop in a hurry,

The "heavy weight" is equivalent to two or three coaches. Nobody
worries about the effect in a crash if two or three coaches are
added to a train.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:39:08 +0000 someone who may be Clive Coleman
wrote this:-

I suspect the shape of the leading power car to have something to do
with gathering up the car instead of just shunting it to the side.

As has been said before, the shape of the nose of the power car is
simply fibreglass. Behind that fibreglass is essentially what one
would find on the front of a locomotive, though without the buffers.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:19:59 +0000 someone who may be Clive Coleman
wrote this:-

econdly, the rear power car was NOT under the full power.
The train's 'black box recorder' that the power notch was at zero and
the brake handle was in 'emergency'. It was simply the inertia of the
rear power car (which had already derailed) that kept it moving.

Do you KNOW that?

The Railway Inspectorate say so in their interim report.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In article ,
David Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:39:08 +0000 someone who may be Clive Coleman
wrote this:-

I suspect the shape of the leading power car to have something to do
with gathering up the car instead of just shunting it to the side.

As has been said before, the shape of the nose of the power car is
simply fibreglass. Behind that fibreglass is essentially what one
would find on the front of a locomotive, though without the buffers.


It does seem that most of the car wreckage was tossed aside very close to
the point of impact on the crossing. But I guess that something (the
engine perhaps ?) must have caught underneath and derailed the leading
wheelset.

David

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Clive Coleman wrote:
In message , dwb
writes
econdly, the rear power car was NOT under the full power.
The train's 'black box recorder' that the power notch was at zero
and the brake handle was in 'emergency'. It was simply the inertia
of the rear power car (which had already derailed) that kept it
moving.
Do you KNOW that?

Um... I didn't write that.

ANyway, as David says, it's in the HSE report so I would guess it might be
true.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Ronnie Clark wrote:
Clive Coleman wrote in message:

I don't troll this N/G but I do remember working on British Railways
when propelling was not allowed above 40mph. I expect I'll now get
some egghead to troll me, but this was always the case when working
tender first. (It also had the advantage of keeping the coal dust out
of your eyes).


Generally 45mph now for tender engines working backwards (at least, in all
the tender engines I've been in).

However, do note that this was not due to the dange of derailment. It was
due to poor visibilty.

Do remember that push-pull services with tank engines existed for a long
time during the big-four period and continued into BR days. These were not
troubled with visibility problems, as the driver could control the engine
from a suitable front coach - something which could be called the very first
DVT, but better known as the auto-coach :)

Not much of a van, though. More like the DBSO on Liverpool St - Norwich
(not for too much longer).

Robin

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Richard J. wrote:

The unfounded idea that the rear power car was still under full power
was certainly NOT in the interim HSE report. It was an ignorant rumour
that I believe was mentioned first on Sky News a few hours after the
crash.

Why would any sane person believe anything from the Murdoch organisation?

Brian Rumary, England

http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Clive Coleman wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 10 Nov 2004:

I don't troll this N/G

Which N/Gs do you troll, then? (Sorry, couldn't resist!)
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 6 November 2004 with new photos

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

David Hansen wrote:

Clive Coleman wrote:

secondly, the rear power car was NOT under the full power.
The train's 'black box recorder' that the power notch was at zero and
the brake handle was in 'emergency'. It was simply the inertia of the
rear power car (which had already derailed) that kept it moving.

Do you KNOW that?

The Railway Inspectorate say so in their interim report.

Unless you are reading a different report than is available on the RI
web site:

- There is no mention of the power setting in the interim report.
- There is no mention of the type of brake application, nor the position
of the brake handle in the interim report, only that the brakes were
applied 2 to 3 sections prior to impact. One can assume they were
applied in emergency, but the report makes no statement on the subject,
and it would be an assumption on the part of the reader.
- There is no mention in the report of where the rear power car first
derailed, (meaning the one at the London end of train) only that it was
derailed where it came to rest.

How do people get so many facts wrong, when the report is readily
available?

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Tim Christian wrote:

Braking and power control not withstanding, a heavy weight at the rear of a
train is not good news when it has to stop in a hurry,

It makes absolutely no difference what the distribution of weight in the
train is when stopping in a hurry. The suggestion that the locomotive in
the rear is somehow a problem demonstrates a complete misunderstanding
of the physics involved.

The issue is the total mass of the train behind a derailed vehicle,
which includes the mass of the coaches as well as the power car. That
total mass is what creates the tendency to jackknife. The only way to
avoid it is to run separate, individual vehicles, since there would then
be nothing to push from behind. Individual vehicles are what run on
highways. Trains run on tracks.

but a heavy weight at the front means a better chance of staying
upright and, potentially, more protection for the guy at the sharp end.

That is true, since a heavy vehicle is more likely to remain on the
rails, rather than be lifted up in a collision and derail. However, just
because a vehicle is heavy doesn't necessarily mean that it offers more
protection. I acknowledge that you said "potentially", since the weight
can be from other things than extra strength applied to the front
structure of the vehicle, which would provide the necessary protection.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , James Robinson
writes
That
total mass is what creates the tendency to jackknife. The only way to
avoid it is to run separate, individual vehicles, since there would then
be nothing to push from behind. Individual vehicles are what run on
highways. Trains run on tracks.


Don't say that too loudly otherwise the media and safety mafia will be
screaming for all real trains to be replaced by dogboxes! :-)
--
Spyke
Address is valid, but messages are treated as junk. The opinions I express do
not necessarily reflect those of the educational institution from which I post.

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

In message , Mrs Redboots
writes
Clive Coleman wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 10 Nov 2004:

I don't troll this N/G

Which N/Gs do you troll, then? (Sorry, couldn't resist!)
Uk.transport.
--
Clive Coleman

Dangers of High Speed Trains Pushed from the Rear
 

Roger H. Bennett wrote:
"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
Even if it was under full power the extra force that provided was
not enough to cause the damage. If it was then HSTs would be damaged
every time only the rear power car is working, which happens from
time to time. The forces the power cars produce are minor compared
to the forces involved in a crash.

Quite. The maximum tractive effort is about 8 tons, which I guess (I
don't have a power curve) would be only about a quarter of that at
100 mph. Compared to the momentum of its 70-ton weight at 100 mph,
plus that of the other carriages at the rear, the effect of any power
it could produce is negligible.

Roger

Power was cut, full emergency brake was in and the power car at the rear
provided much additional braking effort to the rear five coaches, which
did not pile up onto the front three. The driver did everything right,
call it self preservation, instinct, skill whatever, it is a testament
to his last act and the construction of the train that so many survived.