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

[pompeyfan]

Whilst looking for information on my train into work I noticed this;

Realtime Trains - 5Z51 0906 Southampton Central to Salisbury T&R.S.M.D

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

5Z50 Southampton - Salisbury via Newbury

 

[trainmania100]

Anyone know if the unit is out of the tunnel yet, IE the one the 59 was busting it's gut to remove

 

[Suraggu]

The remains of 159102 is not coming out without more specialist input. There is more than speculation now about specialist teams arriving today to do more destructive work to try and free the remains of 159102.

It's quite deeply embedded in the ballast and wedged against the 158 which just using a locomotive to pull it out will not be enough.

 

[Annetts key]

The remains of 159102 is not coming out without more specialist input. There is more than speculation now about specialist teams arriving today to do more destructive work to try and free the remains of 159102.

It's quite deeply embedded in the ballast and wedged against the 158 which just using a locomotive to pull it out will not be enough.

The recovery is in this topic

 

[Crossover]

Yes it was, someone I follow on Twitter posted a picture at around 1700 on Sunday of 159102 at the buffer stops at Waterloo shortly before it worked 1L53, it was definitely just a three car.

Thanks for confirming

 

[swt_passenger]

Although not necessarily accurate, RTT showed it had run as a 3 car from Waterloo, having been there for a good hour or so after working the service before it. Whether this was the actual case or not, I don’t know, but if so, quart into a pint pot springs to mind!

In fact, RTT was altered post-incident to make it accurate. But immediately after the incident it was actually reporting the service as a 9 car, which you can see in post #70 of this thread.

 

[HowardGWR]

Would there be any marks on the track east of the junction to indicate the first wheel slide that took place when the Honiton train tried to brake? Perhaps other data (cab recordings) render that not useful anyway?

 

[Western Gaffer]

Incidentally, does anyone know if one of those RHT or sandite trains had been through that area recently? Also could you explain what they do for certain non-industry tyes who know nuffing.

There's been plenty of discussion already in the thread about the RHTT schedule and the principles of its operation - it's obviously a long thread but most of the relevant explanations were on or after Wednesday, on page 34 onwards....

 

[boing_uk]

Had the TikTok link removed for "misleading or incorrect information".

Having looked at the video again now I know why. The video doing the rounds online with the railhead damage isn't quite correct.

We don't use rail spikes in the UK. So some erroneous video editing there!

 

[island]

My default assumption is that anything on "tiktok" is misleading or incorrect information, or at best irrelevant and useless.

 

[MotCO]

Hi there,

I hope you don't mind me joining in the conversation as I'm not much of a train person but I was a passenger in the rear carriage of the GWR and I'm trying to make sense of what happened so stumbled on this forum. It's very hard to find anywhere discussing it factually. Certain things that are being announced are not lining up with my experience and I don't know if it's just because of the matter being a work in progress or if they're not being honest for some reason. Either way, even just reading a few of the pages has made things make more sense to me so for that alone - thanks!

Did you have any specific questions for me or would you like me to just run through what happened as I remember it?

A few facts to start:
I was in the middle of the rear carriage sat to the left, facing away from the direction of travel in the window seat. It was super dark so couldn't see what was happening outside but we were thrown about so much that I assumed we were rolling down a grass verge. I'd estimate there were eight people in my carriage including the three week old baby that the news keeps mentioning. There was a man in a high vis orange jacket at the very rear who was thankfully very calm, knew what to do and went straight into the rear cabin thing to alert the various services, kept us somewhat updated and told us to stay put (even when we started smelling petrol).

I got on at Romsey onto the second carriage, first carriage clearly had no rows clear, second carriage had one (not particular desirable) so I went through the third carriage (also only had one row free) and ended up in the rear. This is all socially distanced at all, but you can see why I'm very suspicious of the 93 total passengers announcement for both trains.

I'm 100% certain there was no derailing of our carriage, there was no horn sounding (I presume I would have heard it?) from the other train and we were in motion at the time.

I'm physically mostly fine and mentally have dealt with it and can see you're all just trying to work out the facts of it all. I have some specific timing of things as I was keeping my mum updated on matters, if that is of interest.

Do ask away and please don't worry about being delicate!

Thanks for reporting 'from the inside', and glad you are ok.

As a matter of interest, did you have to leave your name and details with anyone? Have you been asked to make a statement? If not, would it be appropriate to contact the RAIB to make a statement to help them in their investigations?

You also mentioned the member of staff who was in the rear carriage. Maybe he switched the hazard warning lights on, which may help explain how they were activated.

 

[dingdinger]

From your desciption it sounds like most of these 93 passengers were on the same train as you. I would have expected the train from Waterloo to have been reasonably busy as it was originally booked as 9 carriages as far as Salisbury, although from experiance most people board at Waterloo and Clapham and it then starts to empty out as it gets closer to Salisbury. I think it was reported that it had originally been cancelled and was then re-instated at the last minute,

In fact, RTT was altered post-incident to make it accurate. But immediately after the incident it was actually reporting the service as a 9 car, which you can see in post #70 of this thread.

This was due to stock being all over the place due to the weather disruption and control had originally cancelled the 17.20. As there were crew to run it and there was diesel stock at Waterloo the crew were adamant to get the service up and running again. Originally boarded what I think was a 6 coach on platform 9 I think. Then it was changed to platform 14 to the 3 coach unit. When I got off at Basingstoke it was fairly busy but there were seats available.

 

[ainsworth74]

Please see here for more discussion on the recovery of the units following the collision itself.

 

[rebmcr]

Would there be any marks on the track east of the junction to indicate the first wheel slide that took place when the Honiton train tried to brake? Perhaps other data (cab recordings) render that not useful anyway?

It's extremely likely that the rails bear forensic marks, and the RAIB will definitely be looking at them.

The cab recordings only know what the train knows, and as soon as the wheels lock up, location becomes uncertain — you'll notice that the statement concerning the SWR driver's actions refers to time, not distance.

Not only are the physical markings on the rails valuable evidence when regarded alone, they also can help to put the cab recording timestamps in context and establish a correlation between time and distance.

 

[HBath]

Thanks for reporting 'from the inside', and glad you are ok.

As a matter of interest, did you have to leave your name and details with anyone? Have you been asked to make a statement? If not, would it be appropriate to contact the RAIB to make a statement to help them in their investigations?

You also mentioned the member of staff who was in the rear carriage. Maybe he switched the hazard warning lights on, which may help explain how they were activated.

I was contacted by BTP on Wednesday I think as I'd given my details to a police officer once we were on London Road. They asked if I gave permission to pass on their details to all the various parties (RAIB, another rail body, NR and GWR) who will contact me in due course.

 

[Bikeman78]

Baby was cry constantly (understandable) as I think it's head hit against the wall but generally okay I think, he wasn't taken to the hospital so presume it wasn't anything major. Parents were first timers as well so you can appreciate how terrified they were at the time.

There was a door at the back of our carriage which we came out of which I assume the off duty driver must have opened (one girl was feeling like she might be sick so sounds like a good idea). We waited until the fire brigade arrived (about twenty minutes later) and they took us down one by one down a ladder and led us along until we got to London Road. The SWR rear carriage was being emptied at the same time.

Haven't been on a train yet, my mum (bless her, that was a long night for her!) will be dropping me off at Bradford on Avon so I can do a trail train back to Bath (it's a ten minute journey I've done a thousand times). I expect I'll have a panic attack but it won't be my first one so I know what to expect and how to handle it. Might try to get on the same carriage as the conductor if I see one as the GWR was so great I think that might be reassuring.

I really can't praise the GWR driver with us or the emergency service staff enough, the calmness of it all made such a difference. Also helped that no one died either, I think that would have made it much more traumatic.

Thanks for this. I can imagine that the parents were scared. I remember what it was like looking after a newborn for the first time. I guess that was his first time on a train.

Hope your train journey goes okay. I'm sure you'll be fine.

 

[Janner Paul]

Here is the relevant section of the Salisbury Panel signalling diagram and a list of TPWS fitted signals showing line speed, gradients and distances to fouling points. Dated 2006.
Found yesterday in a box of documents obtained by my model rail club from another group, along with models etc. Source appears to be NR Croydon records centre - I presume they had a clear out of paper records at some point when things were digitised.

 

[MarkyT]

Here is the relevant section of the Salisbury Panel signalling diagram and a list of TPWS fitted signals showing line speed, gradients and distances to fouling points. Dated 2006.
Found yesterday in a box of documents obtained by my model rail club from another group, along with models etc. Source appears to be NR Croydon records centre - I presume they had a clear out of paper records at some point when things were digitised.

Interesting thanks but can you expand the area shown in the diagram to include the distant signal on approach from Andover and its AWS. The image is also upside down!

I note the 50mph PSR just before Laverstock N Jn has a TPWS installation that is located before SY29 signal.

 

[Juniper Driver]

Certainly a few are being fuelled at Fratton.

Ah, thanks…., and thanks for others who have answered…(Kite159)

 

[India Four Two]

"The image is also upside down!

Rectified:

 

[fourtytwo]

I just turned my monitor upside down!

 

[Matt Taylor]

Whilst looking for information on my train into work I noticed this;

Realtime Trains - 5Z51 0906 Southampton Central to Salisbury T&R.S.M.D

Realtime Trains is an independent source of live realtime running information for the Great British railway network.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

5Z50 Southampton - Salisbury via Newbury

Most likely 158884/158883 which were in Southampton bay all week.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Hi there,

I hope you don't mind me joining in the conversation as I'm not much of a train person but I was a passenger in the rear carriage of the GWR and I'm trying to make sense of what happened so stumbled on this forum. It's very hard to find anywhere discussing it factually. Certain things that are being announced are not lining up with my experience and I don't know if it's just because of the matter being a work in progress or if they're not being honest for some reason. Either way, even just reading a few of the pages has made things make more sense to me so for that alone - thanks!

Did you have any specific questions for me or would you like me to just run through what happened as I remember it?

A few facts to start:
I was in the middle of the rear carriage sat to the left, facing away from the direction of travel in the window seat. It was super dark so couldn't see what was happening outside but we were thrown about so much that I assumed we were rolling down a grass verge. I'd estimate there were eight people in my carriage including the three week old baby that the news keeps mentioning. There was a man in a high vis orange jacket at the very rear who was thankfully very calm, knew what to do and went straight into the rear cabin thing to alert the various services, kept us somewhat updated and told us to stay put (even when we started smelling petrol).

I got on at Romsey onto the second carriage, first carriage clearly had no rows clear, second carriage had one (not particular desirable) so I went through the third carriage (also only had one row free) and ended up in the rear. This is all socially distanced at all, but you can see why I'm very suspicious of the 93 total passengers announcement for both trains.

I'm 100% certain there was no derailing of our carriage, there was no horn sounding (I presume I would have heard it?) from the other train and we were in motion at the time.

I'm physically mostly fine and mentally have dealt with it and can see you're all just trying to work out the facts of it all. I have some specific timing of things as I was keeping my mum updated on matters, if that is of interest.

Do ask away and please don't worry about being delicate!

Welcome to the forum. Thanks for posting. Really glad you are ok physically. May I add what others have said in that don hesitate to get counseling if you get some stress/nightmares/flashbacks etc

 

[pompeyfan]

Most likely 158884/158883 which were in Southampton bay all week.

a move Saturday took place Clapham - Salisbury via Basingstoke, Reading and Westbury too formed of a 9 car 159

 

[43096]

A simple derailing trap wouldn't be acceptable but a short 'overlap spur' leading to a friction bufferstop or in the old days a sand drag might be an option. Normally these are only provided where there is no room for any kind of sensible clear overlap, yet flexibility demands the ability to run towards the signal while the junction ahead is blocked. I would suggest treating the existing overlap as 'restricted', with an additional 'warning' class route from SY29 to SY31, enforcing a delayed yellow clearance at SY29. The unrestricted 'main' route would also still be available but would have an extended overlap through the junction. Whether the warner could have reduced speed further back sufficient to prevent the slide past, or limit its extent enough to avoid the collision, I really couldn't say. I want to reiterate this is a 40-year-old layout in this form. If it was inherently dangerous, surely that would have been uncovered before. Have there been any worrying SPADs at this junction in the past, or any near misses?


If you're routing to 31, then the trap has to be beyond the signal!

Rather than mitigating the consequences, wouldn't addressing the root cause be far better? In other words, cut the trees down.

 

[Tomnick]

I am currently working a location not dissimilar to the Laverstock Jn. / Salisbury layout: i.e triangular junction (though the location of a tunnel has no causal effect). The two converging routes at the junction are protected by approach controlled signals. So a train from one route may be signalled without restriction, but a train on the converging route would be allowed to approach the junction by the signals clearing on approach control, thus reducing the speed of approach.

Presumably braking distance (or lack of) is a factor there too - it's a far preferable arrangement to one where you get YY at full braking distance from the Y, as at Laverstock. The overlaps are relatively short as a consequence too, I'd imagine?

(hello from 2S23 too, I guess?!)

 

[High Dyke]

Presumably braking distance (or lack of) is a factor there too - it's a far preferable arrangement to one where you get YY at full braking distance from the Y, as at Laverstock. The overlaps are relatively short as a consequence too, I'd imagine?

(hello from 2S23 too, I guess?!)

It could be. The interlocking clears the signal in advance through the junction before the one in rear clears, even on the straight route. However, the approach control works for trains routed straight on from one signal to the next, when coming to a stand at the conflicting junction. I.e. Red - approach controlled (Y) - Red. Diverging at the junction, coming from Nottingham I could understand it with a line speed of 15mph through the turnout, but trains towards Grantham with a higher line speed? As this is a newer installation than probably the installation at Salisbury then it made me wonder why a similar approach controlled arrangement isn't in place. Perhaps the RAIB report will offer some insight into this?

(I was on early turn. Gone home by the time you passed).

 

[GC class B1]

Presumably braking distance (or lack of) is a factor there too - it's a far preferable arrangement to one where you get YY at full braking distance from the Y, as at Laverstock. The overlaps are relatively short as a consequence too, I'd imagine?

(hello from 2S23 too, I guess?!)

As a layman in terms of signalling, I would appreciate some explanation as follows. If a driver sees a double yellow, does he brake to pass the following yellow (assuming it is still yellow) at say half the speed he approached the double yellow so there is plenty of distance to stop and leave allowance for a higher braking rate if necessary. Is there some rule of thumb for when to brake and at what rate or is it all a matter of route knowledge. My understanding is that the specific rolling stock brake performance requirement is based on stopping in Full Service within signal distances ( less an allowance) in accordance with GM/RT2045.

As I understand it, from what you are saying being able to stop in the distance between the double yellow and yellow signals, I.e perhaps only half the distance to the likely red signal is not preferable. Have I misunderstood what you mean. How much advance warning of a red signal do you believe a driver should have for the conditions. i.e gradient and line speed.

i am aware that defensive driving is good practice and using Full Service braking is not good practice In normal circumstances.

 

[randyrippley]

People keep talking of 40-year old signalling.........in the mid 1980s there was an overnight snowstorm which knocked down just about every railway telegraph pole from Salisbury westward. The whole signal system was destroyed and had to be jury-rigged with loose unprotected cables lying alongside the track. When I left the area a few years later the "temporary" loose cabling was still in place.
Was the installation ever regularised with properly installed equipment? The storm would have been ~37 years ago

 

[30907]

I am currently working a location not dissimilar to the Laverstock Jn. / Salisbury layout: i.e triangular junction (though the location of a tunnel has no causal effect). The two converging routes at the junction are protected by approach controlled signals. So a train from one route may be signalled without restriction, but a train on the converging route would be allowed to approach the junction by the signals clearing on approach control, thus reducing the speed of approach.

In the case of Tunnel Junction, though, the converging route would be from Romsey with the 20mph limit, and the main line

The "that overlap's OK, it's only 50mph there" doesn't seem to allow for the line speed to shortly beforehand having been 90mph, and trains have to be braking continuously from the outer distant at YY to even hit the start of the 50mph limit correctly.

I sincerely hope not! The outer distant at Yellow means SY29 - roughly at the 50 limit - is Red.

Interesting to see what the RAIB will make of this - they criticised a similar combination at a Watford accident some years ago.

Can't read the full report, but the summary doesn't mention adhesion problems as a factor.

People keep talking of 40-year old signalling.........in the mid 1980s there was an overnight snowstorm which knocked down just about every railway telegraph pole from Salisbury westward. The whole signal system was destroyed and had to be jury-rigged with loose unprotected cables lying alongside the track. When I left the area a few years later the "temporary" loose cabling was still in place.
Was the installation ever regularised with properly installed equipment? The storm would have been ~37 years ago

It's several days since anyone, let alone NR/RAIB, suggested there was any fault with the signalling, so is this relevant?