|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
70 confirmed dead and 100 still unaccounted for in London
train crash
By Mike Ingram
8 October 1999
Use
this version to print
Some 70 people are known to have died and a further 100 are
still unaccounted for in what looks like Britain's worst rail
tragedy for more than 80 years, according to reports Thursday.
Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Andy Trotter said:
"We are particularly concerned about a core of 70 people
who were seen by family or friends to get on the trains. We are
facing a terrible situation. Although we know there are 70 people
who may have been on that train, we do not think it will be possible
to recover any further bodies because of the fire. Visual searches
of the carriages have been made and no further bodies can be seen."
So far, only 28 bodies have been recovered from the crash that
took place Tuesday morning. Two trains, carrying rush hour commuters,
collided and burst into flames near Paddington station, West London.
Chris Goodhall, managing director of Demon, the UK's oldest
Internet service provider, was one of the few people to escape
from the first class carriage at the front of the Great Western
express after it collided with a commuter service pulling out
of Paddington station. Mr. Goodhall said that he saw only "four
or five" others struggle free.
It is estimated that up to 70 passengers could have been in
the 48-seat first class carriage H. Being regular
commuters, many would have moved to the very front of the train
as they approached the end of their journey. As the Great Western
train struck the oncoming Thames service, carriage H was engulfed
in a raging inferno, which reached temperatures of over 1,000
degrees Celsius.
As relatives of the crash victims began to gather at the scene
of the tragedy, details of how the events of Tuesday morning happened
began to emerge.
Examination of the track and signals has confirmed that the
collision was triggered by the Thames commuter train going through
a red signal at Portobello Junction, 1,000 yards east of the crash
site. Investigators believe that the Thames train was on line
three of the six-track section. This means that when it missed
the red signal, the train then carried on along a stretch of line
that ran parallel to line two, the line on which the Great Western
express was approaching. This could have been the position when
the drivers of the two trains saw each other, which explains some
eyewitness accounts that reported an absence of braking before
the incident.
The driver of the Thames train had only been qualified for
two months, after an 11-month training period. He may have been
unaware that line three would not take him past the oncoming express,
but instead ended in a sharp left turn, merging with line two.
Rail inspectors believe that the Thames train reached this junction
at almost the same split-second as the express.
The Thames driver who was killed in the collision has been
identified as 31-year-old Michael Hodder from Reading, Berkshire.
He leaves behind a wife and two children, aged seven and four.
The driver of the express train is still "missing, presumed
dead".
Initial attempts to attribute the crash to "driver error"
fell flat once it emerged that Signal 109, the one that the Thames
train is said to have passed at danger, had already been identified
by Railtrack as posing a clear safety risk more than 18 months
ago. Drivers leaving Paddington complained that the signal dipped
in and out of view because of the location of new overhead power
masts. A group of Railtrack managers and rail inspectors proposed
measures to improve sighting, including ground-level markers intended
to remind drivers which line they were on and prevent them confusing
Signal 109 with adjacent signals governing other lines. These
recommendations were never fully implemented. Railtrack claim
this was because they required endorsement from the Public Inquiry
into the 1997 Southall crash. The inquiry into Southall, when
a Great Western train from Swansea to Paddington crashed into
an empty freight train on September 19, 1997, officially opened
in February 1998, but was almost immediately adjourned. The train
drivers union Aslef has said that Railtrack had removed flashing
lights that would have warned drivers they were approaching a
signal. Some 600 trains have passed through red lights on Britain's
railways in the past 12 months.
Discussion has now turned to the politically sensitive topic
of Automatic Train Protection (ATP) systems, which could have
prevented both the Paddington crash and that at Southall two years
ago. The system-wide implementation of ATP was recommended by
an inquiry into the Clapham Junction train crash that killed 35
people in 1988. It was rejected by the then Tory government on
grounds of cost. Labour's Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott
also ruled out ATP on the same basis, proposing a cheaper and
less efficient system known as the Train Protection Warning System
(TPWS).
A public inquiry is to be headed by Lord Cullen, a Scottish
judge who headed the two-year investigation into the Piper Alpha
disaster in 1988 when the North Sea oil platform caught fire and
exploded, killing 167 of the 228 workers on board.
In a dramatic about-face, which can only be explained by the
explosive political implications of the Paddington disaster, Prescott
told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he would find the
moneyup to £1 billionto fund the ATP system
if Lord Cullen's inquiry deemed it necessary. "I want the
best safety system as quickly as I can get it implemented, as
quickly as I can get itand £1billion is not a big
consideration to achieve that, he said.
At the same time, however, Prescott has commissioned an investigation
into comparative protective/warning systems independently of the
Cullen inquiry. Headed by Sir David Davies, the president of the
Royal Academy of Engineering, the investigation should present
an initial report by Christmas. It is believed that Davies' report
may argue for the cheaper TPWS on the grounds that it could be
implemented more quickly than ATP. Railtrack, who assumed responsibility
for signal and track safety following privatisation, has already
voiced this argument. Chief Executive Gerald Corbett said that
while ATP "might be a better solution long-term", it
would take a long time to bring in. He said he would push for
the introduction of TPWS to be accelerated. "We haven't got
the time so we have to go with what we've got", he said.
There are indications that the introduction of ATP could face
stiff resistance from rail bosses, even if Prescott were to honour
his pledge to have the Treasury foot the bill for its installation.
According to a report commissioned by Railtrack, made public Wednesday
night, Great Western Trains management had been reluctant to use
ATP. It regarded the system "at best, as an inconvenience
to the efficient running of the trains". The report, which
was detailed on Channel 4 news, claimed that it slowed drivers
down and even alleges that there were "hints" that some
drivers had tried to damage ATP equipment. The report was compiled
by the Electrowatt Engineering company and was delivered to Railtrack
days after the Southall rail crash in 1997, Channel 4 reported.
The opposition that is unconvincingly attributed to drivers
can be correctly ascribed to the rail bosses. It is they who believe
that questions of safety must not be allowed to get in the way
of the "efficiency", i.e., profitability, of the trains.
See Also:
Death toll could be as high as 100 in
London rail crash
[7 October 1999]
Inadequate safety measures
behind rail disasters in India
[16 August 1999]
The New South Wales rail systema
disaster waiting to happen
[14 August 1999]
At least 11 deaths in Amtrak
collision in Illinois
[18 March 1999]
The terrible
cost of privatisation: The train wreck at Eschede, Germany
[1 July 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |