Greenpeace really did make themselves look stupid with those claims. Pictures afterwards show the engine still bolted down to the frame of the loco, it was the train heating boiler that was seen flying through the air. The coaches had no weights in them, infact all the seats were still there as the GCR were invited to salvage what they could for their own fleet. Quite how a 138 tonne class 46 is supposed to crumple easily is beyond me though.
The crackpot lefty protesters should’ve been given seats in the train to give an indication as to how passengers would’ve coped had it been a real situation! Might’ve come out with a little more understanding!
One possible explanation for that view is that on the 1Co-Co1 BR locos (including Class 46), the buffers and drawgear are fixed to the bogies and not to the main frame of the locomotive. However, the use of a Co-Co locomotive (such as a Class 47) would have reduced both the mass of the leading vehicle and the speed of impact, and hence the total impact energy. I think they made the right choice overall.
I wonder how Greenpeace thinks that a locomotive with the engine unbolted would ever work in the first place. If the mechanical bits aren't fixed to the chassis it's never going to get moving in the first place.
To be fair the train was pushed by another loco which then breaked to a stop. The loco used in the crash was an old type that probably didn't work anymore. It doesn't alter the fact that Greenpeace were talking out of their arses.
@@professorjamesmoriarty5191 actually it didn’t. Watch the eocumtary on this it’s the only test of its kind and it’s explained that it was a 5 mile build up of speed by a second engine that gave the momentum for this live test.
Greenpeace clearly do not understand physics. If a person falls from a 10 story building they will most likely die. Not from the fall itself, otherwise most skydivers would die seconds after exiting the plane, but by the rapid deceleration when they hit the ground....which coincidently is what happens to skydivers when the parachute doesn't work.
Greenpeace lost plot on this.......no way would CEGB do summat so irresponsible...why would they risk faulty flasks their relatives could live near railways where these travel...would they do it ?..no
This is stupid, if you have enough force the Engine inside will unbolt itself, the Class 46 was made for heavy hauling with large loads the more weight the more traction, the Kinetic energy changed to potential energy which kept the Passenger cars on the ground, and as used in the drop test of the flask the lid is on the left side of contaimer.
Would putting weights in the carriages not cause *more* damage by not only making the train simply have more mass behind the hit, but also by *not* losing force to the train flying off the tracks?
Greenpeace really did make themselves look stupid with those claims. Pictures afterwards show the engine still bolted down to the frame of the loco, it was the train heating boiler that was seen flying through the air. The coaches had no weights in them, infact all the seats were still there as the GCR were invited to salvage what they could for their own fleet. Quite how a 138 tonne class 46 is supposed to crumple easily is beyond me though.
The crackpot lefty protesters should’ve been given seats in the train to give an indication as to how passengers would’ve coped had it been a real situation! Might’ve come out with a little more understanding!
One possible explanation for that view is that on the 1Co-Co1 BR locos (including Class 46), the buffers and drawgear are fixed to the bogies and not to the main frame of the locomotive. However, the use of a Co-Co locomotive (such as a Class 47) would have reduced both the mass of the leading vehicle and the speed of impact, and hence the total impact energy. I think they made the right choice overall.
Just typical Greenpeace idiots and liars
"Put our reputation on the line" Do you think he realised that was a perfect pun.
Oh, he definitely planned that one.
I wonder how Greenpeace thinks that a locomotive with the engine unbolted would ever work in the first place. If the mechanical bits aren't fixed to the chassis it's never going to get moving in the first place.
To be fair the train was pushed by another loco which then breaked to a stop. The loco used in the crash was an old type that probably didn't work anymore. It doesn't alter the fact that Greenpeace were talking out of their arses.
@@drawingboard82 No, it ran under it's own power all the way.
ruclips.net/video/Byl_fTbsbjQ/видео.html
@@drawingboard82 it ran under its own power.
@@professorjamesmoriarty5191 actually it didn’t. Watch the eocumtary on this it’s the only test of its kind and it’s explained that it was a 5 mile build up of speed by a second engine that gave the momentum for this live test.
That thick ass flask would not be damaged by the coaches, those coaches are like paper Compared to how thick that flask was
Greenpeace clearly do not understand physics. If a person falls from a 10 story building they will most likely die. Not from the fall itself, otherwise most skydivers would die seconds after exiting the plane, but by the rapid deceleration when they hit the ground....which coincidently is what happens to skydivers when the parachute doesn't work.
They crashed a perfectly good locomotive!
It proberbly would of been scrapped anyway and the peaks were on their way out.
Atleast it prooved a point.
Greenpeace lost plot on this.......no way would CEGB do summat so irresponsible...why would they risk faulty flasks their relatives could live near railways where these travel...would they do it ?..no
This is stupid, if you have enough force the Engine inside will unbolt itself, the Class 46 was made for heavy hauling with large loads the more weight the more traction, the Kinetic energy changed to potential energy which kept the Passenger cars on the ground, and as used in the drop test of the flask the lid is on the left side of contaimer.
Would putting weights in the carriages not cause *more* damage by not only making the train simply have more mass behind the hit, but also by *not* losing force to the train flying off the tracks?
1:27 What difference between this statement and the advertising world of today. I recall the stunts pulled by companies such as Tesla.
Engineer would have survived, easily
Hamb lmao!!!
What engineer?
Where did you find this ?
Waste of a good peak locomotive
💣 🚂🚃🚃🚃 🇺🇲