Level crossing stupidity...

[Colin_McLeod]

1 hour ago, Fat Controller said:

.

Platform-edge doors are appropriate on Metro systems with uniform-sized trains and standardised door spacing, and where access to tracks by other means is difficult. They are not at all suitable for applications in the open air.

 

In addition metros tend to have continually crowded platforms thus increasing the risk of an accidental fall onto the tracks.

[jcredfer]

45 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

Could you give an estimate of the cost of installing and maintaining such equipment at every passenger station in the UK, therefore allowing a cost per life saved equation to be assessed ? Even on the London Underground, which logic suggests would be a higher risk area for passenger/train interface issues, only a small proportion of stations have platform edge doors.

 

And it is not right that nothing has been done; On quadruple track routes, stations at which trains normally only stop on the Slow lines have fences preventing access to the Fast line areas, eg Wimbledon and the Great Eastern route to Shenfield for example. 

 

 

 

In further agreement, with places where things have been done, it's quite difficult to get past the barriers at Waterloo, so as to be on the platform as a train enters.  Having said that, the same didn't apply to Paddington some years ago, despite similar barriers being in place {that may well have changed in the intervening years.}.

 

Regards

 

Julian

[Andy Hayter]

2 hours ago, jcredfer said:

 

It 'ain't that difficult, if the regulations are made, then the manufacturers would simply factor that into the design of new.  There are plenty of foreign places which have gone this way and they seem to be able to get on their coaches still.

 

Regards

 

Julian

 

I would like to see your list of plenty of places where these doors are used - I gave you three.

 

Fact is that commuter trains need fast on- and off-loading of their cargo and therefore need lots of wide doors.  Long distance trains need lots of seating and have relatively few doors, since doors mean no seats.  That looks like a difficult square to circle if you have regulation to install doors to cover both types of use.

[96701]

On 23/04/2019 at 22:48, Porkscratching said:

When I was a kid the railway fence was a single rusty strand of wire which we ducked under to go and play / put pennies on the track etc...we all lived to tell the tale ...

Are you sure that every kid in the country survived, or was it just you and your mates (and their parents and siblings) that were lucky?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44868659

[Porkscratching]

Of course not, doubtless some kids came to grief as they do...i don't recall any kids i knew,( or knew of) at school were ever injured ..tho I did badly sprain an ankle climbing over a 6ft chain link fence ( yes railway again) a bit later, aged about 11...

We were of the era when kids used to just go off and play all day, then roll home at tea time..

Don't suppose they're allowed to do that anymore, too busy being brainwashed by iphones and the internet...

[96701]

2 hours ago, jcredfer said:

 

It 'ain't that difficult, if the regulations are made, then the manufacturers would simply factor that into the design of new.  There are plenty of foreign places which have gone this way and they seem to be able to get on their coaches still.

 

Regards

 

Julian

One of the difficulties is coping with the old whilst the new is being  introduced. Another difficulty  is in different purposed trains using the same platforms. Suburban trains with many doors on short coaches to get people off quickly vs long distance trains with longer coaches and fewer doors. I rather think we may need movable barriers with extra bits added in case a 3 coach semi fast turns up in lieu of a 2 car semi fast.

[Colin_McLeod]

22 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

I would like to see your list of plenty of places where these doors are used - I gave you three.

 

Fact is that commuter trains need fast on- and off-loading of their cargo and therefore need lots of wide doors.  Long distance trains need lots of seating and have relatively few doors, since doors mean no seats.  That looks like a difficult square to circle if you have regulation to install doors to cover both types of use.

 

Long distance coaches can still have less doors, so long as they are in the correct position.  Not too difficult for the relevant platform doors only,  to open when a long distance coach is there.

[96701]

9 minutes ago, Porkscratching said:

Of course not, doubtless some kids came to grief as they do...i don't recall any kids i knew,( or knew of) at school were ever injured ..tho I did badly sprain an ankle climbing over a 6ft chain link fence ( yes railway again) a bit later, aged about 11...

We were of the era when kids used to just go off and play all day, then roll home at tea time..

Don't suppose they're allowed to do that anymore, too busy being brainwashed by iphones and the internet...

I give in. You are so right.

[meil]

1 hour ago, 96701 said:

Are you sure that every kid in the country survived, or was it just you and your mates (and their parents and siblings) that were lucky?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44868659

But do we include Darwin Award nominees?

[eastglosmog]

The main danger of the train/platform interface is when the train is departing or arriving.   So if you had the barriers 2m from the platform edge, with plenty of doors, you could wait until the train had stopped and all passengers had got off before opening the doors to let new passengers on. (You would need a separate channel to take them away by.)   Close the pen doors before the train departs to prevent anyone rushing for the doors as the train goes.  Not sure whether the cost and delay all that would entail is worth it, though.

[jcredfer]

2 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

I would like to see your list of plenty of places where these doors are used - I gave you three.

 

Fact is that commuter trains need fast on- and off-loading of their cargo and therefore need lots of wide doors.  Long distance trains need lots of seating and have relatively few doors, since doors mean no seats.  That looks like a difficult square to circle if you have regulation to install doors to cover both types of use.

 

If you google platform safety barriers you will see a very - very long list - I'm not bothered enough to copy it here, you might chose to look for it yourself.  

 

As for your square circle, that has never bothered our Gov't {nor other foreign ones either, it seems} when they see a need.{often referred to as "Biting the Bullet"}.  Automatic barriers have been available for over 40 years, manual / physical ones for way longer than railways.  Bigger decisions have been made in very much shorter times than either of those.  My point is that there has not been much [repeat "much"] will in the UK for platform safety barriers.  There are some {repeat some}, but few in comparison to platforms without.  To repeat {again} the original point, fences along all lines, to prevent animals getting to the lines,  but few for humans at the points of direct interface with the trains {platforms}.

 

I have not made any recommendation for barriers, or no barriers, simply observed how their application, or not, in the Uk, has compared to their diligence over fencing the lines beyond the platforms.

 

I hope this clarifies the discussion for you.

 

Regards

 

Julian

Edited April 25, 2019 by jcredfer

[cctransuk]

Are we now in a period where evolution is regressing?

 

Since the invention of railways, humans have managed to stand on platforms, (mostly) without falling off, whilst trains arrived and departed. So what has changed?

 

Are there statistics that show that potential passengers, or others, have suddenly started throwing themselves off platforms in the same way that lemmings apparently jump off cliffs? If so, there is an urgent need to research what is happening to the human psyche.

 

.... or perhaps that burgeoning body of self-interest, the H&S industry, has discovered that railways provide a limitless source of 'accidents waiting to happen'!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[eastglosmog]

John - it is more the threat of getting sued and the cost, time and trouble of defending oneself rather than H&S as such, that is the deterrent. As Mozzer noted upthread, Network Rail were cleared in the Hipperholme case.  From personal experience in these matters, I know that Network Rail will not get back their full costs and little if any compensation for the time and worry staff will have had over it.  All to often, it is cheaper to pay the Danegeld.

[RJS1977]

6 hours ago, caradoc said:

 

Could you give an estimate of the cost of installing and maintaining such equipment at every passenger station in the UK, therefore allowing a cost per life saved equation to be assessed ? Even on the London Underground, which logic suggests would be a higher risk area for passenger/train interface issues, only a small proportion of stations have platform edge doors.

 

And it is not right that nothing has been done; On quadruple track routes, stations at which trains normally only stop on the Slow lines have fences preventing access to the Fast line areas, eg Wimbledon and the Great Eastern route to Shenfield for example. 

 

 

 

 

 

Cholsey on the GWML is another example.

[Andy Hayter]

9 hours ago, jcredfer said:

 

If you google platform safety barriers you will see a very - very long list - I'm not bothered enough to copy it here, you might chose to look for it yourself.  

 

As for your square circle, that has never bothered our Gov't {nor other foreign ones either, it seems} when they see a need.{often referred to as "Biting the Bullet"}.  Automatic barriers have been available for over 40 years, manual / physical ones for way longer than railways.  Bigger decisions have been made in very much shorter times than either of those.  My point is that there has not been much [repeat "much"] will in the UK for platform safety barriers.  There are some {repeat some}, but few in comparison to platforms without.  To repeat {again} the original point, fences along all lines, to prevent animals getting to the lines,  but few for humans at the points of direct interface with the trains {platforms}.

 

I have not made any recommendation for barriers, or no barriers, simply observed how their application, or not, in the Uk, has compared to their diligence over fencing the lines beyond the platforms.

 

I hope this clarifies the discussion for you.

 

Regards

 

Julian

 

 

Well in frustration I took your advice and di indeed use a search engine to find a long list of lines and countries using automatic platform barriers including the UK, so thanks for that.  

 

What I found in the list was a lot of similarities in the system descriptions.  Common words used are:

Underground

Subway

tramway

Metro

 

and in addition quite a number of airport internal transportation systems (I listed two).

Quite a number of the systems use automated or driverless operation and you can see why such barriers are going to be a necessity there. 

In all cases it would seem that the stock used is near identical on each line in question.  And of course having introduced such a system it is clear that the automated door layout will determine the configuration of future rolling stock purchases.  

 

What I did not find was a single example (though I might have missed it) of barriers used on a  system using mixed stock operations.  Can it be done?  I am sure it can, but I am sure given a small budget, that I can fly to the moon.  

 

 

[stewartingram]

If platform doors are deemed such a necessity  for trains, (which follow known guided paths), then why have they not been considered for bus stops? I'm thinking in particular for rural areas, with narrow roads, where no footpaths exist, and roads are considered dangerous for pedestrians (though it reality it is the drivers that are dangerous, not the roads). 

[jim.snowdon]

Not all instances of platform doors are for safety, some, at least, are there for reasons of ventilation and air conditioning, and function purely to limit the volume of space being treated.

 

 The incidence of people falling off platforms is really quite tiny.

 

Jim

[Hobby]

13 hours ago, Porkscratching said:

Of course not, doubtless some kids came to grief as they do...i don't recall any kids i knew,( or knew of) at school were ever injured ..tho I did badly sprain an ankle climbing over a 6ft chain link fence ( yes railway again) a bit later, aged about 11...

We were of the era when kids used to just go off and play all day, then roll home at tea time..

Don't suppose they're allowed to do that anymore, too busy being brainwashed by iphones and the internet...

 

It's an interesting point, what has changed? I, too, was brought up in that era. Our local playground was Longton Brickworks (shut for several years when we played there. It had three (very) deep lakes where the clay had been dug out) but I only ever remember one fatality there, due to drowning (the weeds got him), and the only reaction was for all the parents to remind us to "be careful"... It still had it's buildings and chimney and for several years we kids gradually removed the bricks from the bottom (as per Fred D., though we didn't know that's how he did it at the time!), eventually an adult spotted what was going on and they demolished it before we did! No that could have been nasty!

 

We also used to wander across the mainline near Lostock Hall same as PS says above, and even though there were a lot of us there were no injuries or fatalities... I can even remember that we allocated a "look out" who kept their eye out for trains (4 track main line, two fast, two slow lines). The train crew who did the shunting in the sidings used to chat to us...

 

So what's changed since then? Some of it seems to be a lack of awareness of their surroundings and dangers by people these days. Trains have always been dangerous but back "in the day" were were brought up with a healthy respect for things mechanical and the dangers that go with them, I am not sure that's the case these days. We'd never dream of walking down a road with earphones on and not taking any notice of our surroundings to give just one example... We saw the advert on TV saying "wear something white at night" and took notice... If were were told that the lakes were deep and dangerous we'd treat them with respect, at least most of us did...

 

So, what has changed, why do people seem to do such stupid things where even an ounce of brains would be shouting "Don't!", such as those two poor girls or the person who dropped their phone on the track at Chesterfield and got down without looking... And, more worryingly, why are other people trying to blame their stupidity on someone else?

Edited April 26, 2019 by Hobby

[Porkscratching]

Kids and people in general are positively Discouraged from thinking for themselves now, hence there's no common sense much anymore..

It's like an addiction, just plug in, follow the programme, buy more junk, think what we tell you on Facebook ( or whatever one it is )..

[Mark Saunders]

1 hour ago, Hobby said:

 

, such as those two poor girls or the person who dropped their phone on the track at Chesterfield and got down without looking... And, more worryingly, why are other people trying to blame their stupidity on someone else?

 

You can always get another phone!  

 

However this is lost on most people!

[PhilJ W]

3 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

You can always get another phone!  

 

However this is lost on most people!

Many of them will never need another phone. Twice recently people have stepped out in front of my car while using a mobile causing me to brake suddenly.

[chris p bacon]

15 hours ago, 96701 said:

Are you sure that every kid in the country survived, or was it just you and your mates (and their parents and siblings) that were lucky?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44868659

 

I've got a picture taken at school of the last class at Junior school, there are 31 of us aged 11, out of that picture 3 were dead by the age of 16. All were killed trying to cross the A1 after to school to get home.  Only then was a bridge proposed and some time later the speed limit dropped to 50.

[Coryton]

1 hour ago, Porkscratching said:

Kids and people in general are positively Discouraged from thinking for themselves now, hence there's no common sense much anymore..

It's like an addiction, just plug in, follow the programme, buy more junk, think what we tell you on Facebook ( or whatever one it is )..

 

I have been following discussion on the recent Boeing 737-Max crashes on a pilots' forum.

 

It is a little scary hearing several suggestions that pilots' jobs are being dumbed down - manuals that just tell you what to do not how the plane works, and overwhelming use of automation even when it's not necessary, so that when things go wrong the reaction is to find the right checklist to go through rather than thinking.

 

On 22/04/2019 at 21:36, ejstubbs said:

EDIT: Although NASA didn't actually go fully metric until 2007: https://www.space.com/3332-nasa-finally-metric.html.  The ISS (the first component of which was launched in to orbit in 1998) still uses a mixture of metric and imperial.

 

I'm not sure about NASA, but I can assure you that ESA is quite happy for imperial (4-40) threads to be used in its satellites.

 

(They are standard for microwave waveguide flanges so using metric fasteners would be odd - I suspect NASA do the same).

 

Just to make it OK, it seems to be normal to use 4-40 cap head screws which take metric allen keys.

 

On 17/04/2019 at 12:14, mcowgill said:

 

Unfitted trains are still a regular occurrence on the Festiniog, all the heritage freight stock is unfitted and until recently most of the stock used for infrastructure work.   The PW dept's main loco (Harlech Castle, the loco involved in the incident) was not vac fitted until an overhaul this winter and as the PW train is out on the line for inspections and maintenance almost every day that would give an indication of how familiar crews would be at working unfitted trains. 

 

There are some unfitted trains that you don't want to come to a halt above the crossing except in the case of the gates being closed, so a controlled approach and the ability to either stop or continue rolling past the sign is appropriate - the Festiniog is unique in running demonstration gravity slate trains and these are run alongside the rest of the normal services on the line particularly at special events.   There are specific local instructions for running these trains, so the issue with the incident is more a matter of non-compliance with operating procedures than an issue with the signs themselves.

 

 

I'm coming to this a bit late, but it seems that much of the discussion has centred on whether it was right to have a sign that had a conditional STOP command. Aside from the explanation of why there are trains you don't want to have to stop, it seems a bit of a red herring. I didn't see any suggestion that the driver wasn't prepared to stop, it was just that the custom had developed of stopping in front of the gates rather than at the sign. I suspect that no matter how the sign had been phrased, nothing would have changed. 

 

What I find curious is that the sign was the result of earlier occasions where previous trains had had the same difficulty in stopping on contaminated rail in exactly the same location and yet somehow the institutional memory had been lost as to why the board was where it was.

 

I could understand an attitude of ignoring a rule because it is inconvenient and seems unnecessary when it arises from incidents happening elsewhere in a large organisation, but this surprises me somewhat.

 

 

[ess1uk]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-cambridgeshire-48055763/man-seen-jumping-level-crossing-barrier-at-shepreth

 

oh dear

[Hobby]

Probably didn't have a ticket either...