RATANA CRASH

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 April 1938, Page 14

RATANA CRASH

“THIRD "MAN” DENIED [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON- April 27. Th© allegation that the WellingtonNew Plymouth excursion train which was wrecked in a cutting near Ratana on the morning of March 2G, was travelling at an .excessive speed shortly before the derailment, was denied to-day hy another passenger, who volunteered to give evidence before the Board' of Inquiry set up to investigate the cause of the disaster. Sir Francis Fraser stated that the Minister had extended the time within which the board was required to report, to May 31, the driver not being sufficiently recovered to permit his making a statement to the Board. James C. Bell, driver in charge of a train from Wanganui which passed over the scene of the derailment at 1.40 a.in., and pulled into the Turakina siding to permit the excursion train to pass, said that the train when it passed was travelling af the usual speed. In the case'of a train passing like that, it was impossible to distinguish the faces of the men in the cab. On the run to Turakina, witness encountered a light fog, .just out of Wanganui. It was slightly heavier when going up the Fordell Bank, and at the top of the Wangaehu bank it was very heavy. That was the only patch of heavy fog. There was light fog, he thought, at Wangaehu Flat. To him, the fog appeared to be worse on the higher levels. It was patchy on the run. Witness said that he was the driver of the engine which was partially derailed on the curve on June 1. 1936. He had not heard that, as the result of an inquiry later, the conclusion was reached that some iorm of obstruction had been placed on the rails.

Witness said the fog on the Ratana flat was not so dense that, in his opinion, the driver of a train would not he able to see the radius board or the speed restriction boardIn reply to a question by the chairman, witness said that a driver would only see the notice boards at a distance of 15 to 20 yards. The chairman: If he saw the radius board at a distance of 15 yards, and was not exceeding 35 miles an hour when he saw it, in what distance should he be able to get down to 25 miles an hour?—l should think in 100 yards to 150 yards, assuming he was travelling 35 miles an hour, and immediately applied the brakes when he saw the radius board.

At what speed should he be travelling when he got to the point of derailment, 170 yards away?—He would be down to round about 25 miles an hour.

Mr H. F. O’Leary, K.C. (who appears for the Department): What sort of application of the brakes? —Surface application. Assuming he had on more than surface application, in what distance should he pull up to 20 miles an hour from 35 miles an hour? —I should say 80 yards or 90 yards. It all depends on the application of the brakes If he had on more than surface application, he could bring the speed down to 20 miles an hour from 35 miles an hour in less than 320 feet.

ENGINEER’S STATEMENT. A prepared’ statement was read as i-evidence by Alexander S. Wanbrough, I designing engineer of the chief engineer’s branch of the New Zealand Railways, who slated that the reduction in speed called for by the notice board at the ton of the Ratana grade was only moderate. Even if the engine driver failed to observe the speed restriction of 20 miles an hour as prescribed, the speed of the train should not at any time be more than 35 miles an hour, either for any part of the distance of six miles and three-quar-ters before reaching the place where the accident occurred or for a further distance of nine miles and three-quar-ters after passing it. A passenger in the last car, HenryArthur Hare, a hotel porter, of Wellington, who volunteered to give evidence, said the train was rocking just before the accident. Witness thought it was off the line, and running over the sleepers, but he did not have time •to switch on the lights. He heard the locomotive whistle three times, the last whistle being particularly long. This, said witness, might have been due to the whistle jamming. He had passed over the line three weeks previously, and on the morning of March 26 did not consider the speed of the •train to be any more than on the previous occasion. He estimated’ it at between 25 and 30 miles an hour. Witness described assisting with the injured, and telephoning to the train control, Wanganui, from the track telephone. The night was dark, but ■there was no fog. The chairman: When was it that you heard rumours of a third man being on the engine?—lt was before the arrival of the doctors, about 3-45 a.m. You did not sec this alleged third man? —No, I did not. There was no sign of anybody in dungarees until the arrival of the relief train, said witness.

In reply to a question by Mr Foote, witness said he felt the train rocking a few seconds before the accident. To Mr Watson, witness said he came forward-to give evidence as a result of reading the evidence of Winstone, given at the inquiry the previous day. .

Mr Watson: The two main points in his evidence were the alleged excessive speed and a third man being in the cab. Substantially, you disagree with Winstone’s evidence? Witness: Absolutely. You did not agree that the train was travelling at an excessive speed five minutes before the accident?— No. Was it Winstone’s statement, regarding the speed of the train that made you come forward?—Yes. Witness added that he did' not see any man who resembled the man in dungarees. He spoke to practically every passenger in response to a request from train control, Wanganui, asking him tp ascertain whether the passengers desired to continue their journey, or return to Wellington. Evidence of the rolling stock involved in the accident being in good condition before W4 left Wellington was given by Herbert Rigden Lepper, of Wellington, and' Edward Samuel Creelman, train examiner, of Wellington.