Just been reported (https://news.sky.com/story/two-trains-crash-between-andover-and-salisbury-with-emergency-services-at-the-scene-12456655). Not far from me. Hope it's not too serious ???
EDIT: Looks to be more IN Salisbury as opposed to between there and Andover. Adjacent to London Road, a road I know well. Not a fast line as it isn't too far from the station.
Bbc website says between salisbury and grateley plus https://news.sky.com/story/two-trains-crash-between-andover-and-salisbury-with-emergency-services-at-the-scene-12456655
Nature of incident, from PoliticsForAll Twitter feed, accessed via railforums.co.uk
Passenger train (1F30) struck an object in Fisherton Tunnel, Salisbury and derailed, then struck by another passenger train (1L53), which also derailed
UPDATE at 21.23: Photos of incident tweeted on PoliticsForAll
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI
Tweet from Philip Haigh from Network Rail's press statement
"GWR 1708 Portsmouth-Bristol struck object, derailed as it approached Salisbury. Derailment knocked out signalling. SWR 1720 London-Honiton hit Bristol train. Reports of injuries."
https://twitter.com/philatrail/status/1454909476948033536?s=21
Feel for those involved. 1708 portsmouth to bristol, 1720 waterloo honiton. Realtime trains reports issues with lineside vegetation..weather possibly involved
Live video of response here (https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=notif&v=1116111805460088¬if_id=1635713023100837¬if_t=live_video)
sorry, don't do faceache, so seems I'll have to wait for ITV news,
which of course I have to pay the BBC to watch :censored:
From Sky News:
Network Rail says a carriage derailed after hitting an object as it approached Salisbury station, and another train then collided with it. A number of people have been injured after two trains collided in a "major incident" near Salisbury station.
One carriage derailed at Fisherton Tunnel shortly before 7pm on Sunday, and another service crashed into it. All those on board have been evacuated.
One of the train drivers was trapped in his cab but has since been freed and taken to hospital. He is not seriously injured, the PA news agency reported.
A "number" of people were injured but no one died, British Transport Police said. Earlier, PA said "up to a dozen" had been hurt.
Network Rail said the rear carriage of the 17.08 Great Western Railway service from Portsmouth Harbour to Bristol Temple Meads "derailed after striking an object on its approach to Salisbury station".
It added: "The derailment knocked out all of the signalling in the area. Subsequently, the 17.20 South Western Railway service from London Waterloo to Honiton then collided with the Bristol train.
(https://e3.365dm.com/21/10/1600x900/skynews-train-salisbury_5566759.jpg?bypass-service-worker&20211031222050)
No fatalities thankfully.
Not sure about the comment that the derailment "knocked out all the signalling". If that was the case I would expect everything go back to danger but I can't get Clapham out of my head.
My thoughts are with everyone on the train and the Signaller on duty. No-one wants this on their watch.
The BBC were reporting that the second train struck the rear of the derailed one. I agree I gave short shrift to the comments about "knocking out the signalling", assuming it was just dumbed-down reporting, but if that is the case then yes, it's concerningly close to Clapham.
Latest reports..
Driver of Second train has "Life changing Injuries"
No object found to have been hit...
Second train did hit first from behind, but was on the parallel second track through tunnel as they were approaching Salisbury Station going into different platforms.
The first train is definitely off the rails ..
PS the Tunnel is in Fisherton, which these days, you won't spot the join between Fisherton and Salisbury..
Thank you for this. It is a worrying development concerning the driver.
I had not realised the trains were on parallel tracks in the tunnel. The photographs available suggest they converged on the Down line at the junction, immediately east of the tunnel mouth.
I await with interest the initial notification on the RAIB's website.
In the meantime my thoughts are with the driver and their family, and the other railway people involved.
Thanks again and best wishes.
John
Quote from: The Q on November 02, 2021, 08:19:38 AM
Latest reports..
Driver of Second train has "Life changing Injuries"
No object found to have been hit...
Second train did hit first from behind, but was on the parallel second track through tunnel as they were approaching Salisbury Station going into different platforms.
The first train is definitely off the rails ..
PS the Tunnel is in Fisherton, which these days, you won't spot the join between Fisherton and Salisbury..
This demonstrates why it's better to wait for the report. From what I can see the tracks involved are not bi-directionally signalled.
It's a standard double track junction, both trains were heading towards 43 signal via 31 or 37 signals
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/115/88-021121122337.png) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=115788)
Quote from: GrahamB on November 02, 2021, 11:48:35 AM
Quote from: The Q on November 02, 2021, 08:19:38 AM
Latest reports..
Driver of Second train has "Life changing Injuries"
No object found to have been hit...
Second train did hit first from behind, but was on the parallel second track through tunnel as they were approaching Salisbury Station going into different platforms.
The first train is definitely off the rails ..
PS the Tunnel is in Fisherton, which these days, you won't spot the join between Fisherton and Salisbury..
This demonstrates why it's better to wait for the report. From what I can see the tracks involved are not bi-directionally signalled.
Looking on Google Maps I can't see any way of getting a train from London across from the LH line to the RH line from at least as far back as Andover, which would seem to be a very long way to be running on the RH of only two tracks.
I fear they will be investigating either a signalling error or fault (*), or a driver error - which, surely, should have been stopped by the ATC on the signals protecting the junction?
(*) Surely the interlocking, if working correctly, should have prevented the signals being cleared for both the Southampton and London lines at the same time?
Whatever the cause, those two vehicles pictured above are almost certain to be write-offs - not clear from pictures online whether the remaining half of the GWR one and the other 2 vehicles of the SWR one have been significantly damaged.
158/159 bodyshells are aluminium so would be difficult and expensive to weld-repair, even if there was no distortion.
Believe there is one spare bodyshell (built as a spare when the units were manufactured) stored at Long Marston.
Quote from: Coyote on November 02, 2021, 12:24:33 PM
It's a standard double track junction, both trains were heading towards 43 signal via 31 or 37 signals
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/115/88-021121122337.png) (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=115788)
firstly, I'm no railwayman, but looking at the track plan the only way I could see of getting a train heading towards Salisbury on the up line from the London direction would be :
traveling past signal 29, then divert round the loop towards signal 203.
driver then change ends to travel
wrong line past signals 36 and 40 .
unless of course I'm reading things totally rear end about face :hmmm:
I am assuming that where the track from signal 31 to signal 43 crosses the track from signal 40 to signal 36 it does so across a diamond crossing, not slip points ?
or have I totally lost the plot :-[
Quote from: class37025 on November 02, 2021, 02:10:01 PM
I am assuming that where the track from signal 31 to signal 43 crosses the track from signal 40 to signal 36 it does so across a diamond crossing
From photos online showing the other end of the trains this does look to be the case,
Quote from: class37025 on November 02, 2021, 02:10:01 PM
I am assuming that where the track from signal 31 to signal 43 crosses the track from signal 40 to signal 36 it does so across a diamond crossing, not slip points ?
Correct
Here are maps https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/westofengland (https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/westofengland) agree with graham and await the report.
Leaves on the line caused a SPAD by the South Western train?
[url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769] [url]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769] [url]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769 (http://[url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769)[/url]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769)
Looks like the early reporting was complete rubbish and was "simply" a SPAD.
An excellent example of why it's best to wait for the official reports.
seems as though they were now on the same track ?
why cannot news reporters either check their facts, or even say "at present it is not known how this happened" ?
mind you Network Rail and BTP if quoted correctly do not exactly cover themselves with a reputation for informed comment, though I suppose as long as you get on tv that's what counts.
Hi all,
So details are still too unclear to tell anything as there are still a number of mixed reports, the only thing that is definite so far that has been confirmed is that the SWR class 159 had applied full emergency brakes in which it suffered low adhesion and it did have a SPAD.
Was this the root cause of the incident or an event because of another root cause we don't yet know, but we are expecting an initial release from the RAIB by the end of this week so we have to wait until then. But I for one am just glad that no one was killed but my thoughts are with the driver whom has suffered life changing injuries.
Always feel for the drivers in these situations, reminds me of a Hastings line incident
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fe7e5274a428d000159/R182011_111117_Stonegate.pdf (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fe7e5274a428d000159/R182011_111117_Stonegate.pdf)
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/115/thumb_88-021121193856.jpeg)
Quote from: Coyote on November 02, 2021, 07:44:46 PM
Always feel for the drivers in these situations, reminds me of a Hastings line incident
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fe7e5274a428d000159/R182011_111117_Stonegate.pdf (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fe7e5274a428d000159/R182011_111117_Stonegate.pdf)
(https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/115/thumb_88-021121193856.jpeg)
Yup!
I worked Robertsbridge Box until April 2010. The Signaller on duty (Mentioned in the report) was one of my fellow resident Signallers. He's still rather sore about the contradictions in the report regarding what he said.
Quote from: GrahamB on November 02, 2021, 05:11:51 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59130769)
Looks like the early reporting was complete rubbish and was "simply" a SPAD.
An excellent example of why it's best to wait for the official reports.
Conjecture and speculation is natural in virtually any event. Of course we could just say "no discussing until the official report is out", but I don't personally see the harm in discussion. Otherwise we should lock this thread until the official report comes out.
Latest reports are, the first train derailed.
The computer on board the second train reports both the driver and the AWS hit the brakes and the train slid past the red lights 150 yards into the back of the other.
Unsurprisingly the RAIB's initial summary is good.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/collision-between-passenger-trains-at-salisbury-tunnel-junction (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/collision-between-passenger-trains-at-salisbury-tunnel-junction)
May give some thoughts https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59143021 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-59143021) again best to wait until the release of official reports
Quote from: The Q on November 03, 2021, 01:49:27 PM
Latest reports are, the first train derailed.
The computer on board the second train reports both the driver and the AWS hit the brakes and the train slid past the red lights 150 yards into the back of the other.
The RAIB report is quite clear, 1F30 (The front train) derailed AFTER being struck by 1L53 (The rear train). 1L53 passed SY31 at danger (SPAD). So the focus is now on 1L53 and why it didn't stop.
That report makes it pretty clear that the cause was poor adhesion - which is always a problem at this time of year.
so, at long last [tongue in cheek, it's less than a week] we have a detailed and informed report of what happened, although obviously much still to be investigated.
I wonder how many of the so called reporters are now regretting their flights of fancy used to fill their slots on TV news.
the trouble is, if they said the simple facts as known, in this case , ie two trains collided and some casualties, it would surely be better, though not so exiting, than adding piles of conjecture with no basis.
ie no serious casualties turns out be several minor casualties plus one life changing.
trains running on parallel lines turns out to utter tosh, etc.
no wonder so many people simply ignore anything they hear on the news on tv these days.
Quote from: davidinyork on November 03, 2021, 04:19:01 PM
That report makes it pretty clear that the cause was poor adhesion - which is always a problem at this time of year.
Who you going to call ?
LEAF BUSTERS !!
Quote from: class37025 on November 03, 2021, 05:08:38 PM
Quote from: davidinyork on November 03, 2021, 04:19:01 PM
That report makes it pretty clear that the cause was poor adhesion - which is always a problem at this time of year.
Who you going to call ?
LEAF BUSTERS !!
Otherwise known as the RHTT (Rail Head Treatment Train) They run all over the place at this time of year.
Quote from: GrahamB on November 03, 2021, 05:18:14 PM
Otherwise known as the RHTT (Rail Head Treatment Train) They run all over the place at this time of year.
Getting progressively more filthy,until by the end of the season they are mostly a uniform brown (they unsurprisingly tend to leave the same locos on them if they can).
In addition to blasting the rails with high-pressure water jets, they also deposit sandite (a sticky paste containing sand, antifreeze and steel, designed to help with adhesion).
I note the RHTT was scheduled to pass through Salisbury at 19.36, having been through previously at midday on the 30th.
Interesting vid of them trying to recover the 159 with 59003. Pretty much through brute force.
I suspect the track under the 59 is going to be a bit funny shaped after that.
https://youtu.be/BsHXWUMsLdM
It's incredible they even tried that. The ramifications of the cable snapping, or the attachment point coming off would be horrendous for any of the workers in the immediate vicinity. I guess the track was already a mess; but now 59003 will need its wheels sorting too I'd guess!
I assume 'elf 'n safety were not there that day. >:D
Quote from: njee20 on November 09, 2021, 10:19:31 AM
It's incredible they even tried that. The ramifications of the cable snapping, or the attachment point coming off would be horrendous for any of the workers in the immediate vicinity. I guess the track was already a mess; but now 59003 will need its wheels sorting too I'd guess!
That's what I thought. I'm not a professional railway engineer or anything, but when I watched that video I saw all sorts of red flags for things that could go horribly wrong. Not to mention it just didn't look like it would have any chance of working anyway. The angles and obvious points of friction are all wrong.
Out with the torches - cut it up!
don't know how it would work under those circumstances, but when I was in the RAF we had a system for a/c that had crash landed where [IIRC] tracked low platforms were pushed under the wings, and air bags inflated to lift the fuselage off the ground so they could be towed off the runway / grass etc.
surely it would have been possible to jack and slew the carriages across to either the other track, or to position recovery kit under the carriage, perhaps after removal of the bogies ?
mind you, I suppose we should be glad they didn't try two locos and a kinetic recovery rope :'(
when I did my winching training it was always impressed on us that the cable / strop whatever could fail, or attachment points, and the absolute necessity to maintain a clear area where the cable could reach if it failed at the furthest end from the winch, or at the winch.
it made me cringe to see the guy at the rear of the loco watching the attempt, I'd imagine that if something had gone, he'd have ended up cut in half.
was there no trained supervisor on site ?????????
I don't think I've ever seen anything so ridiculous.
No visible tow 'rope' restraint, waaaaay too many people floating around, I mean, seriously? I somehow doubt anymore than four people needed to be anywhere near that operation.
If you're going to try tugging in out, why on earth wouldn't you jack it off the wall a bit to reduce contact/resistance?
What's next? Giving it a 'poke' from behind?
Words fail me.
:smackedface:
assuming that as everyone seemed to be filming this idiocy, including a BTP officer, I'd guess that by now there should be some very intensive discussions going on by multiple agencies as to how this actually happened, and hopefully heads will roll, though hopefully not from a broken tow wire.
if this is an example of the 'professionalism' of the recovery team, I'm amazed there are not more accidents.
Would love to read the pre-agreed and approved method statement and risk assessment.
As a driver (who has signed locomotives) I'd simply refuse to operate that locomotive - and most of the lads I work with would be the same. And I know I'd have the backing of my immediate bosses, their boss, my colleagues and the union. I have refused to drive things before for safety related reasons in the past, and been supported by my gaffers over it.
That said perhaps things are tougher on the freight side - given how unstable the work is for staff (in all grades management included) to just say "no way - we're not doing this".
If it cannot be removed safely using proper recovery equipment, it should be cut up on site. We've already had a driver seriously injured and passengers with minor injuries from the collision itself. We don't need any more after it!
Quote from: class37025 on November 09, 2021, 12:30:54 PM
when I did my winching training it was always impressed on us that the cable / strop whatever could fail, or attachment points, and the absolute necessity to maintain a clear area where the cable could reach if it failed at the furthest end from the winch, or at the winch.
it made me cringe to see the guy at the rear of the loco watching the attempt, I'd imagine that if something had gone, he'd have ended up cut in half.
Similar training - different colour uniform, but same thoughts, particularly about the
Clown person at the tow end of the loco!! :o
What a mess. I agree with emjaybee and n bodger 's comments.
What if it's snagged on the tunnel brickwork - bring the whole tunnel down if they're not careful - or perhaps they did actually check first :no:
Just an off the cuff thought, maybe they want to damage or demolish the tunnel good reason/way to close the line down.
Personally thought the idea of towing the train out was stupid, can't believe so called experts would even consider the idea. Something a child would suggest or maybe it is being run by children!!!!!
Regards Stu
Not sure why they ever thought it would work pulling it out like that. Couldn't they just get a big hand in and pick it up like I do in my loft?
(https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/model-railroad-hand-placing-locomotive-hand-placing-locomotive-track-model-railroad-188029369.jpg)
I've just been re-watching the video again, on my laptop rather than earlier on my phone.
I still think it's an appallingly badly planned idea, but...
...if you look carefully, it is actually shifting the unit out of the tunnel!
It's difficult to tell, but it looks like it's shifting by about 6" at a time. Shagging the loco wheels mind, so whether it's a cost effective solution remains to be seen.
This video shows the same event from a different angle. You can see that the coach does move quite a bit.
But I am shocked those guys were allowed to stand anywhere nearby.
If that had snapped the whiplash could very easily have killed them all, hell it would have been powerful enough to do some serious damage to the locomotive, let alone the people.
Whoever was in charge of safety for that operation on that day should be keel-hauled.
Ross.
perhaps they thought they were bullet proof as they were wearing ...
hi - viz
helmets
safety boots
:hmmm: :smiley-laughing:
not sure how Network Rail works, but shouldn't there be a black helmet somewhere around ?
at least no blue helmets, apart from the BTP appear to be there.
Perhaps if they had put a winch on two statioary 66s they could have winched it out instead of trying to pull it out ,metal wheels on metal rails surely means it would slip pulling a dead weight that wouldnt roll like a heavy train load .
But Im'e no expert .
Bob Tidbury
I'm wondering if RevolutioN will be doing a 'Special Edition'?
Hi all,
So where to start on this as an engineer on the railways and having attended incidents previously, granted not to this degree!
Lets start with working practises, simply put on the multiple videos I have seen there was plenty going wrong and I have no doubts that multiple personalities will have had a rocket up the arse, potentially suspension of safety cards and retraining required.
I shall not go into detail as that will be a discussion between said personalities and their bosses who shall be dealing with their indiscretion.
Also the recovery teams
DO NOT come from network rail but actually come from operators normally freight operators, and the teams in question could have come from multiple operators.
Now for the activity itself, well first of all you have to look at the scenario:
"2 items of rolling stock both of which have derailed in a tunnel wedged against each other and the tunnel walls and there is no risk to life as the rescue operation has long concluded. With no way to safely access or ascertain the structural condition of the rolling stock or more importantly the tunnel itself and in the knowledge that both items of rolling stock carry COSHH (fuel and lubricants) which due to the location cannot be removed therefor presenting a fire risk and if a fuel tank has ruptured presents a toxic and potentially explosive atmosphere especially considering there are electric on board the train that again due to location that cannot be isolated"What options are there to safely remove the items of rolling stock?Well option one is out the window, the rolling stock is in a tunnel so you cannot lift it out!
Cut up one or both items of rolling stock?You cannot do that there are flammables on board which if ignited in that environment would result in an explosion, that potential source of ignition may not only come from cutting tools but also the electrics on board there may just be 2 wires waiting to short and spark!
Additionally to that as previously stated you don't know the structural integrity of the rolling stock or tunnel so do you really want to be potentially weakening it further with staff inside?
Jack the rolling stock apart and off the tunnel walls to then drag out?The first issue is where do you fit the jacks and how? You cannot have staff crawling under the rolling stock to fit the jacks when they could move at any time, then comes with using the tunnel wall to push the rolling stock upright.
Tunnels are built for external pressure to push inward, not for pressure to push outwards from the inside even under normal circumstances it's not something you do, so do you really want to be pushing outwards against the walls then it could already be weakened?
Having done plenty of formal and dynamic risk assessments the number of
Very High Risk factors and activities there is no safe option for people to work inside to remove the rolling stock.
So that leaves you with only one option to remove the rolling stock externally, hence dragging them out by force.
So how do you drag it out?Quote from: Bob Tidbury on November 10, 2021, 08:09:55 PM
Perhaps if they put a winch on two statioary 66s they could have winched it out instead of trying to pull it out ,metal wheels on metal rails surely means it would slip pulling a dead weight that wouldnt roll like a heavy train load .
This idea of course has some good logic, but 2 issues with using 2 66s and a winch system!
First one the winch itself it would be a metal rope and shackles, while of course traditional they are less favoured these days for dragging things due to the fact when they do they really do go and having seen a 50t shackle fail and go flying they really can go far! Especially as the tension would have to be huge to pull it out under a sustained force, but more about that later.
But also in this case due to the limited space you would have people in the danger area if a wire or shackle fails which of course we want to avoid.
The issue of the using 66s as anchors, with the amount of force been needed even with parking brakes applied the locos would be dragged rather than drag the rolling stock out, especially at that location which is know to have adhesion issues at the best of times.
To give you an idea of how easy it is to move a loco, in the old job I have pushed by hand a class 90 on my own! Granted the brakes were no applied but if I can push a 85t loco by hand, the force needed to winch the rolling stock out of the tunnel would easily slid a pair of locos backwards.
The better option would be to use some form of anchor in the ground, but again the location doesn't lend itself to that sadly.
This leads to the solution they have come up with, its not pretty but it has been used before and works!
So the tools used are the right tools for the job! A locos with a lot of low end torque so the class 59 is ideal as it is has the highest rated low end torque at rail of any diesel loco on the UK network!
Now the ropes used that are pretty much industry standard and are anti whip ropes which should they fail are designed in such a way that the tension causes the fibres to tighten in the rope and should the rope fail the fibres loosen to get rid of the energy and drop to the ground rather than snap and whip like old pretensioned wire ropes.
Additionally fibre ropes have loops on both ends so that there is no need to use shackles so again it reduced the risk.
Also the ropes used in this job will have been a minimum of twice the weight of the rolling stock (37.8t) so a minimum of 80t safe working limit, but at a rough guess I would say the ropes in question have a 100t safe working limit.
However that doesn't mean you stand near by, best practice been that you should stand no closer than the length of the rope in question, the further you can the better!
As for the bouncing method to get the stock out, it has been done before and no doubt be done again as/if/when the need arises and is an agreed practice with recovery teams. If you use a sustained force the amount of sustained force needed is much greater than if you bounce the train out using impact forces, the best way to think of it is using a hammer to put a nail in wood.
If you try and push the nail into wood it takes a large amount of force but by hammering the nail in the impact force does the work far more efficiently!
But as some may have noted the 59 was sliding backward with the wheels not rotating, the driver would have had at least initial brake pressure applied to prevent running away should the ropes have snapped or rolling back freely while bouncing the rolling stock out!
Doing this procedure there is little doubt that there would be damage to the track, but that is not of concern as the whole junction would be getting lifted and fresh track put in regardless.
Additionally its likely that the loco will have got wheels flats (sparks coming off the wheels pretty much makes it a guarantee), but this would have been factored in and no doubt Network rail will have given concession for the loco once released from site to run light loco to depot for a full inspection and foot the bill for tyre turning (plenty of metal left on those wheels) and if needed a replacement coupling (at a rough guess around £40k all in).
As for damage to the tunnel as I previously said pushing against the tunnel wall which may have been damaged is dangerous, the risk of further damaging the tunnel with a lateral force travelling across the tunnel lining is greatly reduced and therefor reducing the risk of incurring more damage.
So all in its not pretty and appears very rough in this day and age but given the scenario at hand the method was the least dangerous of options, its just let down by people ignoring safe practises!
@acko22 (https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=4166) nice explanation.
Thank you.
Which has helped the non railwaymen eg those with interest in issues and those who are not engineers understand the procedures involved.