Jump to content
 

Level crossing stupidity...


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, lather said:

The above may take a long time to read. (Sorry, but as you can no doubt appreciate, it IS a complex process...) However, in reality, the time from pulling the "loud handle" to being under a parachute which is deployed enough to enable a survivable (if a little painful) landing can be as little as two and a half seconds.  You can see this in probably the most famous piece of footage of an ejection by searching for "MiG 29 crash Paris 1989" - in this case, the ejection took place at just a couple of hundred feet with the plane heading almost vertically down to the ground. Not only did the pilot survive, it really was a case of "and he walked away", despite ejecting at extreme low level, low speed and just two seconds from impact with a flight-path heading straight for the ground. And was he shaken by it? Of course not! In fact, the first thing he did after landing was pull a pack of smokes out of his pocket, light up and wander over to see the mess he'd made...

 

 

Also explains the cause of the crash, flame out of right engine.

Edited by PhilJ W
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that detailed update on ejector technology lather, that's why my post suggesting it said that an ejector seat be designed for rather than fitted for a train driver.  I was aware of issues when flying inverted and that modern seats are considerably more sophisticated than the early ones, just as other equipment like aircrew helmets are rather more elaborate (and costly) than what we make the kiddies wear when riding a bike.

 

Your ethical point about V-bombers and everybody else on board may apply to passenger workings, but these days there is often only one person on board a freight train, and I suppose you'd have to make provision to fitting another one for an inspector travelling with him. I'm not sure that the situation with a V-bomber crew is comparable, as the pilot who chooses to remain on board is still using the control surfaces that are still available in an attempt to keep the aircraft stable long enough for his crew to bale out conventionally or is trying to make a crash landing that they might be able to survive even if he doesn't.  After he's put the brakes into full emergency a train driver has no controls he can usefully manipulate when a collision is obvious.

 

In any case, where a train is loco-hauled, there is a greater risk to the bloke at the front in a collision than there is to a passenger two thirds of the way down the  train.  Unlike a car he isn't expected to remain seated and he doesn't have a seat belt, indeed he probably prefers being able to go to the bar for a beer!

 

I think there is a slightly different ethical issue about ejecting from trains - I suspect there is greater risk to people on the ground than there is from an aircraft.  All the same, anybody unfortunate enough to be standing too near the line when a train is derailing has a problem anyway, even if he is beyond the threshold required to meet PTS rules. 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistically, though, whilst still too frequent, fatal collisions with obstacles are, thankfully, quite rare events. As such, resources may be better spent on projects to improve road/rail separation (elimination of level crossings, basically), and improving crash worthiness of locos and stock. Indeed, in this day and age, how critical is it for the driver to be right at the pointy end? If looking at aircraft tech to improve driver safety, maybe the sort of VR gear that makes drones feasible would be a better option. Indeed, AIUI, driverless train technology is already able to achieve exactly this. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we've already moved the signalmen from Kings Cross to York, and we could take the next logical step and run the entire railway from a call centre in Bombay, saving a fortune in drivers' wages.

 

I seem to recall when the Victoria Line was opened that it had been designed to be driverless but the powers that be thought the public wouldn't feel safe travelling in unmanned trains so they retained the motorman and he's still there some half a century later.  Of course he could become a "Train Captain" whose job is to lead survivors away after a smash.  Not that London Transport has much trouble with low loaders on level crossings of course.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, PatB said:

Realistically, though, whilst still too frequent, fatal collisions with obstacles are, thankfully, quite rare events. As such, resources may be better spent on projects to improve road/rail separation (elimination of level crossings, basically), and improving crash worthiness of locos and stock. Indeed, in this day and age, how critical is it for the driver to be right at the pointy end? If looking at aircraft tech to improve driver safety, maybe the sort of VR gear that makes drones feasible would be a better option. Indeed, AIUI, driverless train technology is already able to achieve exactly this. 

Careful there are a few drivers on the forum who might not like sitting in a portacabin in Leeds driving the train with VR strapped to their noggin :lol:

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

In any case, where a train is loco-hauled, there is a greater risk to the bloke at the front in a collision than there is to a passenger two thirds of the way down the  train.  Unlike a car he isn't expected to remain seated and he doesn't have a seat belt, indeed he probably prefers being able to go to the bar for a beer!

But in a loco-hauled train, unlike an MU, the driver can't get to the bar.  (Sorry, blame the way I was taught grammar)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

It's not just drivers. I believe that at both Hatfield and Great Heck, catering staff were amongst the casualties. I seem to remember that catering containers were involved.

 

Jamie

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

In any major impact, a refreshment trolley would potentially create absolute mayhem. I wouldn't want even to be responsible for trying to keep one under control in an emergency braking situation. 

 

John 

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

Careful there are a few drivers on the forum who might not like sitting in a portacabin in Leeds driving the train with VR strapped to their noggin :lol:

At least they'd be in Leeds - meeting one of the Govenrnment's objectives  of levelling up by  creating jobs in the frozen North! 

 

I think the logic behind ATO on the Victoria Line had more to do with ASLEF strikes irritating the voters in commuterland.  It was before Thatcher's time, but she would have been happy for the railways to go the same way as the pits, and our incumbent great Leader is in favour of driverless trains https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53314197   Somebody ought to tell him diggers could be driverless too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

In any major impact, a refreshment trolley would potentially create absolute mayhem. I wouldn't want even to be responsible for trying to keep one under control in an emergency braking situation. 

 

John 

Surely that's a design issue - fit the thing with its own brakes and an accelerometer to apply them in such a situation.  Maybe even a sort of deadman's that the steward just has to let go of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Surely that's a design issue - fit the thing with its own brakes and an accelerometer to apply them in such a situation.  Maybe even a sort of deadman's that the steward just has to let go of.

I'm not sure that it was the trolleys. I think that it was the wheeled containers that the restaurant car supplies come in. They are normally secured by what look like a set of dog clips.

 

Jamie

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Surely that's a design issue - fit the thing with its own brakes and an accelerometer to apply them in such a situation.  Maybe even a sort of deadman's that the steward just has to let go of.

 

Unfortunately that probably wouldn't do much - if the force of the train stopping is hard enough to throw the trolley forwards at any great rate, then it'll likely be thrown, tipped or just skid with locked wheels, as there's only a limited amount of friction between smooth trolley wheels and the carpet. A push-down handle like on airport baggage trolleys that released the brakes might help stop it at slow speed - maybe they already have them to keep them steady, I don't know - but at anything like a higher speed the lack of friction between the trolley and carpet would be the bigger problem. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
15 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Surely that's a design issue - fit the thing with its own brakes and an accelerometer to apply them in such a situation.  Maybe even a sort of deadman's that the steward just has to let go of.

Possibly, but they are tall, narrow, and quite heavy. I'd think whatever brakes they have would be rendered ineffective by them toppling over, at which point they could slide about anywhere. 

 

John

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Possibly, but they are tall, narrow, and quite heavy. I'd think whatever brakes they have would be rendered ineffective by them toppling over, at which point they could slide about anywhere. 

 

John

You should try moving one from the upper deck to the lower (or vice versa) of a Eurotunnel Shuttle...We did, but just the once.

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

..... and we'll soon have driverless cars on the level crossings too - GAWD 'ELP US !

Like the Teslas that needed the real drivers to stop it driving onto the railway, instead of following the tarmac.

 

And this one that thought it was a plane:

https://interestingengineering.com/video/watch-this-tesla-model-s-catch-air-after-hitting-train-tracks

  • Round of applause 2
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...