Terrible train accident in Spain (Galicia)

[westfalen]

Japan has seven Grade-4 Automation railways, that is to say, driverless trains.  The oldest, Kobe New Transit - Port Liner, opened in 1981.  To date, I am not aware of any accident across the Grade-4 network.

About as different from the normal railway network as chalk and cheese.  All the trains on the line are of the same type with the same operating characteristics, ie;no combination of all stations and express trains or freight trains and are completely segregated from other railway lines and other modes of transport, ie;no level crossings or pedestrian access.

 

I've never personally considered them as railways in the true sense.

Edited September 11, 2013 by westfalen

[bikkuri bahn]

I've never personally considered them as railways in the true sense.

Indeed.  They're called something like "automated guideway transit".  Of course, some reporter in N. America, when writing about such a system, will predictably begin an article with "the new choo-choo is chugging into to~wwwn"....

[Ochanomizu]

I've never personally considered them as railways in the true sense.

 

Hello Mr westfalen,

 

Interesting point.  I can see how you might adopt this position with, say, the Okinawa Monorail, but would you consider Grade-3 (GoA 3) to be "railways"?  All the driver has to do is push the start button and the train will travel at a safe speed to the next station.  I understand the driver has access to the throttle and brake controls in the event of an emergency.

[Dani]

You'd have to ask Dani, the original poster of the picture but I assume that is what Vmax means although it could also be the the maximum speed allowed for that type of train, different types of train may have different speed limits over the same section of track.

 

Yes, Vmax means Maximum Speed (Velocidad máxima). First column is the milestone (in km.), second maximum speed, following is "Dependence" or description/name of the milestone, next one I don't know, and the last is the time to arrive at this point.

 

The curve is from milestone 84.2 to 85, called "Grandeira". The route book just shows it has to be at 80km/h exactly in the curve, but before he has been more that 80km at 220km/h.

 

Case is not yet closed, but RENFE will not be persecuted. Just ADIF and the train driver. Judge has pointed these causes of the accident:

 

* Human error

* Inadequate signaling

* Inadequate security systems

* Ignoring previous advises from train drivers

* Distraction due to phone calls to the train driver

* No advance signal

 

In this picture you can see the only signal at Km. 84.2, exactly where the route book changes from 220km/h to 80km/h:

 

[Ochanomizu]

Hello,

 

Nine months has passed since this accident.  I was wondering if anyone has further information regarding the official investigation?

[Dani]

Hello,

 

Trial is still opened and working, and seems it still needs much more time to finish... To summarize, ADIF (the Railway Infrastructure Administrator company) is pushing to set the train driver guilty and only responsible of the accident. On the other hand, driver states is ADIF fault because of the lack of signaling and security systems in a very dangerous section.

 

The first three reports delivered to the judge (one independent, another requested by the driver, and another by RENFE insurance company) set as main cause the lack of security systems (there was just an old one and not recommended by Europe). The last one delivered by ADIF states that the driver is the only responsible, and adds personal oppinions like "this railway line is a high quality one". About the discrepancies between the route book that uses the driver and the real signalization and security systems in the railway says nothing...

 

If this is not enough, the judge doesn't see the driver as unique guilty person and imputed 11 high posts from ADIF, like the president and security manager in that year, but none of them wanted to declare. Now there are appeals from ADIF to avoid imputation of those 11 people.

 

To be more complicated, the judge has renounced to this case because of personal reasons (many people think it's because he received too much pressure). This week a new judge has been designated, but he will be reviewing the case after August and will continue diligence in September.

 

Seems to be a case very similar to Valencia's accident, also with many death people: the only responsible according the investigation was the driver, the driver was dead, so nobody took any responsibility. Here it's a bit more difficult, because the driver is not dead (thanks God) and will not remain in silence.

 

Cheers,

Dani

[westfalen]

These things often turn into a quest to find who is to blame rather than what so it can be fixed which would cost money.