Dublin Bus AV 266 written off after Luas Crash

dublinman1990

I didn't when to either update an old thread or start a new one, but anyway, there is some news floating around that the bus which was involved in the Luas crash in O'Connell Street in 2009 is not going to be repaired further.

The bus (AV 266) is to be sent to the crusher sometime in the near future. I suspect that it is a big disappointment for DB, especially for the staff out in Summerhill Garage.

I found pictures of the mangled bus in Broadstone HQ which were taken yesterday on Flickr.

It was probably not a bit surprising that the LUAS tram involved in the crash is back in service already.

The_Wrecker

We will strip it of every useable part before the frame goes to the crusher.

Cookie_Monster

Interesting that they've taped over the Dublin Bus writing on the back while it sitting there. can clearly see a lot of the engine bay has been stripped already too.
Few other rotting away there too, I love the look of those old KR(KA) buses

dublinman1990

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Interesting that they've taped over the Dublin Bus writing on the back while it sitting there. can clearly see a lot of the engine bay has been stripped already too.
Few other rotting away there too, I love the look of those old KR(KA) buses

Even DD21 is in there as well, which is a shame. Although her career ended through circumstances of a fire. It doesn't seem like a old bus at all, it is about the same age as an AV.

Alan_P

A very sensitive subject I realise, but has it ever been make known what happened the bus in the Eden Quay crash ?

ax586

Alan_P wrote: »

A very sensitive subject I realise, but has it ever been make known what happened the bus in the Eden Quay crash ?

It has been scraped there is a picture of it somewhere on Flickr .

The_Wrecker

Alan_P wrote: »

A very sensitive subject I realise, but has it ever been make known what happened the bus in the Eden Quay crash ?

Up at Louth commercials being stripped to keep others going with donor parts.

The_Wrecker

ax586 wrote: »

It has been scraped there is a picture of it somewhere on Flickr .

I was in the technical dept today and the bare frame has been returned for the training of complete electrical re-wiring skills. At least some good will come from the remains.

Cookie_Monster

The_Wrecker wrote: »

Up at Louth commercials being stripped to keep others going with donor parts.

why, surely it wasn't that badly damaged?
Did they have to strip it as part of the investigation?

Run_to_da_hills

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Interesting that they've taped over the Dublin Bus writing on the back

They have to hide its owners identity when transporting it.

Cookie_Monster

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

They have to hide its owners identity when transporting it.

And the hideous (and unique) paint scheme or stupid tag line doesn't give it away?

The_Wrecker

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

why, surely it wasn't that badly damaged?
Did they have to strip it as part of the investigation?

Its was stripped and rebuilt.

Cookie_Monster

The_Wrecker wrote: »

Its was stripped and rebuilt.

so why is it not in service then?

LXFlyer

I can't imagine that any drivers would wish to drive it given its history, and out of sheer deference to the deceased's relatives I doubt that the company would want to reinstate it.

Cookie_Monster

lxflyer wrote: »

I can't imagine that any drivers would wish to drive it given its history, and out of sheer deference to the deceased's relatives I doubt that the company would want to reinstate it.

If they have not fully found the fault and are concerned it could happen again that's understandable why it was not reinstated.

If however it was because "of deference to the deceased's relatives" I'd take issue with wasting a perfect usable asset for sentimental reasons. If that policy were followed by IE much of the DART fleet would be laid up by now, utter nonsense.

Bazzer2

lxflyer wrote: »

I can't imagine that any drivers would wish to drive it given its history, and out of sheer deference to the deceased's relatives I doubt that the company would want to reinstate it.

Frankly, I think that's superstitious nonsense.

kieran4003

DB would not keep a bus withdrawn for reasons like that. There are several BE vehicles in service that were involved in fatalities.

Run_to_da_hills

could they not convert it into a utility vehicle, cutting hedges, etc or sell it to someone that wants to convert it into a camper.

Conway635

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

If they have not fully found the fault and are concerned it could happen again that's understandable why it was not reinstated.

If however it was because "of deference to the deceased's relatives" I'd take issue with wasting a perfect usable asset for sentimental reasons. If that policy were followed by IE much of the DART fleet would be laid up by now, utter nonsense.

There is a valid reason why it was kept off the road that is not either of the above, unfortunately for legal reasons I cannot publish it here.

C635

LXFlyer

They are two totally different situations - in the case of the trains someone decided to take their own lives. In this case four people lost their lives allegedly due to the bus going out of control.

As far as I'm aware no conclusive evidence was found either way as to the cause, and hence I can entirely understand why that bus will not return to service.

Cookie_Monster

lxflyer wrote: »

They are two totally different situations - in the case of the trains someone decided to take their own lives.

not always, some muppet on a level crossing gets run down from time to time, though I suppose you could argue suicide by stupidity in that case.

Anyway it's some legal mystery reason, I guess us plebs will never know :rolleyes:

Conway635

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Anyway it's some legal mystery reason, I guess us plebs will never know :rolleyes:

Just to be clear - the reason the bus remained unused is not necessarily a legal one, however my inability to discuss it in public is. (and I'm talking real legal advice here - based on pre-publication vetting of an analysis I put together for a UK based trade magazine at the time of the investigation/court case)

C635

Tarabuses

lxflyer wrote: »

They are two totally different situations - in the case of the trains someone decided to take their own lives. In this case four people lost their lives allegedly due to the bus going out of control.

As far as I'm aware no conclusive evidence was found either way as to the cause, and hence I can entirely understand why that bus will not return to service.

I presume we are talking about the Wellington Quay accident here?

A bus is an inanimate object and is not directly responsible for anyone's death no matter how distressing the incident.