Santiago de Compostela Train Acccident case study

Trains are regarded as some of the safest means of transport, and as such any disaster that concerns them has to be analyzed in order to understand the cause. Given their bulky nature, train accidents have turned out to be quite disastrous to both humans and infrastructure. As such many governments strive to ensure that up to date safety measures are always taken to ensure the smooth operations of such machines. However, despite the measures that have been taken, there have still been some recorded cases of train accidents that have occurred, and this paper will be analyzing one such accident. The Santiago de Compostela train accident is one such incident that will forever be remembered in the history of derailments as one of the most catastrophic occurrences ever recorded.

These were all experts from Spain. This team of experts was brought together to try and reconstruct the events that might have led to the accident, by looking at it from all the possible angles. The mechanical engineers for instance were meant to analyze the mechanical aspects that could have led to the derailment of the train. Through logic and simplicity thinking, this team of experts was able to come to the overall conclusion that the driver of the train was to blame for what happened (Shultz et a,. Crash Synopsis 8. The train crash resulted on one of the largest train catastrophes ever recorded where eighty passengers out of the two hundred and forty four that were on it lost their lives.

The other one hundred and forty four sustained serious injuries that required medical attention. This was the first ever recorded railway accident that had occurred in Spain since the introduction of the Alvia train in the year 1992. According to the weather reports of that day, the conditions were optimal and were thus rule out as a possible cause of the accident (Forsberg, & Vázquez, 2016). The terrain on which the train had reached was also level and so that was also ruled out as another factor that could have caused the accident. It was highlighted as an anthropogenic (human-caused), non-intentional, transportation disaster. Its distinguishing features included the following: over speeding, human error, lack of safety systems on the track, gruesome wreckage and multiple physical and psychological casualties.

The accident recorded a 100% injury or death rate. The physical trauma was felt by the surviving passengers, while the psychological trauma was felt by both the victims and their families. Villagers from around the scene of the accident rushed to offer help to the victims as the emergency response teams were also quick to respond to call of duty. Mr. Francesco was regarded as a veteran driver who had travelled that route multiple times, and thus had to take responsibility for what had happened. The alternative causes of the crash such as lack of automated systems on at the curves were also mentioned, but, regarded as not majorly important in that incident (Forsberg, & Vázquez, 2016). The estimated cost of the damage to the infrastructure was found to be about 1.

4 million Euros. As such, Spain and other nations noted the results of the CIAF report, and had to make changes in their transport systems to evade such a disaster (Stanton, Margaryan, & Littlejohn, 2017). According to Dr. George Bibel, most train derailments are caused by problems with rail equipment or damages on the track (Couce-Vieira et al,. In the US today, train derailments have recorded a healthy decrease of about 90% since 1976. This decline can be attributed to changes made to the railway safety measures. Today Spain has ensured that all their tracks have been fitted with such. The United States also took the lesson and followed suit in ensuring that their tracks have been upgraded with similar technology. Bibel adds that despite the braking measures being taken to safeguard trains, they cannot be expected to account from every scenario that may occur (Couce-Vieira et al,.

Different trains with different loads have different demands in terms of making emergency stops. A heavy freight train for instance cannot be stopped in the same manner as a speeding passenger train because they both have different needs. , Bendele, M. , Bishop, P. , Stroud, R. , & Tonks, S. (2016, June). Couce-Vieira, A. , Rios Insua, D. , & Houmb, S. H. GIRA: a general model for incident risk analysis. , Coplestone, A. , & Carey, M. (2016, August). Real world verbal protocol data analysis of European Rail Traffic Management System train driving and conventional train driving. In Intelligent Rail Transportation (ICIRT), 2016 IEEE International Conference on (pp. The 2013 Santiago de Compostela Train Crash: High-Speed Derailment, Medical Trauma, and Psychological Aftermath.  Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 32(S1), S114-S114. Shultz, J. M. , Garcia-Vera, M.