Ghent University denies the allegations published last February according to which the institution “came to precise conclusions about the causes of the fire that broke out after the collision of the two trains in Tempi and concluded that there were at least 3.5 tons of illegal flammable liquid, which were transported in the first carriage of the commercial train on a tank measuring one by two and a half meters.“

Specifically, according to Georgios Marangos, a researcher at Ghent University and the subject-matter investigator responsible for the Tempi case – who collaborated with EODASAAM together with Professor Bart Merci – he categorically stated that “the allegations in the publications are extremely misleading and unfounded.“

“The two researchers from Ghent University were never called upon to investigate the accident and never carried out any simulation on behalf of EODASAAM. Their sole duty was limited to offering their scientific opinion on three preliminary simulations, sent to them by Mr. Lakafosis, for which they provided comments to EODASAAM, stating, however, that they do not approve and disagree with both the findings of the CFD simulations presented in the EODASAAM report and the way in which the university’s name was included in the report,” points out Georgios Maragos.

“The CFD study presented is not of high quality – Silicone oil droplets can ignite”

Mr. Marangos had expressed his disagreement with the EODASAAM conclusion. Asked for his opinion, he pointed out at H.H. the following:

“There is no justification for the amount or type of fuel mentioned in the report. For example, one can achieve a comparable size of fireball in hundreds of different ways, depending on the data you give to the models. The same size of fireball can be achieved with a significantly smaller amount of fuel than what is mentioned in the report, depending on the data you give to the model. Silicone oil droplets can ignite as long as there is a sufficiently high heat source, I was surprised that the opposite is stated in the report, etc. Preparing a high-quality CFD study for this scenario would require several months of work by trained and specialized scientists in the field of CFD and many other fields. It is obvious from the limited information and analysis provided in the EODASAAM report that the CFD study presented is not of high quality. In our view, the name of Ghent University has been included in the EODASAAM report in a somewhat misleading manner, to make it appear that we approve of what is included in it, which is not actually the case.”