Found this video from when the high-speed train service started in Galicia.
The train at the time was an AVANT, not an AVE as stated in the video title.
I think the AVANTs were used in the so called testing stage.
Note just after the reporter says the train can do 220kph you see the driver with sheets of paper in front of him. As far as I know those sheets are still be used. Newspapers written about paper maps being used. (min 1.11)
At min 2.03 the man from RENFE gives details of how much one is allowed to claim back when a train is late. It has been suggested that the train was running late and then divers are under pressure to get back on time. RENFE have denied this could be one of the causes of the accident.




The news from the Government's commission/enquiry is that ADIF and RENFE avoided answering important questions. However ADIF have is trying to shift the blame on the previous government for not installing the ERTMS automatic braking system.
If you want to read up to date information about the drivers iPad then this will explain.

Can the driver or other people pass through the generator sections to access other areas of the train or are the isolated in the cab?

I assume that the tractor unit at each end is the same but with an added diesel genset. It should not affect movement of the drivers and the passengers don't have access anyway.

Thanks Fred, I was thinking more of rail personel than the general public.

as Sir Nigel Gresley designed the tender for his A4's with a passage way through to the cab, and IIRC the original Deltic Diesel's also had that facility it would surely be a retrograde step to not have the access on long distance trains in this modern day.

Do you think the EU would give Spain some money to waste on one of these?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...o-30-mins.html

Latest news about the investigation into the causes of an accident in Santiago.

Various insinuations that known deficiencies were not corrected in order that the politicians could rush the ribbon cutting ceremony through in time to get themselves maximum publicity for the forthcoming elections.

http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/08/22/...53_943657.html

Like I said in this post. and this news is a repeat of the information I posted here. The Galician newspaper La Voz and El País have been writing about this the apparent lack of true travellers safety since the time of the accident. And all the news written in English was following the Government and the 2 rail companies manta ..."It was all the train drivers fault".

http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/09/06/...02_039832.html

A bit of a shocker.

The dead mans handle was activated twice in the last 25 minutes before the crash.

Both driver and conductor have altered their original statements, so it's doubtful if either of them can be considered entirely credible.

The conductor is not being charged it seems, despite the fact that according to the rules he shouldn't have made the second phone call.

What on earth the driver was up to is anybodies guess, but considering the evidence regarding the dead mans handle, there must surely be questions as to wether or not he was fully awake.

Update on the train cash in Santiago.

The judge charges 22 personnel and three presidents of ADIF. News in Spanish
Spanish train divers now say the service running between Galicia and Portugal is not safe. News in Spanish

in this day and age and mobile phones are being used

have they stopped building trains with internal communication systems ??

They also stopped making trains without a good safety system.
I just hope something positive comes out of this investigation.

I think in this instance, probably others, the safety system is external of the train ??

The UK had problems with SPAD's (Signal Passed At Danger), too many at certain locations that were never followed up after the event.

But irrespective of the procedure/system/whatever in place, surely it is incumbent on the driver (and to a lesser degree the conductor/guard) to maintain the correct speed for the section of track.
I can just imagine what a judge would say if the driver of a car or a coach said they were busy answering the phone, but its alright as I habitually went through this bend at excessive speeds.

They gets paid good money, they know the responsibility of the job. If they can't/won't obey the rules then they should be walked off the platform with no compensation.

Everyone has the right to drive themselves home after a train journey, no need to do it with an ambulance or hearse.

The trouble with your arguments about what the judge should do and not do are two fold.
Firstly this did not happen in the UK so there are many things which have obviously influenced the situation which may or may not have occurred in the UK. It a bit pointless to keep referring back to good old Blity.
Secondly, the Spanish safety system did allow the driver to communicate via a telephone. Apparently as this was allowed, plus the failure to install either physical signs or an automatic braking system then I feel it is reasonable that the company will be at fault.
I agree one should expect a safe train system, just like one should expect a safe airline, boat cruise, roads, hotels, working environment etc