Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 13:35 20 Apr 2024
- Three men killed in retail park car crash named
* Some Wales roads to revert to 30mph after backlash
- Three men killed in retail park car crash identified
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
20th Apr (1789)
Opening of Sapperton Canal Tunnel

Train RunningCancelled
13:07 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
18:52 London Paddington to Great Malvern
19:19 Carmarthen to Swansea
Short Run
10:03 London Paddington to Penzance
11:09 Gloucester to Weymouth
14:48 London Paddington to Carmarthen
15:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
Delayed
08:15 Penzance to London Paddington
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
April 20, 2024, 13:53:20 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[279] Somerset and Dorset Devonshire Tunnel flood
[220] Rail to refuge / Travel to refuge
[109] On reservations, fees and supplements - Interrail
[37] Rail delay compensation payments hit £100 million
[33] Problems with the Night Riviera sleeper - December 2014 onward...
[16] Difficult to argue with e-bike/scooter rules?
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12
  Print  
Author Topic: Two trains collide near Salisbury - 31 Oct 21  (Read 21854 times)
lympstone_commuter
Transport Scholar
Full Member
******
Posts: 83


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: November 03, 2021, 09:12:37 »

This cab-view video shows the state of the vegetation in the cutting west of the tunnel in 2015.

In this video, signal SY31 is passed at around 38:33 (having become visible at around 38:21), and the junction is passed at around 38:45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLV_D2RHeMc



apologies - typo -  I meant *east* of the tunnel, not west.

Also very best wishes to the driver https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59143021


Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12357


View Profile Email
« Reply #91 on: November 03, 2021, 11:00:27 »

Driver is 75…..is s/he the oldest on the railway?

Various media also reporting a broken ankle
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5318


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: November 03, 2021, 11:04:17 »

There’s an updated RAIB (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) “news story” this morning that explains current understanding:

Quote
RAIB’s preliminary examination has found that the movement of train 1F30 across the junction was being protected from trains approaching on the Down Main line by signal SY31, which was at danger (displaying a red aspect). Train 1L53 passed this signal, while it was at danger, by around 220 metres, immediately prior to the collision occurring.

Preliminary analysis of data downloaded from the On Train Data Recorder (OTDR (On Train Data Recorder)) fitted to train 1L53 shows that the driver initially applied service braking to slow the train on approach to the caution signal before signal SY31. Around 12 seconds after service braking started, the driver made an emergency brake demand. As the train approached signal SY31, and with the emergency brake still being demanded by the driver, a second emergency brake demand was made by the train protection and warning system (TPWS (Train Protection and Warning System)). These emergency brake demands did not prevent the train from reaching the junction, where the collision occurred. OTDR analysis indicates that wheel slide was present both when the driver applied service braking and after emergency braking was demanded. This was almost certainly a result of low adhesion between the train’s wheels and the rails.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/collision-between-passenger-trains-at-salisbury-tunnel-junction

Logged
JayMac
Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 18918



View Profile
« Reply #93 on: November 03, 2021, 11:24:21 »

No doubt the full report will focus intently on why the RHTT (Rail Head Treatment Train) didn't run as scheduled. There may be some difficult questions for Network Rail to answer.
Logged

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

- Sir Terry Pratchett.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7163


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: November 03, 2021, 13:03:14 »

The RIAB statement has this to say about the approach by 1L53 from further back:

Quote
Preliminary analysis of data downloaded from the On Train Data Recorder (OTDR (On Train Data Recorder)) fitted to train 1L53 shows that the driver initially applied service braking to slow the train on approach to the caution signal before signal SY31. Around 12 seconds after service braking started, the driver made an emergency brake demand. As the train approached signal SY31, and with the emergency brake still being demanded by the driver, a second emergency brake demand was made by the train protection and warning system (TPWS (Train Protection and Warning System)). These emergency brake demands did not prevent the train from reaching the junction, where the collision occurred. OTDR analysis indicates that wheel slide was present both when the driver applied service braking and after emergency braking was demanded. This was almost certainly a result of low adhesion between the train’s wheels and the rails.

The caution signal, SY29, is passed on that cab video at 37:55, followed by the 50 mph sign just by Laverstock North Junction at 38:08. I presume slowing for the speed limit reduction (from 90 mph) would need to start well before SY29, and once its aspect was seen the speed limit made no difference.

I still can't quite get the timings to work and place the two trains on the junction at once. It's only a couple of minutes, so it may be down to the nature of the timings recorded, or indeed to my sums. The distance from the call at Andover to Salisbury Tunnel Junction is 16m 13ch, and at a steady 90 mph with no call would take 10.9s. Add acceleration time and it's barely possible to get there in 12s (with rounding of times) and the path allowed 15s. Recorded timings at Andover and the junction are 18:30 and (for 1F30) 18:42, so by my reckoning there can't have been much deceleration at all.

Thus I was not surprised by the RAIB (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)'s comment about slide starting from the initial service braking application. As to why ... well, that stretch of track is not overhung by big trees like the junction itself. So I shall be interested to see not just the actual timings, but the full explanation of the lack of adhesion. If there is one, of course; previous investigations have often failed to come up with clear evidence from the railhead itself to fully explain sliding.
Logged
Clan Line
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 858



View Profile
« Reply #95 on: November 03, 2021, 13:23:23 »

Driver is 75…..is s/he the oldest on the railway?


I went to school with someone with the same name as the driver: not a particularly common surname, right age, right area.................I wonder ??
« Last Edit: November 03, 2021, 14:54:46 by Clan Line » Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5408



View Profile
« Reply #96 on: November 03, 2021, 13:29:17 »

Whilst leaves on the rail are the most probable reason for the reported wheel slide, I suppose that oil or grease on the rails is an outside possibility. That could result from a defect on another train leaking oil. Rare, but just about possible.

ISTR (I seem to recall/remember) a buffer stop collision that occurred some years ago despite the driver braking correctly. Oil or grease contamination was considered as a possible cause.

Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5318


View Profile
« Reply #97 on: November 03, 2021, 14:31:10 »

I hope they look at the part TPWS (Train Protection and Warning System) played in the incident. Once the train passes the red the driver loses all control and is effectively a passenger. I’d be interested to know if the emergency brake application made the slide worse.
I think your question is overtaken by the latest RAIB (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) explanation, the driver was already emergency braking, so AIUI (as I understand it) in that case TPWS just duplicates the demand, but there’s no additional effect?

Paul
Logged
JayMac
Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 18918



View Profile
« Reply #98 on: November 03, 2021, 14:34:47 »

On my train from Salisbury to Templecombe earlier today it was noticeable how much more cautiously we approached each station stop. I presume drivers have been asked to drive even more defensively than they usually do.
Logged

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

- Sir Terry Pratchett.
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6438


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: November 03, 2021, 15:30:25 »

I hope they look at the part TPWS (Train Protection and Warning System) played in the incident. Once the train passes the red the driver loses all control and is effectively a passenger. I’d be interested to know if the emergency brake application made the slide worse.
I think your question is overtaken by the latest RAIB (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) explanation, the driver was already emergency braking, so AIUI (as I understand it) in that case TPWS just duplicates the demand, but there’s no additional effect?

Paul

It would seem that the combination of Mk1 human eyeball and Mk1 human brain beat the computers to it.
Logged

Now, please!
Oxonhutch
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1248



View Profile
« Reply #100 on: November 03, 2021, 15:35:53 »

Do these SWR» (South Western Railway - about) train sets have sand shots to assist in emergency braking?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40786



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #101 on: November 04, 2021, 00:44:41 »

From gov.uk by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch on 3rd November 2021.

Quote
Collision between passenger trains at Salisbury Tunnel Junction

Investigation into a collision between passenger trains at Salisbury Tunnel Junction, Wiltshire, 31 October 2021

At around 18:45 hrs on 31 October 2021, train reporting number 1L53, the 17:20 hrs South Western Railway passenger service from London Waterloo to Honiton, collided with the side of train 1F30, the 17:08 hrs Great Western Railway passenger service from Portsmouth Harbour to Bristol Temple Meads. The collision took place at Salisbury Tunnel Junction, which is on the immediate approach to Fisherton Tunnel, near Salisbury in Wiltshire.

This junction allows the Up and Down Dean lines which lead to and from Eastleigh to merge with the Up and Down Main lines which lead to and from Basingstoke. At the time of the accident train 1F30 was using the junction to join the Down Main line from the Down Dean line, while train 1L53 was approaching the junction on the Down Main line from the direction of Basingstoke.



The impact of the collision caused the front two coaches of train 1L53 and the rear two coaches of train 1F30 to derail. Both trains continued some distance into Fisherton tunnel following the collision, before they came to a stop. Thirteen passengers and one member of railway staff required treatment in hospital as a result of the accident, which also caused significant damage to the trains and railway infrastructure involved.

RAIB (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)’s preliminary examination has found that the movement of train 1F30 across the junction was being protected from trains approaching on the Down Main line by signal SY31, which was at danger (displaying a red aspect). Train 1L53 passed this signal, while it was at danger, by around 200 metres, immediately prior to the collision occurring.

Preliminary analysis of data downloaded from the On Train Data Recorder (OTDR (On Train Data Recorder)) fitted to train 1L53 shows that the driver initially applied service braking to slow the train on approach to the caution signal before signal SY31. Around 12 seconds after service braking started, the driver made an emergency brake demand. As the train approached signal SY31, and with the emergency brake still being demanded by the driver, a second emergency brake demand was made by the train protection and warning system (TPWS (Train Protection and Warning System)). These emergency brake demands did not prevent the train from reaching the junction, where the collision occurred. OTDR analysis indicates that wheel slide was present both when the driver applied service braking and after emergency braking was demanded. This was almost certainly a result of low adhesion between the train’s wheels and the rails.

Our investigation will seek to identify the sequence of events which led to the accident. It will also consider:
* the level of wheel/rail adhesion present on the approach to Salisbury Tunnel junction
* the status and performance of the braking, wheel slide protection and sanding systems on train 1L53
* the behaviour of both trains during and following the collision
* South Western Railway’s policies relating to low wheel/rail adhesion
* Network Rail’s policies relating to low wheel/rail adhesion and how it managed the risk of low adhesion in this area
* the processes used to assess and control the risk of overrun at signal SY31
* any relevant underlying factors, including any actions taken in response to previous safety recommendations.
Our investigation is independent of any investigation by the railway industry, the British Transport Police or by the industry’s regulator, the Office of Rail and Road.

We will publish our findings, including any recommendations to improve safety, at the conclusion of our investigation. This report will be available on our website.

You can subscribe to automated emails notifying you when we publish our reports.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2021, 00:51:33 by grahame » Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
bradshaw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1455



View Profile
« Reply #102 on: November 04, 2021, 11:32:59 »

Network Rail Wessex are providing a developing thread on the recovery of the carriages throughout the day, complete with photographs, on their Twitter account

https://twitter.com/networkrailwssx/status/1456213392847421440?s=21
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12357


View Profile Email
« Reply #103 on: November 04, 2021, 15:08:51 »

Paul Clifton has a few others on his twitter feed courtesy of a lass from ITV
Logged
MVR S&T
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 438


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: November 04, 2021, 18:51:52 »

Video and photos of the recovery:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59163323

Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page