Two trains collide near Salisbury - 31 Oct 21

[whole diary]

[DaveHarries]

POST EDIT, 02-Nov-2021: In view of the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)'s information today that they are considering wheelslide as to why the SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) train collided with the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) train I have removed what remained of the post I had put here.

Dave

[PhilWakely]

My thoughts on this are as follows:

<snip>

Can we please refrain from speculating! Let the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) investigate and publish their conclusions in due course.

[ChrisB]

There are informed suggestions that the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) train split in the tunnel - so the picture showing two trains from the front roughly side by side is of the second of two 2-car GWR 158s. When that happened isn't clear.

Let’s say this is correct, and the front portion continued past the signal outside the tunnel. Would that then release the previous signal, allowing 1L53 past the junction signal at amber? Just one hypothetical based in what’s been reported here so far. Yes, it raises other questions of course, but possible. There are zero photos of the front unit of 1L30, which raises my suspicions that more has still to be discovered. A lot more possibly

[DaveHarries]

My thoughts on this are as follows:

<snip>

Can we please refrain from speculating! Let the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) investigate and publish their conclusions in due course.

Indeed but I resisted the idea of expanding further and so haven't said precisely what I am thinking. A colleague of mine at work is a former NR^» (Network Rail - home page) employee though and he and I were talking it over earlier today.

[PhilWakely]

My thoughts on this are as follows:

<snip>

Can we please refrain from speculating! Let the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) investigate and publish their conclusions in due course.

Indeed but I resisted the idea of expanding further and so haven't said precisely what I am thinking. A colleague of mine at work is a former NR^» (Network Rail - home page) employee though and he and I were talking it over earlier today.

You said enough - and indeed stated that ' I won't post my conclusions here (although some may guess them)'

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!

[broadgage]

In my view, speculation is fine provided that it is firstly reasonably well informed, and secondly is based on previously known facts about infrastructure, rules and procedures, and rolling stock, and/or based on reliable reports already made public by reputable media, such as published photographs of the aftermath, or published statements and press releases.

Speculation blaming an individual is in poor taste and might in extreme cases even be illegal.

But more general speculation is arguably at least partly what forums are for. The post by  DaveHarries is in my view informed speculation, incorporating factual data about infrastructure in the area, and is in my view both interesting and informative.

EDIT TO ADD^▸ (Automatic Dropping Device) that the post to which I refer is now hidden from public view. In my view it should be re-instated, but ultimately the view of the moderating team must be respected in such matters.

[ChrisB]

It may be worth further discussion….I’m also happy with discussion on infrastructure while not discussing persons and/or staff (so no personal stuff either persons or positions with the rail industry) which both my previous post & Dave’s was

[IndustryInsider]

There will be no public speculation from me.  I await the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)’s findings with interest.

[grahame]

EDIT TO ADD^▸ (Automatic Dropping Device) that the post to which I refer is now hidden from public view. In my view it should be re-instated, but ultimately the view of the moderating team must be respected in such matters.

It is a very difficult call indeed for me, for the reasons you have stated.   I have stated in my "snip" comment that I am seeking the views of the wider moderator team. Its removal is precautionary at present; it can easily enough be put back, if appropriate, but if I left out in place while we decide, those extreme cases of legality you refer to could cause permanent damage.

[DaveHarries]

I await the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)’s findings with interest.

As will I. My earlier post is hidden but I will keep my conclusions to myself. Apologies if I said too much: I will, of course, read the RAIB report also with interest and will be happy if I am proved wrong on what I am thinking.

Dave

[Western Pathfinder]

Thankyou Dave.

[a-driver]

In my view, speculation is fine provided that it is firstly reasonably well informed, and secondly is based on previously known facts about infrastructure, rules and procedures, and rolling stock, and/or based on reliable reports already made public by reputable media, such as published photographs of the aftermath, or published statements and press releases.

Speculation blaming an individual is in poor taste and might in extreme cases even be illegal.

But more general speculation is arguably at least partly what forums are for. The post by  DaveHarries is in my view informed speculation, incorporating factual data about infrastructure in the area, and is in my view both interesting and informative.

EDIT TO ADD^▸ (Automatic Dropping Device) that the post to which I refer is now hidden from public view. In my view it should be re-instated, but ultimately the view of the moderating team must be respected in such matters.

I fully agree with your post.

The likes of the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) carry out their own thorough investigations, highly professional people. Not the kind who give up, retire to the pub trawling through public forums to copy and paste posts to compile a report.
Point the finger of blame at someone or naming individuals crosses the line but speculation based on some knowledge is in my opinion, perfectly acceptable, a lot of us have discussed and speculated all day in messrooms today.

[JayMac]

The problem with speculating publicly is that there are plausible explanations that point to human error.

[DaveHarries]

Thankyou Dave.

No worries although I remain hopeful that the hiding of my post is only temporary. If I had gone the whole hog and given my conclusions in the post (which I won't do on this forum or anywhere else public) then I would fully understand the hiding and / or removal of the post permanently. I realise that it is not my say-so though.

Dave

[a-driver]

The problem with speculating publicly is that there are plausible explanations that point to human error.

True, as with any incident there’s always going to be the possibility that human error plays a part to  a varying degree, but where human error occurs a safety system like TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) or ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) should prevent incidents of this nature which is why this one has caused a good deal of debate.
I think we can all appreciate that no one sets out to deliberately cause an incident.