TAY BRIDGE DISASTER

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 898, 15 February 1930, Page 6

TAY BRIDGE DISASTER

50-YEAR-OLD TRAGEDY TRAIN BLOWN INTO SEA Few' wilder nights have been known in Dundee than that of Sunday, December 28. 1879. Within the present month we have had more than enough experience of gales by land and sea, but It may be doubted whether any of them eaualled in fury that which swept the Tay estuary on that night, says the London "Observer.” So furious was the wind that, as night closed in. a sense of foreboding struck cold on the hearts of those citizens who remembered how some of the weather-wise had shaken their heads as they looked at the new railway bridge which was the pride of Dundee, and foretold that It would go hard with it on some such night as this. So strong was this foreboding that, acting independently, quite a number of people made their way to the neighbourhood of the northern signal box in order to watch, between hope and fear, the coming of the Edinburgh mail. At about a quarter-past seven the lights of the train were seen on the bridge. There are various accounts of what followed, but they agree in essentials. “Once on the bridge,” to quote from one of them, “it seemed to move with great swiftness along, and when the engine entered the tunnel-like cloisters of the great girders my little girl (this family was watching from the shelter of a house) exactly described the effect of the lights as seen through the latticework when she exclaimed, ‘Look, papa, isn’t that like lightning?’ "All this takes some time to write, but to the eye it seemed as if, almost simultaneous with the entrance of the train upon this part of the bridge, a comet-like burst of fiery sparks sprang out, as if forcibly ejected into the darkness from the engine. In a long, visible trail the streak of lire was seen, till quenched in the stormy waters below. Then there was absolute darkness on the bridge.” SIGNALMAN’S EVIDENCE

Actually the last sentences of this account anticipate events a little. At the time it would seem that no one realised what had happened very precisely. Communication, however, was set up between the watchers and the signalman on the Dundee shore, and he attempted to get into touch with his colleague at the other end of the bridge, only to find that he could get no answer. At the Inquiry there was some evidence from the signalbo?: on the south shore. A railway workman had gone up into the box.

and stood watching the train along the bridge. He spoke of seeing first “sparks of fire,” and - then “great flashes of fire before the tail-lamps disappeared.” At first the signalman scouted the idea of an accident, remarking that he had seen similar sparks when for any reason brakes were applied on the bridge. Gradually, however, the other man’s uneasiness communicated itself to him, and he also tried to speak of his colleague at the other end of the bridge with the same negative result. By this time .the gravest fears were entertained in Dundee. If 'anything, ■ the gale had increased, so much so that it was at the risk of life that anyone attempted tt> walk along the bridsie. Eventually, with groat difficulty two men crawled along till, as the wind swept the clouds fitfully from the face of the moon, they saw that the middle of the bridge had disappeared. THE "SPARKS OF FIRE” Meanwhile, about ten o’clock a message had come that mall-bags were being picked up on the beach at Broughty Ferry, and there could be no doubt that a terrible disaster had happened, and an examination of the bridge from the water by ferry steamer confirmed the worst fears. The exact course of events could not be known. The. train consisted of one first class coach, one second class, and four third class, with engine and •brake-van. It will never be known at what point, if at all, the driver realised what had happened,’though evidence of the “sparks of fire” from the south side suggests that he may have seen the gap, and may have put on his brakes in a desperate and unsuccessful effort to pull up before reaching the cavern. The loss of life could not be ascertained. There were no survivors; probably about seventy-five perished. The first proposal to bridge the Tay estuary at Dundee was made in 1803, but it was not until 1870 that the scheme for a bridge within a few yards of two miles long between Newport and Fife and the town of Dundee was sanctioned. The engineer who designed it was Thomas Bouch, and it was the: central thirteen of the eighty-five spans which gave way. At the inquiry these spans were described as being of "wrought iron lattice girders on piers each consisting of six cast iron columns braced with wrought iron ties gnd struts and resting on foundation piers of masonry, brickwork and concrete.” The total length which fell was 3,149 feet. SIR THOMAS BOUCH’S DEATH

In the official report on the cause of the disaster it was stated that the bridge, which had been completed in 1877 and opened to the public use in May, 1878, having cost £350,000, was of “insufficient strength in that

the base of the piers was too narrow, occasioning a very great strain on the struts and ties; the angles at which the latter were disposed and the mode of connecting them to the columns were such as to render them of little or no use.” The yielding of the struts and ties under pressure of the. gale was the immediate cause of the disaster. In the case of Sir Thomas Bouch the shock was so great that his health gave way, and he died the following October. The new Tay bridge was built be,tween 1882 and 1881, but the disaster of 1879 had a profound effect on English bridge building, and may be said perhaps to have produced good out of evil in the certainty that never again would a bridge in this country, exposed to high winds, be built on an insufficient platform or without the most meticulous examination of A'ind pressures. The fall of the bridge had immediate reactions not far away. In 1873 the Forth Bridge Company had been formed to carry out plans prepared by Bouch for a suspension bridge with two large spans of 1,600 feet each. The capital was subscribed; the necessary Act aad been passed through Parliament; work had been begun on lnchgarvie when the Tay bridge disaster happened. At once the work was stopped on the Forth bridge, Bouch’s plans were abandoned, and in 1881 the wellknown design of Fowler and Baker for a cantilever bridge was substituted. It is possible that the fall of Tay Bridge may have averted a greater tragedy on the Forth.