Collision and derailment near Salisbury (Fisherton Tunnel) 31/10/21

[dosxuk]

GWR train (1F30 17:08 Portsmouth Harbour to Bristol Temple Meads) passed Dean (on the Down Dean line) at about 13:35, and approached the junction (Tunnel Junction), but for some reason stopped over the junction on the Down Main, with the rear part still on the junction, but with the front part in the tunnel. The front part does not look to be derailed in the photos.

The front part of the GWR train looks derailed in this photo. The flange appears to be to the left (from the camera viewpoint) of the rail. While this could have happened during the collision, I'd have expected it to have derailed to the right (towards the tunnel wall) if it happened then, as that's the direction the 159 will have been forcing it.

 

[bramling]

D

IMHO its looking like completely made up. Unfortunately that regurgitated 7 minute delay leads to discussions going off at tangents about protection of the line, and completely different scenarios like Ais Gill etc…

Protection will still be something to be looked at yesterday, as with a third train in the area (thankfully safely out the way, but could have been very different), as well as the potential for a further eastbound train to have been leaving Salisbury, it is certainly a relevant factor that could have led to a worse outcome. However equally one should emphasise that there is *no* suggestion that this wasn't attended to promptly after yesterday's collision.

 

[MadCommuter]

Was the 158 formed with 2 carriages and the 159 formed with 4 carriages? I'll refrain from speculating...

 

[westcoaster]

another question is how the GWR split on the coupler,

The front part of the GWR train looks derailed in this photo. The flange appears to be to the left (from the camera viewpoint) of the rail. While this could have happened during the collision, I'd have expected it to have derailed to the right (towards the tunnel wall) if it happened then, as that's the direction the 159 will have been forcing it.

that is the front of the back half of the GWR unit on the right.

my question is how the front half ended up further along

 

[JN114]

Was the 158 formed with 2 carriages and the 159 formed with 4 carriages? I'll refrain from speculating...

The GWR train was a 4 car 158 (158762+763)

The SWR train was a 3 car 159 (159102)

 

[Surreytraveller]

Unfortunately in the case of Ais Gill, control's words were meaningless, as protecting the train wasn't in their gift. Equally, with the best will in the world the guard shouldn't have taken any assurance from this, especially as "we'll take care of that" isn't the same as "I can confirm your train is protected and there's nothing else in the section". Whilst Ais Gill was not an accident which has found itself particular etched in history, the lesson learned is one every single train crew anywhere should never forget. It's rather unfortunate that we saw further sloppiness from control just a couple of years later at Southall, with a failure to grasp the seriousness of AWS being isolated. Again, something never to escape the mind. Almost certainly not relevant yesterday however, where it seems everything happened very quickly (I'm emphasising this in case anyone might read this and jump to inaccurate conclusions).

It wasn't Control being sloppy at Southall. The Rule Book was vague, allowing for interpretation. Control's job is to keep the train service going, so they're not going to take trains out of service unless they have to

 

[MadCommuter]

The GWR train was a 4 car 158 (158762+763)

The SWR train was a 3 car 159 (159102)

Thanks. A lot to come in out in investigation, I suspect.

 

[Surreytraveller]

It wasn't Control being sloppy at Southall. The Rule Book was vague, allowing for interpretation. Control's job is to keep the train service going, so they're not going to take trains out of service unless they have to

If anything at Southall, it was the driver being sloppy for not paying attention to the signals

 

[CaptainBen]

Last night an older female passenger was interviewed by BBC News, she talked about leaves on the line, which seemed a bit random at the time.

Probably just that 'leaves on the line' is to go-to example of The Railway coming up with explanations for things going wrong, using a term that (to the layman) is utterly meaningless in actually explaining the cause of the problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The front part of the GWR train looks derailed in this photo. The flange appears to be to the left (from the camera viewpoint) of the rail. While this could have happened during the collision, I'd have expected it to have derailed to the right (towards the tunnel wall) if it happened then, as that's the direction the 159 will have been forcing it.

Possibly pivoted if the rear wheel of that bogie was pushed the other way?

 

[cogload]

If people think that the FGW driver is in error for not carrying out protection, well imagine if he or she had done so.

 

[adamello]

Indeed
That quote has gone from overly dramatic to by the sounds of it a complete fabrication?

What many people on this board forget to realise, is that to the layman, a loco is just another name for a train - not necessarily for a power unit.
Secondly on the same vein - people refer to a high speed train, as a train that travels at high speed; something going past you at 50mph is high speed - when it is close and you are not moving - not necessarily a designation of train (or even the Class 43 - some people thing that those descriptive words only apply to those units.)

Some of the adjectives will be 'sexed up' as sensationalism sells - but in hindsight we know no one was seriously hurt (except the SWR Driver), but we don't know what it was like to experience another train crashing into you / crashing into another train last night

 

[172007]

Are Class 158 & Class 159 sanders one shot? I think they are.

 

[spark001uk]

Yes, could have been a very different story.

 

[bramling]

It wasn't Control being sloppy at Southall. The Rule Book was vague, allowing for interpretation. Control's job is to keep the train service going, so they're not going to take trains out of service unless they have to

Don't want to digress too far, however the control response at Southall was dire. Yes the rules weren't precise, but equally control did not effectively deal with the defective AWS. One message appears to have got lost in a shift change, and another message was taken by someone who wasn't conversant in rolling stock and who took it only as a driver calling about "isolating something", which also wasn't logged, nor acted upon. I'm afraid that's sloppy by any interpretation, and this was indeed picked up on in the official report. Agreed that control didn't have to withdraw the train from service based on the rules at the time, but by the same token they did nothing effective to try to resolve the defective AWS.

If people think that the FGW driver is in error for not carrying out protection, well imagine if he or she had done so.

No one has suggested protection wasn't carried out yesterday. It's merely been raised as point of interest. The potential for secondary collision is always something which any investigation will look at, and this will certainly apply here since the outcome (whatever the original cause) was all lines being blocked.

 

[Llama]

Are Class 158 & Class 159 sanders one shot? I think they are.

The 158s we inherited from Wessex 15 years ago had one-shot sanders fitted as well as the WSP having the capability to auto-sand in brake step 3 and 'emergency'. The one-shot system was disconnected and removed very soon after they arrived with us though. The WSP was modified in about 2008/9 to allow the WSP system to auto-sand in brake step 2 in addition to step 3 and emergency.

Whether FGW/SWR units are similarly set up, one of their drivers will have to tell us.

 

[reduke]

The GWR train was a 4 car 158 (158762+763)

The SWR train was a 3 car 159 (159102)

Is there a source for this, other than this thread? From the available photos, it shows that the rear of the SWR train is sticking out roughly 1 carriage further than the GWR train, the 3 visible SWR carriages are all still coupled or at least together, and the front of the 2 trains are roughly level.

This indicates that the SWR train is 1 carriage longer than the GWR train. 158763 and 159102 numbers are both visible, which would indicate that unless there's another SWR unit in front of 159102 (3-car), then the GWR train is just 158763 (2-car) and not 158762.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Is there actually still a requirement to place protection on continuously track circuited or axle counter’d lines, to protect a stopped train?

 

[dosxuk]

Is there a source for this, other than this thread? From the available photos, it shows that the rear of the SWR train is sticking out roughly 1 carriage further than the GWR train, the 3 visible SWR carriages are all still coupled or at least together, and the front of the 2 trains are roughly level.

This indicates that the SWR train is 1 carriage longer than the GWR train. 158763 and 159102 numbers are both visible, which would indicate that unless there's another SWR unit in front of 159102 (3-car), then the GWR train is just 158763 (2-car) and not 158762.

According to #485 the GWR train has split and the front unit is in front of the photographed cabs.

 

[norbitonflyer]

It is still not clear whether the Bristol train had stopped in the tunnel before it was hit by the SWR one, and if so, why.

Looking at the track layout, would the rear of a train standing at signal SY43, which controls access to the station, be in the tunnel?

Looking at RTT both trains would normally have called at platform 4, but the Bristol train was running about twenty minutes late and the Honiton train was due, so one of them would have had to use a different platform. Platform 3 appears to be the only other through platform available to westbound trains.

 

[sjm77]

Do you mean that the train coming from the Romsey direction was probably slowing for the Junction towards Salisbury, but was slipping on wet leaves and couldn't brake in time and shot through a red signal?

In this example with these specific two trains which would have been given priority at the junction normally? The GWR service is booked first but was running 20 minutes late so clearly had missed it's path. The SWR service was 6 minutes late but with a 5 minute stop at Salisbury (according to RTT) in could have got back much closer to time. My instinct says that if I were the signaller I would give priority to SWR given the long single track sections it had ahead of it towards Honiton.

 

[Ianno87]

Is there actually still a requirement to place protection on continuously track circuited or axle counter’d lines, to protect a stopped train?

Don't know the ins and outs of the rules, but I presume you would have to if you are foul of the other running line, or had other reason to believe your train may not be protected by the signalling (I.e. wholly or partially derailed).

 

[Scotrail84]

Is there actually still a requirement to place protection on continuously track circuited or axle counter’d lines, to protect a stopped train?

Yes, even if it was removed or amended from the rule book you'd do it anyway, its drummed into you. Safety is paramount.

Each driving cab has red flags, 10 dets and a pair, sometimes 2 pairs of TC clips.

 

[C96]

Is there a source for this, other than this thread? From the available photos, it shows that the rear of the SWR train is sticking out roughly 1 carriage further than the GWR train, the 3 visible SWR carriages are all still coupled or at least together, and the front of the 2 trains are roughly level.

This indicates that the SWR train is 1 carriage longer than the GWR train. 158763 and 159102 numbers are both visible, which would indicate that unless there's another SWR unit in front of 159102 (3-car), then the GWR train is just 158763 (2-car) and not 158762.

The GWR shown is the rear unit of the 2 units.
159’s can’t be 4 cars. All 159s are 3 car.

 

[Rab Smith]

What a horrendous incident. My thoughts are with the injured. Looking at that photo, it's a miracle there were no fatalities.

 

[Skymonster]

From the BTP statement:

At around 6.45pm, a Great Western Railway service from Southampton to Cardiff collided with a South Western Railway service from London to Honiton as they both entered the Fisherton Tunnel in Salisbury.

I would expect an official BTP statement to be very precise in its wording and there a clear implication in it that the GWR train hit the SWR train - and not the other way around which so far most people seem to have been suggesting. (Note: if you aren’t certain which train hit which, the correct wording would be ‘… a Great Western Railway service from Southampton to Cardiff and a South Western Railway service from London to Honiton collided…’)

 

[norbitonflyer]

In this example with these specific two trains which would have been given priority at the junction normally? The GWR service is booked first but was running 20 minutes late so clearly had missed it's path. The SWR service was 6 minutes late but with a 5 minute stop at Salisbury (according to RTT) in could have got back much closer to time. My instinct says that if I were the signaller I would give priority to SWR given the long single track sections it had ahead of it towards Honiton.

The signaller had also got 1F27 (to Portsmouth) to think about. Its route through the junction would have conflicted with 1L53 (from London) but not with 1F30 (from Portsmouth)

 

[backontrack]

From the BTP statement:

I would expect an official BTP statement to be very precise in its wording and there a clear implication in it that the GWR train hit the SWR train - and not the other way around which so far most people seem to have been suggesting. (Note: if you aren’t certain which train hit which, the correct wording would be ‘… a Great Western Railway service from Southampton to Cardiff and a South Western Railway service from London to Honiton collided…’)

Looking at the photos, the impression I got is that the GWR hit the SWR.

 

[QueensCurve]

Also BBC with a much clearer photo this morning of how the two trains have ended up where they have.

That picture paints a 1000 words.

 

[Cowley]

Don't know the ins and outs of the rules, but I presume you would have to if you are foul of the other running line, or had other reason to believe your train may not be protected by the signalling (I.e. wholly or partially derailed).

If a train passes through a set of points set against it what kind of noise would you hear from inside the train? I’ve always assumed that the blades would shift with the weight of the train, but would it be a bit of a rough experience?