The investigation into the Adamuz accident finds "inconsistencies" in the information about the welding of the tracks

BarcelonaA month and a half later tragic train accident in Adamuz The investigation into the train crash—which resulted in 46 deaths—is ongoing, and all hypotheses regarding the causes remain open. In a report submitted to the court overseeing the investigation and signed on February 17, the Civil Guard admitted that it did not yet have sufficient evidence to completely rule out or confirm any of the possibilities. Precisely in response to this report, the investigating magistrate authorized officers on Monday to review the data from the black boxes and the surveillance camera footage from the two trains involved in the accident. One hypothesis that remains open and strong is that the cause of the crash was a problem with the railway infrastructure. Investigators are certain that a rail and a weld broke, but so far they have not been able to determine whether the rail break caused the weld to fail, or vice versa. In any case, the reasons for this breakage would also need to be clarified, and the Civil Guard is considering several possibilities. On one hand, there is the possibility that a defective rail caused the derailment of the Iryo train, which collided with the Alvia train traveling in the opposite direction. Investigators have requested data from Adif (Spain's railway infrastructure manager) regarding the batch of rails used on this section to clarify the matter. Another possibility is that a rail weld was defective and broke, so the Civil Guard has also requested information on the workers who performed the welding.

"Inconsistencies" in the welding

For now, investigators know that this weld was performed on May 24, 2025, by an operator with more than five years of experience, who had the necessary permit to carry out this installation and who worked for the company Maquisaba. The Civil Guard is studying the documents it has collected regarding the weld, while the Railway Accident Investigation Commission (CIAF) has already alerted the agents that it has found "various inconsistencies" in the documentation on the welds submitted by AYESA, the company in charge of supervising the installation. The Civil Guard is now waiting for the CIAF to provide further information. Members of the CGT union have also publicly commented on these welds, stating that they did not comply with regulations regarding the required distance between welds. Two union members also testified as part of the investigation and assert that this could pose an accident risk. Civil Guard investigators have also taken statements from 19 train drivers from Ouigo, Iryo, and Renfe who traveled on the section of track where the accident occurred that same day. Only one driver noticed something on the right side; the rest had no incidents or unusual sensations.

Train drivers and prevention

Another possibility that the Civil Guard "cannot definitively rule out" is negligent or reckless driving by one of the train drivers. The Alvia train driver died, and pending the results of toxicology tests, information from the Renfe technical recorder and the testimonies of the operators at the Madrid high-speed control center do not indicate any unusual activity. The driver was apparently surprised by the derailment of the Iryo train, with no time to react. In contrast, the Iryo driver was unharmed. He tested negative for both alcohol and drugs, and crew members' accounts show no evidence of recklessness or negligence that could have caused the derailment. In addition to this information, the Civil Guard has also requested data from Iryo regarding the last five services of the driver involved in the accident, including dates, times, distances traveled, and any incidents.

Investigators are also looking into whether a lack of preventative measures or supervision prevented the detection of risks on the track. Investigators have interviewed train drivers to ask if they had detected any anomalies on the tracks, but they have not provided any relevant information. Nor has anything been gleaned from reports made by trains that had previously traveled on the same track. The next step will be to review the protocols for monitoring and inspecting the tracks and for responding when drivers report an incident. In this area, investigators have obtained "information of interest regarding responsibilities in supervision and maintenance" through an interview with Adif personnel.

Among the other lines of inquiry that remain open is the possibility of sabotage or a terrorist act, although investigators consider this "highly unlikely".