Report of collision Bedford (Elstow) - 19/06/26

Haywain · 24 Jun 2026

AlterEgo said:
Several eyewitnesses reported seats having been thrown about, so I expect there to be some focus on this. RAIB as you say are very good and they also understand the media landscape they now operate in. I think the industry has responded very well to the incident.

Probably seat base cushions which are fairly easily removed on many modern trains.

RailUK Forums

Tw99 · 24 Jun 2026

54 people still in hospital several days after the accident, especially given how keen the NHS usually is to get people moved on, certainly emphasizes that it was a really big impact.

Bletchleyite · 24 Jun 2026

E100 said:
I would welcome insight with the investigation as to the impact of luggage space or lack their of in modern trains on safety following several reports that many injuries were caused by luggage and 'furniture' and if it is felt this may have had an impact.

With regard to these units specifically, the refurb they have started to receive increases the amount of floor level luggage rack space significantly.

ainsworth74 · 24 Jun 2026

AlterEgo said:
I think the industry has responded very well to the incident.

Agreed, it's a horrible incident but I think the industry response has been exceptional both the pace with which they've been recovering the site (see the other thread) but also the quality of communication (the Network Rail video updates have been superb, kudos to the fella doing them and the team supporting him) as well as the instant and blanket ticket acceptance across a huge range of TOCs. EMR have also been doing a good job communicating what's been happening as well to be clear and it's of course even rawer for their staff.

Dave W · 24 Jun 2026

AlterEgo said:
Several eyewitnesses reported seats having been thrown about, so I expect there to be some focus on this. RAIB as you say are very good and they also understand the media landscape they now operate in. I think the industry has responded very well to the incident.

100% agreed - RAIB have been on quite the journey in terms of their media engagement since inception. The current approach works extremely well, and they're delivering reports in under 12 months as is their aim.

Haywain said:
Probably seat base cushions which are fairly easily removed on many modern trains.

Several accidents at lower speed have in the past dislodged seat and table fixings. I wasn't on the train so can't say, but at the speed concerned I wouldn't be surprised if there was some detachment of otherwise fixed internal fittings.

Haywain · 24 Jun 2026

Dave W said:
Several accidents at lower speed have in the past dislodged seat and table fixings. I wasn't on the train so can't say, but at the speed concerned I wouldn't be surprised if there was some detachment of otherwise fixed internal fittings.

Well, tables wouldn't be a risk on a class 360!

E16 Cyclist · 24 Jun 2026

Nicholas Lewis said:
No it didn't just that it had come to stand unexpectedly from a fault with its AWS system. Again RAIB will want to know why that happened and whether it was self contained to the train or initiated by an interaction with passing over an AWS inductor.

I do think potentially the AWS fault is a bit of a red herring. As you say there are train bourne faults and track bourne ones and it could be something as simple as the Nottingham driver didn’t cancel their AWS in time and it applied the brake (who knows)

But even if it was track bourne the Corby train would’ve passed over a different set of AWS magnets until the final one which is why I’m sceptical

Bletchleyite · 24 Jun 2026

Dave W said:
Several accidents at lower speed have in the past dislodged seat and table fixings. I wasn't on the train so can't say, but at the speed concerned I wouldn't be surprised if there was some detachment of otherwise fixed internal fittings.

Somewhere, I forget where, I saw a picture of a seat with the back missing, there was just the tubular framework with the whole back missing.

Mike395 · 24 Jun 2026

Bletchleyite said:
Somewhere, I forget where, I saw a picture of a seat with the back missing, there was just the tubular framework with the whole back missing.

Some of the cushions on the 360s have questionable levels of being affixed to the train, so Im not surprised by this.

Signal Head · 24 Jun 2026

ainsworth74 said:
Agreed, it's a horrible incident but I think the industry response has been exceptional both the pace with which they've been recovering the site (see the other thread) but also the quality of communication (the Network Rail video updates have been superb, kudos to the fella doing them and the team supporting him) as well as the instant and blanket ticket acceptance across a huge range of TOCs. EMR have also been doing a good job communicating what's been happening as well to be clear and it's of course even rawer for their staff.

Very well said.

yorkie · 24 Jun 2026

This thread isn't a place for proposals, suggestions, predictions etc for changes or recommendations that may happen.

Here are some spin-off topics from this thread today:

Following the Bedford incident, should TPWS - or something providing an equivalent level of protection - be fitted to all remaining unfitted signals?

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/report-of-collision-bedford-elstow-19-06-26.303537/ The likelihood of a signalling system error causing WH154 to display a proceed aspect always seemed incredibly remote. So as expected, this was a SPAD. Obviously we must maintain...

www.railforums.co.uk

Should the responsibility for warning about speed restrictions ahead be separated from the system which warns that there is another train ahead?

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/report-of-collision-bedford-elstow-19-06-26.303537/ Should the responsibility for warning about speed restrictions ahead be separated from the system which warns that there is another train ahead?

www.railforums.co.uk

Should the Japanese approach to signals be adopted in the UK?

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/report-of-collision-bedford-elstow-19-06-26.303537/page-15#post-7836494 The Japanese practice of requiring drivers to point at every signal and say out loud what they are seeing (Shisa Kanko) helps ensure that drivers don't fail to...

www.railforums.co.uk

For any other spin-off topic, including anything of a speculative nature (including proposals, ideas, hypothetical scenarios, predictions etc) please create a new thread in the Speculative Discussion section; please don't use this thread for anything of that nature. Thanks.

MarkWi72 · 24 Jun 2026

I noticed it (1H46) was on the section at the Railcam position as ‘passing’. Where is the Railcam in relation to the collision site? Would the trains have gotten past it ? If so, there’ll be more evidence.

AlterEgo · 24 Jun 2026

ainsworth74 said:
Agreed, it's a horrible incident but I think the industry response has been exceptional both the pace with which they've been recovering the site (see the other thread) but also the quality of communication (the Network Rail video updates have been superb, kudos to the fella doing them and the team supporting him) as well as the instant and blanket ticket acceptance across a huge range of TOCs. EMR have also been doing a good job communicating what's been happening as well to be clear and it's of course even rawer for their staff.

Comms has been excellent, yes - gold star to NR and EMR for this as well as RAIB. Great coordination and control which has kept the media largely at bay, textbook crisis management.

Jala_150 · 24 Jun 2026

Still lots of unanswered questions, which will be answered by RAIB
Was the AWS fault the 810 experienced due to a fault at WH154. The section doesn't seem very long so an AWS brake application at WH154 could have brought the train to a stand in the area of WH152, depending on the trains speed.
We know the 360 passed a red signal but don't know yet what if any AWS indication was recieved by the driver.

Harpo · 24 Jun 2026

Watershed said:
Class 360s are capable of 12%g emergency braking, i.e. around 2.6mph/s. That makes the stopping distance from 76mph around 465m. The distance from WH154 to the rear of a class 810 stood 20m in front of WH156 is around 1170m. So a collision would have been entirely avoided.

But not all rail vehicles brake at the same rate. How does TPWS factor that in?

Tom · 24 Jun 2026

Jala_150 said:
The section doesn't seem very long so an AWS brake application at WH154

The distance between WH154 and WH152 is about 1.3km.

Watershed · 24 Jun 2026

Harpo said:
But not all rail vehicles brake at the same rate. How does TPWS factor that in?

That is factored into the linespeed they are permitted to run at. The trigger speeds for TPWS overspeed loops on approach to a signal are also lower for freight trains than passenger trains.

norbitonflyer · 24 Jun 2026

The AWS fault which caused the 810 to stop may be significant. RTT shows no other train on the fast line nearer than St Albans at the time of the accident, so the 810's driver should have been seeing green signals and getting an AWS bell. If either of those didn't happen (and in particular if only one of them did) the driver would have noticed something amiss and stopped. (there are three possibilities, a fault with the signal itself, a fault with the trackside part of the AWS equipement, or a fault with the trainborne AWS equipment)
Again, if the 810 was under green signals it might have taken more than one block to stop - that is after all why double yellows exist.
So an important question will be what the driver of the 360 saw and heard when passing the same signal.

LYuen · 24 Jun 2026

Watershed said:
Class 360s are capable of 12%g emergency braking, i.e. around 2.6mph/s. That makes the stopping distance from 76mph around 465m. The distance from WH154 to the rear of a class 810 stood 20m before WH156 is around 1170m. So a collision would have been entirely avoided.

That assumes a train is stopped near the end of the section. But the train can stop at any part of the section to cause a danger aspect. Automatic stopping after SPAD couldn't fully protect if the track is obstructed close to the start of the section.

Kilopylae · 24 Jun 2026

AlterEgo said:
Comms has been excellent, yes - gold star to NR and EMR for this as well as RAIB. Great coordination and control which has kept the media largely at bay, textbook crisis management.

The interim report is very well-written to provide "clear" answers whilst constraining speculation.

Haywain · 24 Jun 2026

norbitonflyer said:
what the driver of the 360 saw and heard when passing the same signal.

The only "same signal" that the 360 passed was WH154 which, we know, was displaying a red aspect.

QueensCurve · 24 Jun 2026

VP185 said:
I think a SPAD was pretty much what we all expected.

The question remains, and hopefully the investigation determines, why he didn’t see or react to the red signal.

Yes. And it will be RAIB's work cut out to see what underlying factors there were. It will be interesting to see if there was wrong side failure of the AWS.

Watershed · 24 Jun 2026

LYuen said:
That assumes a train is stopped near the end of the section. But the train can stop at any part of the section to cause a danger aspect. Automatic stopping after SPAD couldn't fully protect if the track is obstructed close to the start of the section.

The location of the two trains after the collision is just past WH152. With the best will in the world a 49mph collision isn't going to allow a class 360 to shunt a much heavier class 810 as much as 700m along the track.

norbitonflyer · 24 Jun 2026

Haywain said:
The only "same signal" that the 360 passed was WH154 which, we know, was displaying a red aspect.

Did it also dispay a red aspect to the 810? (it shouldn't have done if it was working properly, but something caused the driver to stop the train)

Tetchytyke · 24 Jun 2026

Bletchleyite said:
Somewhere, I forget where, I saw a picture of a seat with the back missing, there was just the tubular framework with the whole back missing.

Cushions detaching in a 49mph crash doesn't seem particularly alarming to me, when you consider the g-forces that would be involved in such an incident.

From memory, the seats are quite close together on a 360, especially the airline seats. I can't help wonder how many of those 56 injuries are head and facial injuries, or whiplash injuries. RAIB only recently touched on seatbelts on trains in their report on the LNER overspeed incident.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2026 ==

LYuen said:
Automatic stopping after SPAD couldn't fully protect if the track is obstructed close to the start of the section.

That is very true and you are quite right, if a train is stopped near the start of the section then TPWS may not prevent a collision- although it would still reduce its severity.

But the point is irrelevant to this situation. The front train was stopped at the signal at the end of the section, it wasn't stopped in the middle of the section or at the beginning of the section.

Firestarter · 24 Jun 2026

Does the 810 have rear facing camera? If so the position of the sun blind on the 360 before collision could be an interesting factor when you take into account the time of day and ability to see WH154 signal is showing a Red.

Omnishambles · 24 Jun 2026

Kilopylae said:
The interim report is very well-written to provide "clear" answers whilst constraining speculation.

I agree. One of the best interim reports into an accident I have seen from RAIB to date

Bald Rick · 24 Jun 2026

norbitonflyer said:
If either of those didn't happen (and in particular if only one of them did) the driver would have noticed something amiss and stopped. (there are three possibilities, a fault with the signal itself, a fault with the trackside part of the AWS equipement, or a fault with the trainborne AWS equipment)

Assuming the signal was green, then any fault with the AWS trackside would have been ‘right side’, and would not require the driver to stop immediately.

Haywain · 24 Jun 2026

norbitonflyer said:
Did it also dispay a red aspect to the 810? (it shouldn't have done if it was working properly, but something caused the driver to stop the train)

The 810 stopped because of an AWS fault, not because it passed WH154 at red.

king_walnut · 24 Jun 2026

Sorry if it's been mentioned already but 9 seconds of braking and the speed only dropped by 27mph? I don't know the 360s but does that suggest he didn't have it in emergency?

The trains I drive would drop more than that in brake step 2 ..

Report of collision Bedford (Elstow) - 19/06/26

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Member

Forum Staff

Member

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member