Echoes of Potters Bar 2002..?

Thought so too, Red Squirrel. I'd have thought there would have been earth leakage circuit breakers, as well as residual current protection. But if one bit can fail... who knows?

Electrocution was reported right from the start. The train mowed down several OLE supports, so the line may have dropped towards the ground before power was removed. In addition, this line is 1500V DC, not 25 kV AC, so the fault current to trip the breakers will be much higher.

... they are often screened by an insulting barrier.

I also think that the contrast to the safety of Aviation vs other transport modes is ridiculous.

How so? Are you saying that rail has nothing to learn from the excellent safety systems used in aviation?

I also think that the contrast to the safety of Aviation vs other transport modes is ridiculous. A Pilot told me you're more likely to die slipping over in the bath than on an Aircraft.

I note that some tabloid reports are suggesting that passengers were electrocuted. Is that likely? Wouldn't the power have tripped out pretty quickly as soon as a derailing train shorted the circuit?

The morning after successfully flying my first ever solo cross-country flight,

For someone on the platform the position is very different, a person standing on the ground could well be killed by contact with displaced overhead line equipment that remained live, even briefly.

Being that it was cross-country, were there plenty of toilets, but all smelling worse than a downtown Kolkata sewer? Did you turn up expecting a seat but had to fight for one because the reservation system had gone t*ts up? Did the on-board catering consist of nothing more than a melting Kit-Kat and a warm can of Carling, delivered to you by a trolley dolly who turned up 3 minutes before your destination?

That's my experience of travelling solo cross-country.

Looking at the electrocution question again, I recall hearing that DC is more dangerous than AC, because the latter causes muscle spasm, meaning that one is likely to be thrown away from the danger. No-one on the train would be in danger in any case, but people on the platform may, sadly, have been. It remains a moot point only. Being crushed or electrocuted is unimportant compared to being killed or seriously injured.

Ah, les Fran^ais - quelle finesse!

But seriously, ET, I appreciate the explanation. As a barrack-room electrician only, I had missed the blindingly obvious. It seems then that the main protection from shock is normally the physical separation of equipment from civilian.

[I can not recall an incident where a passenger in a train has been electrocuted by the passage of OLE fault current through a train. 

Neither can I. The "Faraday Cage" effect would see any current running to earth around passengers, rather than through them. I have twice, in former times, seen Blackpool trams - both double-deckers - "brewed up" by a catastrophic short circuit. No passengers were harmed, although many were shaken by the sight and noise, and even more were inconvenienced.

No one has yet reported that it was a fishplate stuck in a diamond cross-over some yards north of the station...twitter photo (which I meant to grab) showed it stuck in the crossover. A loose nut on the wooden (rather old & splitting) sleeper that the diamond crossing was attached to.

Indeed you did. It was the mention of it having rotated while attached by one bolt that threw me - the photos in that article you linked to very clearly shiws one totally loose fishplate in the diamond of the crossing damaged where the train has obviously gone over it, and another loose lying on the sleeper aside the diamond. Neither attached by one bolt

A couple of things struck me in the pictures. It was always clear that the bits sitting on the rail in the second one had been collected and put there, presumably after the main legal record photos had been done. Looking closer, I see several rusty bolts, presumably discarded during earlier work. Isn't this now regarded as unacceptable in Britain, at least since Potters Bar and Grayrigg?

There are a number of new-looking loose nuts, but also what look like bolt heads (square) and shafts that have been sheared. What stands out by its absence a shaft with a nut still on it. It is not clear which way the bolts went through this particular joint - the gap on one side looks narrow enough to hinder inserting a bolt, but maybe not. You can see why the official response has been one of energetic head-scratching.

Another piece in Le Figaro. They have got hold of some track inspection records going back to February, and say that these did mention faults on this stretch of line. However, the detail is a bit lacking - while they say a missing bolt was recorded in February, it may have been a different one.

The report notes the similarity of this track failure and resulting accident to Southall (2002) and a Danish accident (Farris,  2012), but not Grayrigg (2007). In all cases they observe there were specific technical issues, as well as poor maintenance.

I find there drawing a parallel with Southall strange, my recollection was not a track failure, it was Railtrack signaller / route control crossing a freight train from Southall Down West yard across to the UP Relief, which meant crossing over the DN and UP Main and DN Relief in front of a class 1 passenger train which was compounded by the ATP not functioning correctly and the drive "packing his bag" 

I do think Network Rail are in a much better place than they were at the time of Grayrigg in 2007 I cannot speak for maintenance, in projects the process, procedures and checking that has to be done before, during and after any work is exceedingly onerous.

Wrong derailment.  That was the 19 September 1997 one.  The one similar to the French one is that at Southall that occured on 24 November 2002 http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2003/e03027.htm

A year after the disaster, the conclusions of reports commissioned by the judges in charge of the investigation are instructive for the SNCF and its maintenance procedures.

Findings:

Rail disaster 12 July 2013 last Bretigny-sur-Orge (Essonne), which killed seven people and wounded thirty, is definitely due to a maintenance problem. It is telling that the railway and metallurgical expertise has procured reports whivh  Le Figaro and the prosecutor Evry shall make public on Monday. In these extremely severe reports for the SNCF, sent to judges on June 25, expert engineers (Court of Appeal of Douai) and Pierre Michel Dubernard Henquenet note that "metallurgical examinations were made possible to establish that we are not in the presence of a malicious act, and the process that led to the complete disintegration of the assembly is quite the opposite over several months and involved the entire assembly failing, from which were recorded over 200 anomalies of varying degrees of criticality. Most of these abnormalities were known from the railway company or its agents, but were not adequately remedied. The conclusion of the experts is final and evokes "dilapidation never seen elsewhere." He added: "imfrastructure perished by fatigue, vibration, beat, defects tightening, wear, etc.. Damages relating to the quality of maintenance. "
Number 3657 Intercity train consisted of seven cars Reef. There were 385 passengers on board. The train had left the Gare d'Austerlitz to 16 h 53. At 17 h 11, as it prepared to cross Br^tigny station vi platform 1, passengers felt a shock when crossing a double junction crossing . The train derailed and separated into two parts between cars 4 and while traveling at 137 km / h. the authorized speed limit on this road being 150 km / h. Due to the state of the network, the experts appointed by the judges noted in their report that "it would be desirable to limit to 100 km / hour speed trains approaching the station Br^tigny."
Inadequate monitoring network

It further notes that "current maintenance requirements" for sleepers at double junctions are "inadequate because insufficient." Currently, SNCF dismantles the spliced ​​connections to check every three years because they are classified as "comfort items". Experts advise strongly to dismantle every year to inspect. According to them, the tour audits on channels should lead agents to "the immediate compliance", which is not the case today. The network status Br^tigny "would logically have led the SNCF to increased surveillance, and especially adapted," they write.
Experts are clearly involved in the railway maintenance organization: "There is also important to say that the SNCF staff responsible for implementation of track maintenance and equipment should be chosen according to the first criteria for solid training in engineering and in addition have received extensive specialized training. "an allusion to the youth of the agent who made the last inspection tour July 4, 2013, eight days before the accident. It was a railwayman 25, freshly graduated from an engineering school. In February 2013, he became leader of nearby lanes Br^tigny. He framed 19 agents responsible ways to do maintenance on the rail network in the industry. At the last inspection, no abnormality was reported.
Abnormalities inadequately considered

"The maintenance requirements of the SNCF, complex, difficult to interpret or apply by field workers were not fully met (...). This has led to a lack of consideration and processing of errors encountered; It should be noted in this regard that many observations made ​​during the monitoring tours found themselves carried from one operation to another, sometimes to eventually disappear without us was sure they were treated . "And experts conclude by holding the top three factors that led to the accident by improper maintenance" repositories large maintenance superabundant, sometimes inadequate or contradictory so against-productive. "
Finally judicial engineers who conducted the inspection lane January 28 rounds alert on the status of network station of Noisy-le-Sec (Seine-Saint-Denis). They consider disturbing.

les ing^nieurs judiciaires

Eight injured as train hits lorry near Paris
Published: 21 Apr 2015 11:37 GMT+02:00
Updated: 21 Apr 2015 11:37 GMT+02:00

UPDATED: A passenger train hit a lorry at a level crossing in the town of Nangis to the south-east of Paris on Tuesday morning, leaving seven people injured, including one seriously.

The incident occurred near the train station at Nangis, south east of the capital (see map below), at around 8.45am on Tuesday.

The train, which was carrying 350 passengers from Belfort to Paris, crashed into a lorry that had stopped for unknown reasons at a level crossing near the station.

The impact was so severe that five carriages of the train were derailed.

Firefighters, police, and ambulances were sent to the scene, where seven people were injured - one seriously, said train operator SNCF in a statement.

Passengers took to social media to share images images from the crash, which show the train's derailment and debris on a nearby platform.

SNCF said that an investigation had been launched to determine exactly what went wrong.

Seine-et-Marne - 37 bless^s dont 3 dans un ^tat s^rieux apr^s la collision entre un train et un poids lourd
Un train de voyageurs a percut^ un poids lourd, ce mardi vers 8h45, ^ hauteur du passage en gare de Nangis. Le bilan fait ^tat de 37 bless^s dont trois dans un ^tat s^rieux.

21/04/2015 ^ 13:26 par admin

L'accident s'est produit ce mardi matin ^ hauteur du passage ^ niveau de Nangis.Trente-quatre personnes ont ^ l^rement bless^es et deux autres plus gravement, dont le conducteur de la locomotive.

Un bilan provisoire important. Un accident entre un train et un poids lourd s^est produit ce mardi 21 avril vers 8 h 40 ^ hauteur du passage ^ niveau de la gare de Nangis. D^apr^s la gendarmerie, 37 personnes ont ^  bless^es dont trois sont dans un ^tat s^rieux. L^une d^elles a ^ h^liport^e vers la Piti^-Salp^tri^re et les deux autres conduites vers l^pital de Provins. Leurs pronostics vitaux ne sont toutefois pas engag^s.

Les autres personnes, plus l^rement touch^es sont soign^es sur place. Un important dispositif de secours est actuellement mobilis^ dont un h^licopt^re de la s^curit^ civile.

Le choc s^est produit apr^s que le convoi exceptionnel qui transportait des engins agricoles s^est retrouv^ bloqu^ hauteur du passage ^ niveau. Une enqu^te de gendarmerie a ^ ouverte pour comprendre les circonstances de cet accident. D^apr^s les premi^res constations, il pourrait s^agit d^une panne. Le conducteur aurait tent^ de pr^venir les agents SNCF mais le train ^tait d^ engag^. Il s^agit d^un Intercit^ qui faisait la liaisons entre Belfort (90) et Paris. Le train a percut^ la remorque, ce qui a entra^ le d^raillement de sept wagons.

Today Montpellier was struck by flash flooding, for the third time in a year (it happened twice in ten days last September). A TGV was derailed by a landslip, which blocked the line from N^mes (and reportedly between Narbonne to Toulouse as well). This is not an LGV - there is a plan to build one which should be starting about now - but it is the main line from the Rhone valley towards Toulouse and Spain, and the main TGV route to Spain.

A high-speed TGV train has derailed near the eastern French city of Strasbourg, killing at least seven people, officials say.

The crash happened during a test run in the town of Eckwersheim, on a new Paris-Strasbourg line.
Reports say technicians were on board the train and seven people were injured.

The injured have been taken to hospital by helicopters.

The AFP news agency quotes the Alsace regional prefecture as saying the derailment happened due to "excessive speed".

Pictures later showed the locomotive partly submerged in a canal alongside the track. Wreckage was also scattered in a field beside the track.

Rescue teams - including divers - are working at the scene.
Reports say the Paris-Strasbourg high-speed line is scheduled to open next year.

Transport Secretary Alain Vidalies and Ecology Minister Segolene Royal will visit the scene, French media reported.

Inevitably this was not a major news item - there's just too much news today.

French TGV high-speed train derails near Strasbourg


The locomotive plunged into a canal alongside the track after derailing

A high-speed TGV train has derailed near the eastern French city of Strasbourg, killing at least 10 people, officials say.

The crash happened during a test run in the town of Eckwersheim, on a new Paris-Strasbourg line.

The train was carrying 49 people when it derailed, caught fire, and plunged into a canal. The injured were airlifted to hospital.

The derailment was due to "excessive speed", officials say.

Pictures showed the locomotive partly submerged. Wreckage was also scattered in a field beside the track.

Reports say the Paris-Strasbourg high-speed line is scheduled to open next year.

Junior transport minister Alain Vidalies and Ecology Minister Segolene Royal will visit the scene, French media reported.

France TGV crash: Children on board derailed train

Several children were on board when a high-speed train derailed during a test run in France, killing 11 people, the rail company SNCF has said.

Five people are still missing and more than 30 were injured in the TGV crash near the eastern city of Strasbourg.

Investigators are trying to determine who the children are and why they were on board when access was meant to be restricted to technicians.

It is not clear whether children were among the dead.

"That's not a practice that the SNCF recognises," said company chief Guillaume Pepy. "A test train is a test train".

SNCF said it was possible that railway workers' children were on board when the train crashed, reportedly at around 350km/h (217mph).

Excessive speed has been blamed for the crash, the first fatal accident since TGV trains began operating in 1981.

The train ended up partially submerged in a canal under a bridge.


The train ended up in a canal


It is the first fatal crash involving a TGV in more than three decades


Officials say excessive speed was to blame


Investigators are trying to determine why children were on board

Incidentally, on the LGV trains run on the left, so this run was in reverse. (Trains in Alsace run on the right, so the junction just ahead has to accommodate this switch.)

With kids on board.

It is known These test trains have been running 10% over speed limits with safety equipment off so as it is possible to run at limit plus 10%. The speed at derailment is not confirmed, but the speed limit at location is 160 kph, so plus 10% 176kph. This was around about the 200th test, and all the previous tests ran successfully at the plus 10%.

The train involved was the French version of our NMT train, what kind of staffing does the NMT run with?

The 5 still missing in the above report the BBC are now saying are accounted for and weren't actually on the train, but others may have been due to the "extra guests".

Thanks for the extra info.   Presumably, TGVs in normal use have an automatic system to prevent the train going faster than the permitted line speed.  Presumably also, when you do the 10% overspeed test you disable or override that automatic system (or you do it on track before the lineside part of that system is working) .  Presumably, that then allows for human error to result in you exceeding the linespeed by more than 10%.

Advance news (in French) on RTL of the results of the enquiries. The first report is due out tomorrow - I think that's the interim technical report from the BEA-TT.

RTL concentrate more on the (leaked) prosecutors' report, which seems to be heading for a criminal prosecution as well as a civil liability case. The news item talks about missing bolts in fishplates that no-one is bothered about, and maintenance that was both random and not thorough enough. The other theme, which is obviously going to have political implications, is the confused relationship between RFF and SNCF, and how this clouds the responsibility for maintenance standards.

All sounds rather familiar, doesn't it?

Is this line left hand running throughout? Reason for asking is that I've read elsewhere that the norm is right hand running in the d^partements that border Germany (Moselle, Alsace?).

Are LGVs left hand running within France regardless?

The five "missing" persons are now believed not to have been on board, so the casualty number is as in that last report: 11 killed and 5 still critically ill in hospital. One of those killed was a child, and their presence has still not been explained. Other reports suggest this kind of "treat" was common practice, though unofficial.

An update on the casualties, supposed to be final apart from four people on the danger list in hospital:
There were 53 people on board, of whom four were minors.
Eleven were killed, but none of the children.
All of the rest were classed as "injured", either slightly or now in a stable condition.

So, are we now sure that no children were among the dead? 

Finally, it surely reveals  errors  of  human  behaviour  in  the  driver's  cab  and  in  the communication between the cab and the rest of the trainset, which the investigation will examine.