At least 69 people died when a high-speed train from Madrid to Seville hit another train on the same track from behind near Toledo on Wednesday morning.
Both trains had been brought to a halt earlier when the signalling system failed. The driver of the state-owned Spanish train, a Renfe AVE service, was told by controllers to restart the journey, but crashed into the train in front, run by the private operator Iryo. The front carriages of the AVE train and rear of the Iryo train were destroyed and others derailed.
The nature of this disaster, as well as its human toll, seems particularly shocking. There are multiple safeguards on high-speed lines, including different types of automatic train operation, which should ensure trains are never able to come close on the same track.
The audio file released to Spanish media by the government appears to point the finger at the control centre, with a controller in Madrid telling the driver of the halted AVE train to proceed “ con marcha normale ” – under normal operations – rather than at low speed. The instruction was described by the transport minister, Óscar Puente, as an “inexplicable decision”.
Rear-end collisions are rare, as are any kind of crash between trains on international high-speed networks. The closest comparator occurred in China in 2011, when a high-speed train hit a stationary express in front of it in Wenzhou, killing 46 people. The rear-end collision between two East Midlands trains in Bedford this year was the first fatal crash of that kind in 40 years in the UK, and occurred on a stretch of railway without automatic train operation, after the driver apparently failed to slow despite the danger signal.
While the audio appears to indicate human error played a central role, there are other elements that remain unclear, such as what caused the initial failure of the signalling system. Investigators will be looking at the sequence of events and technical issues that allowed the Renfe train to proceed but the Iryo train to stay put.
Signallers, or track controllers, are increasingly based in remote computer centres but are acutely aware of the risk and responsibility their job entails. Any investigation will want to establish what circumstances or pressures could have led to that instruction.
In all modern hi-tech transport, whether air or rail, known safety risks are eradicated as far as possible. Accident investigations typically yield rare, if not unprecedented, combinations of technical failure and human error.
The Spanish government will want to demonstrate that this latest disaster is completely unconnected to the head-on crash between two trains that occurred on the same line in Adamuz in January after one derailed, apparently due to a small section of faulty or missing rail.
Train drivers were due to strike, even before this week’s crash, in protest against under-investment in the railway and its people, which unions say is directly connected to safety.
The success of Spain’s high-speed railway, linking Madrid to Seville and Barcelona, was the envy of British rail planners. It was modern and had cut journeys from the capital to Andalusia to two and a half hours; a car takes twice that, and the public transport alternative of the coach, three times as long. Good public transportation links bring jobs and growth; losing them could mean the opposite.
The long-term trend since 2010 has been fewer fatalities of any sort on the railway. Most years, in most countries, no passenger is killed in any type of train crash, a world away from the death toll on the roads. However, worries about under-investment in the railways, particularly after costs and subsidy soared as fare revenue dried up in the pandemic, are not unique to Spain.
