Talk:List of rail accidents (before 1880)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Winslow Junction Train Derailment[edit]

I dont know what sources was used for this, but I used 2 books on this railroad and both had July 2 Trans-Anglo Books By Rail to the Boardwalk (1986) Richard M. Gladulich ISBN 0-87046-076-5 and West Jersey Chapter-NRHS Atlantic City Railroad (1980) Library of Congress Control Number 77-79997 Also it was a ACRR train not a WJ&S train as before I fixed it. N2icv (talk) 19:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bias, and flags[edit]

Esp. in the early parts, this list appears to have a strong bias, including numerous accidents from USA, some from UK, a few from Denmark, and not much else. Maybe some of the minor USA accidents should be removed, and the article should be tagged as biassed - I'm not sure what template that should be.

As for the flags, is it really a good idea to use separate flags for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales throughout?--Niels Ø (noe) 09:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This would be best discussed here for the inclusion question and here for the flag issue, since both comments apply to all three pages of this category and there's already a lengthy discussion about inclusion underway. Rmarquet 15:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This crash uses a British flag - but it was in Ireland. OK at the time Ireland was part of the United Kingdom, but is it right to not use the Irish / Eire flag? "5 October 1853 –Straffan, Ireland" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.128.30 (talk) 13:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through the flags, correcting as necessary. Particularly Canada to Canada and Canada.
Also, I've changed Republic of Ireland to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland - this is important for two reasons, click on the flags to see why. For the Armagh accident, the flag has stayed the same, but the article linked to has been changed. Mjroots (talk) 08:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the comment about the straffan crash and dont see why Ireland shouldn't have its flag used for this crash if the English one is used for crashes of the same period, I've clicked on the flags but I dont see the relevance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Owain meurig (talk • contribs) 20:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest the Green Ensign, since it was in use at the time, whereas the tricolor wasn't (I think). At the moment the only use of the Union Jack is for Irish crashes.Ning-ning (talk) 08:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As the majority of UK accidents used the individual country's flags (England, Scotland and Wales), I've changed the few instances of United Kingdom to England where they occurred.
Re the perceived country bias, I think it is more a case of sourcing than bias. This is the English Wikipedia, therefore sources in English are more likely to report accidents in predominantly English-speaking countries (i.e. British Empire, United States) than elsewhere, unless a major accident occurs. I'm sure there are hundreds of accidents which have reports in non-English sources that could be added, but it is a question of finding them. 86.139.188.45 (talk) 08:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC) (Mjroots (talk) - got logged out while typing this!)[reply]
Just noticed that this article mentions the world's longest-running train wreck, the Grateful Dead. Maybe some drastic pruning needed! Ning-ning (talk) 11:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AK trains2.jpg[edit]

Image:AK trains2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 00:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Atsf19.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Atsf19.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improved links.[edit]

Was linking to Münchenstein, now links to Münchenstein rail disaster. Tabletop (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-article (as stands)[edit]

As it is being policed presently, these articles are of minimal value for research into rail crashes over certain periods. Either these articles are an encyclopedic list of rail crashes during a time period or they are not. The title is very misleading to general users if Wikipedians are to continue using their own personal opinion of what is notable for inclusion.

Either the content needs to be improved to reflect the title, or the title must be changed to reflect the content (based on whatever criteria people are deciding to use). DiverScout (talk) 11:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better if it were agreed upon what constitutes notability for inclusion in this article. If every minor shunt on every railway network from the dawn of railway transport to 1950 were included, the article would grow to several megabytes. I doubt whether an interminable list of inconsequential bumps would be regarded as any "improvement". Personally, I would suggest that the crash must involve loss of life, or result in wide-ranging changes to railway operation or equipment, or be the subject of some other notable work of art. HLGallon (talk) 08:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In which case the article title and lead would require amending to demonstrate the limitations of the article. As stands a lay-person researching rail accidents on Wikipedia is led to believe that only these accidents took place. DiverScout (talk) 09:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flags?[edit]

The above comment about "ongoing discussion" was from 2 years ago, but the usage of the flags here is still inconsistent: Should we have only countries, or sub-countries (England/Scotland/Wales, States)? 76.117.247.55 (talk) 00:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 15, 2010 trim[edit]

Removed the following as they appeared non-notable :-

Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The December 1853 accident would appear to be notable as a passenger was killed. Therefore I will re-add it to the list. Agree on the removal of the others. Mjroots (talk) 07:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lindfield Crash 1928[edit]

  • Australia 1928 – Lindfield train disaster, Sydney, Australia: collision when train speeds after stop-and-proceed-at-red signal.

I checked the archive of the Sydney Morning Herald for the entirety of 1928-29 and there was no mention of a train crash there. I can only assume it's an error. Reynardo (talk) 12:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

I've been through the list and tagged many entries as needing references. It shouldn't be too hard to provide a decent ref for all entries where there is not a stand-alone article. I see no reason why this list should be exempt from WP:V. Mjroots (talk) 20:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 31, 1916 – Herceghalom, Austria-Hungary[edit]

Just a minor point, but "November 31, 1916 – Herceghalom, Austria-Hungary: The train arriving from the funeral of Franz Joseph I crashes into the fast train to Graz. 71 people killed." - Did the 31st November *really* happen or does this error need addressing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.249.241.154 (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no 31 November. Most likely a typo of 21 November. Mjroots (talk) 09:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SAL crash, 1945[edit]

December 1945 SAL Silver Meteor crashed into the SAL Sun Queen killing 6 and injuring many. Added by an editor, but without ref or location, so I moved it here. Ning-ning (talk) 19:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

French derailment 1891[edit]

  • September 4, 1891,France - troop train derails near Culmont-Chalindrey north-east of Dijon and falls down steep embankment. 200 killed. [1]

There do not appear to be any French sources for this accident on the web; original report in the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper has an addendum saying that the report has not been confirmed. Ning-ning (talk) 09:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Times, 5 September 1891, p5, states that it was a hoax. Mjroots (talk) 06:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/39438644?searchTerm=transporter%20train&searchLimits=

Proposed split[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

As this article is over 130 KB, I propose that it be split into List of rail accidents (pre-1900) and List of rail accidents (1900–1949). This would reduce the time taken for the page to load, ease maintenance and assist in adding citations. — Iain Bell (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea- I suspect there's quite a few accidents not yet put into this list. Ning-ning (talk) 22:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, with this article moving and the pre 1900 being split off as a new article. Mjroots (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although I think that each article will still be far too big. "List of rail accidents (1950–1999)" is already over 140kB and this one has grown to over 144kB (according to the revision history - it was ~142kB in November). WP:SPLIT guidance suggests that both these should probably be divided into 3 or 4 articles. Splitting the 1950-1999 article into 1950-1969 and then 3 separate decades would satisfy that requirement, and would partly match the two later decades. Continuing back into this article, four articles would mean something like: upto-1874, 1875-1899, 1900-1924, 1925-1949 -- a bit messy. I therefore suggest that both articles be split into decades from at least 1880, if not earlier (c1850). I'm sure a template can be written to give a common disambiguation theme to all pages in the series. Tim PF (talk) 03:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it doesn't use a {{template}}, and I hadn't found that page yet, as it is not linked to from its subpages. The same set of links are more or less replicated at the top of each of these articles, not all of which link to List of train accidents by death toll. Splitting these articles up into more sub-pages, would mean more maintenance, until a common template is used in the dab page and at the top of its sub-pages. Tim PF (talk) 13:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support, and I may even split the list myself. ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanTD (talk • contribs) 19:01 21 February 2011 (UTC)
    • Comment Are you referring to a split into 2 or into separate decades? Tim PF (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Splitting the list in two (I thought I signed that message), at least for the time being. ----DanTD (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Preferably into decades as that seems the most logical of time divisions (rather than 1900-1925, etc.). I'd say pre-1880 and then decades after that, but would support any split at this juncture. Ravendrop 22:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • UPDATE - I just split up the 1900-1949 list, which means you can rename this one pre-1900. Whether any of you choose to split up those lists further is up to you. ----DanTD (talk) 22:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • UPDATE - I've done the move (rename) to pre-1900, changed the entries in List of rail accidents, and changed the (new) redirect at the old pre-1950 page to point to the latter, although I think the talk page redirect may still come here. I'm losing my ADSL for a couple of days from sometime Thursday (ie when British Telecom get around to it, so I may not get a chance to remove the 1900-1949 material; could anyone else oblige, please? Tim PF (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'd still like to split everything into decades (including 1950-1999, but I'd like to template-ise the table first, as what I just did is a bit messy. Tim PF (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's your call. I just found one accident on the 1900-1949 which was removed, because somebody thought it wasn't notable enough to be on the list. Maybe if you split up that one you could bring it back. If you do spit them up, though, they shouldn't be in the middle of a decade. Any chance we could archive the relevant talk page messages on the appropriate new pages? ----DanTD (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is the old (ie 1600-1949) talk page renamed. It now has post-1900 items in it, but the alternative would be to end up as the talk page to a redirect page. I guess that someone will remove the redirection in the next few days once this split has settled down. As for notability, I'm not sure of the criteria. Tim PF (talk) 00:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm closing this now, because the formerly proposed split was carried out over a year ago, and even those was split further. Any new talks of splitting this page should start with a new thread. ----DanTD (talk) 19:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1879 "It is the worst ever train disaster to date,"[edit]

"It is the worst ever train disaster to date", this must refer to either the UK or Scotland or bridges falling down or something else. It cannot be "ever in the world", as the implication is now. I hope someone more comfortable with the article will fix this (or just say I'm wrong.) Greswik (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the claim- there's an even worse one just above it in the article, also involving a bridge. Ning-ning (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it means the worst in the UK to that date (and for almost a decade — see List of United Kingdom rail accidents by death toll), but the use of the present tense for these lists means that it is difficult to change the wording to concisely express this. Tim PF (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1880-1899 split coming[edit]

I am currently getting ready to split off the segments of this article between 1880 and 1899, so prepare to rename this article "List of rail accidents (before 1880)." ---------User:DanTD (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After some struggles, it's  Done. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced items removed[edit]

The following entries have been removed as they were unreferenced. They were almost all tagged as long ago as September 2010. Feel free to find references and re-add them. Mjroots (talk) 21:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • 1828 – Locomotion No 1's boiler explodes, killing the driver.
  • December 1830 – Maryland, United States: On the Baltimore & Ohio the driver of a crowded horse-drawn coach falls from his seat and is killed beneath the wheels, the first fatal accident on a railroad in the United States.
  • July 25, 1832 – Quincy, Massachusetts, United States: A cable snaps on an incline of the Granite Railway, killing one tourist from Cuba and injuring three other visitors to the railway.
  • November 10, 1840 – Two employees of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway lose their lives when the boiler on 2-2-0 steam locomotive Surprise explodes at Bromsgrove, Worcestershire.
  • November 21, 1844 – Two Midland Railway trains collide in thick fog at Beeston, Nottinghamshire. Two people die shortly afterwards from their injuries. Between 15 and 20 other persons are injured.
  • January 6, 1853 – Andover, Massachusetts, United States: The Boston & Maine noon express, traveling from Boston to Lawrence, Massachusetts, derails at forty miles an hour when an axle breaks at Andover, and the only coach goes down an embankment and breaks in two. Only one is killed, the eleven-year-old son of President-elect Franklin Pierce, but it is initially reported that Pierce is also a fatality. He was on board but is only badly bruised. The baggage car and the locomotive remain on the track. President Pierce's inaugural ball is cancelled as the family grieves over the loss of their son.
  • January 23, 1853 – Glen Rock, Pennsylvania, United States: One person lost after the caboose was detached from train cars around the Mason–Dixon line in a forest during a blizzard. Conductor B.A.Stells was lost. Train car and conductor were never found. Railway was broken down in 1864.
  • March 4, 1853 – Mount Union, Pennsylvania, United States: A Pennsylvania Railroad emigrant train stalls on the main line with engine problems in the Allegheny Mountains near Mount Union, and when the brakeman sent to flag protect the rear of the stopped train falls asleep in a shanty, an oncoming mail train shatters the rear car, killing seven, most by scalding from steam from the engine's ruptured boiler, the highest single U.S. accident toll up to this time.
  • April 16, 1853 – Cheat River, Virginia, United States: Two Baltimore & Ohio passenger cars tumble down a hundred foot ravine above the Cheat River in Virginia (now West Virginia), west of Cumberland, Maryland, after they are derailed by a loose rail.
  • April 25, 1853 – Chicago, United States: An eastbound Michigan Central Railroad express bound for Toledo, Ohio, rams a Michigan Southern Railroad emigrant train at level Grand Crossing on the city's South Side at night. Twenty-one German emigrants are killed. The Michigan Southern engineer, who was running without a headlight, could have avoided the accident by either observing a stop signal or by accelerating his train, but did neither. Grand Crossing will be grade-separated after this accident.
  • December 1853 – Secaucus, New Jersey, United States: The same two trains that crashed on May 9, 1853, a Paterson and Hudson River Railroad emigrant train and an Erie Railroad express, collide again, within one mile (1.6 km) of last spring's wreck site near Secaucus. A brakeman and one passenger die, 24 others are injured.
  • May 11, 1858 – Utica, New York, United States: Two New York Central trains, a westbound freight and the eastbound Cincinnati Express, pass on a forty-foot wood trestle over Sauquoit Creek, 3 miles (4.8 km) from Utica. It collapses under their weight, utterly destroying the passenger train, killing nine and injuring 55.
  • April 30, 1866 – Collision of a passenger train travelling from Brighton to London Bridge with a goods train on an embankment north of Caterham Junction station, caused by a signalling error. 2 passengers and 2 railwaymen killed and a number of passengers injured.
  • August 10, 1871 – Thomas Green Clemson and Anna Maria Calhoun Clemson's son, Capt. John Calhoun Clemson (b. July 17, 1841), is killed in a train wreck between a passenger train and a lumber or freight train on the Blue Ridge Railroad near the future Seneca, South Carolina. He was 30 and unmarried.
  • April 19, 1873 – Wood River Junction (formerly Richmond Switch), Richmond, Rhode Island: The Wood River Branch of the New York, Providence and Boston Railroad train-bridge washaway and fire of passenger cars; Eleven people are killed and 22 are injured, with some bodies swept downstream and unaccounted for.
  • December 26, 1876 – Hansted, Denmark: The two locomotives in a snow plough train separate under unclear circumstances and crash, killing nine locomotive crew and injuring 26 workmen.
  • January 14, 1878 – Tariffville, Connecticut, United States: A double-headed ten-car Connecticut Western Railroad special train of the faithful, returning from a revival held in Hartford, crosses the Tariffville Bridge over the Farmington River near midnight, and the structure collapses. Both locomotives and the first four cars plunge into the ice-covered river, killing seventeen and injuring 43.
  • January 30, 1878 – Emu Plains, New South Wales, Australia: Two goods trains collide at Emu Plains when the guard of the train heading east went down the Lapstone Zig Zag instead of waiting for the train from Penrith to come up first. Five people were killed.
  • May 21, 1878 - Bennett, Colorado aka "Kiowa Crossing". A Kansas Pacific railway train lost in a washout; 3 killed.

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of rail accidents by country which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone update the TOC please to include 1813?[edit]

It is beyond my novice skills, Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by LMRT (talk • contribs) 21:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parr Moss, February 1, 1833[edit]

There's an inconsistency in the account of the 1833 Parr Moss accident - an eastbound train at Parr Moss would not have been approaching from Bolton. It would plausibly have been going to Bolton, via Kenyon Junction and Leigh.

However, it's also possible that the words "westbound" and "eastbound" are transposed - if it was the eastbound train that had broken down, then the straying passengers could plausibly have been struck by a train coming from Bolton.

Does anyone have a copy of the source book, to check whether this inconsistency lies in the original text, or if not, which way around the error is?

Quackdave (talk) 19:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As the source book sounded interesting over and above the ability to check this entry, I have now acquired a copy. The train which had failed had come from Liverpool, and the train which struck the wandering passengers was indeed coming from Bolton, therefore it's the "eastbound/westbound" in the article that are at fault. I'll go and swap them around. Quackdave (talk) 17:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Old railroad Idioms[edit]

In the late 1880s early 1900s sometimes there wasn’t enough gravel under The railroad ties.

A rail would come loose and pop up through the railroad car.

We would call this some idiom today. 24.190.199.158 (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we would call it "very bad track maintenance". For a rail to come loose in that manner would mean that the spikes securing it to the ties were all loose or missing, and that the bolts through the joint bars were also loose or missing. The lack of ballast (n.b. not gravel, it's far too fine) would be much less of a cause. See Railway track. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:25, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_rail_accidents_(before_1880)&oldid=1208286616"