Southernman46 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The theory is that as the signalman is in charge of train movements, He / she will know where trains are and therefore should not put themseleves in a position where they could be struck by a passing train. There was an incident on the SR in the early 80's when the out-going signalman at Woodside SB was actually struck and killed by the train he was catching home which I always considered very ironic as well as tragic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 10, 2012 Has no one read my posts? I'm not questioning the HV or lack of, but rather was making a comment about how to explain a toddler who is used to seeing people working on the railway and going on track in orange? I think you are missing out the important bit that you said first James, i.e. 'But I teach Thomas that you stay off the track..' That is what keeps people safe - not the wearing of hvv (lets the Driver see you before he hits you - and that, basically, is all it does) or anything else, the simplest and safest rule is stay off the track and keep well away from it. And quite bluntly isn't doesn't matter if a train is doing 10mph or 100 mph because the only difference the speed makes is how far some poor s*d has to go to pick up the pieces afterwards - 10 mph makes you just as dead as any other speed when a train or loco etc hits you. Alas over the years I had to deal in some way or another with two staff fatalities as a result of them being hit by a train/shunting movement and both of them were wearing hv vests (in fact one of them wasn't even required to wear one in his footplate job but was one of those sorts who did that sort of thing back in the mid 1970s). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 I think you are missing out the important bit that you said first James I won't ever tell the orange keeps them safe, more that it's a sign that someone is allowed to be there because they're doing a job. If you see what I mean... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted October 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 10, 2012 I think you are missing out the important bit that you said first James, i.e. 'But I teach Thomas that you stay off the track..' That is what keeps people safe - not the wearing of hvv (lets the Driver see you before he hits you - and that, basically, is all it does) or anything else, the simplest and safest rule is stay off the track and keep well away from it. I learned track safety in the days before HV clothing (although the New St shift linemen did have white donkey jackets for working in the dark!!!), from my Grandfather who joined the LNWR Signal Department in 1919. He taught me that tracks are for trains, the cess is for the men. You only go on the track when necessary and make sure you are protected, lever collars, a man in the box at complex places, fouling a detector blade in semaphore days. Even though you had a lookout, keep one eye on the job and the other on what is going on around you. The only time I nearly got caught was when a Signalman put a train of tanks across me at 3am whilst I was chasing a TC failure. I had disconnected the signal to protect us but he talked the train by after I had told him that there was no obstruction or broken rails. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted October 10, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 10, 2012 During the Hampton Court Flower show, I happened to conduct a Track Maintenance Engineers' trackwalk of the Hampton Court Branch from Surbiton back to Surbiton, - after partaking of a well-earned cup of coffee at HC station kiosk I walked off the platform by the bufferstops to walk in the wideway adjacent to the platform track making observations / measurements of the platform track (1933 vintage rail btw) when I was challenged by a member of SWT staff on the platform who said "Are you allowed to be down there ?". So............. I put down my 5ft long very technical looking track gauge, my large sheaf of HSTRC traces, IMPART print-outs, notes, my hard hat and stared hard at him past all my bright orange Network Rail branded PPE (being the shiniest thing for miles around I'm sure) and replied very unprofessionally "how the fecking hell am I supposed to look after the track your trains run on then, Chum ??" - he blinked and walked away................. Although I have sympathy with your circumstances, I believe it was highlighted earlier in this thread that many people trespass on the railway unchallenged because they are wearing orange. Yes, there are the posts that state that the wearer should have the relevant logos - Network Rail etc, but what's to stop those with illegal intentions acquiring the correct gear and then having carte blanche to steal cabling, etc. and furthering their disguise by carrying other implements or acting in a manner to disguise their true intentions? Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 re: above post. Don't they issue a report or notice to station staff if engineering work is taking place in their area and by whom? Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 re: above post. Don't they issue a report or notice to station staff if engineering work is taking place in their area and by whom? Best, Pete. Nope - the railway isn't that joined up........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Although I have sympathy with your circumstances, I believe it was highlighted earlier in this thread that many people trespass on the railway unchallenged because they are wearing orange. Yes, there are the posts that state that the wearer should have the relevant logos - Network Rail etc, but what's to stop those with illegal intentions acquiring the correct gear and then having carte blanche to steal cabling, etc. and furthering their disguise by carrying other implements or acting in a manner to disguise their true intentions? Cheers, Mick Maybe in Bond movies' or the more rural areas of the Reading - Basingstoke line when you can look very industrious and attach a land rover or transit van to the continuous earth cables and pull them out of the troughing etc, ...................you had to be there, this was just plain stupidity and lack of understanding on the individuals' part Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted October 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 11, 2012 I won't ever tell the orange keeps them safe, more that it's a sign that someone is allowed to be there because they're doing a job. If you see what I mean... Not having a go James (Happy Birthday !) but the issue is really those who wear orange vests who shouldn't be where they are, be they enthusiasts or even staff. (But don't confuse your lad !) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Well lets not forget the Pikeys who raided the former Leemside line a few years ago and made off with quite a bit of track and they were all wearing NR branded hi-vis gear and so were their vans. It was only a member of the local management driving past and wondering what was going on that saw the feds called and them caught. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted October 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 11, 2012 what's to stop those with illegal intentions acquiring the correct gear and then having carte blanche to steal cabling, etc. and furthering their disguise by carrying other implements or acting in a manner to disguise their true intentions? And for that reason, when out cab riding from time to time, I have occasionally reported NR gangs working quite legitimately, purely because they were in an area of high cable theft risk - better safe than sorry (also, I didn't recognise any of the individuals concerned, even though they were wearing all the right gear etc.)... No harm done when the Mobile Operations Manager turns up and confirms that all is well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Don't they issue a report or notice to station staff if engineering work is taking place in their area and by whom? Not unless it's taking place on or affecting the operation of the station itself, and apart from planned work there are always staff carrying out routine inspections and patrolling. We have had one or two problems with staff at stations trying to insist that Network Rail patrolmen sign in as contractors, but it's often quite difficult to get across the subtleties of who should and who doesn't need to. Well lets not forget the Pikeys who raided the former Leemside line a few years ago and made off with quite a bit of track and they were all wearing NR branded hi-vis gear and so were their vans. It was only a member of the local management driving past and wondering what was going on that saw the feds called and them caught. Quite a lot of the former Express Freight sidings at Tinsley disappeared in the same way, but in BR days. The yard staff even showed them the best place to leave their kit so it didn't get nicked overnight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
avonside1563 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Going back to the signalman not wearing a HV on a preserved line, it is entirely possible to operate without any HV at all providing the railway's Safety Management System and associated documentation has been correctly written to specifically operate without resorting to it. The Tanfield Railway do it very well, their approved PPE clothing seems to be a proper waist coat and cloth cap. Foxfield's SMS specifically includes exemptions for loco crews when in the course of carrying out their duties off the loco. Following on from Mike's comment about HV's not preventing the train from hitting you... I had a conversation with a member of HMRI a couple of years ago and we both expressed similar thoughts, particularly that there is cross pollination of labourers who could be working on a road works one day and a railway the next, coupled with the thought that seems to be instilled that wearing HV makes you immune. Perhaps those enthusiasts mentioned in the OP's comments should bare this in mind when they wander around with apparent impunity wearing their unapproved HV gear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 96701 Posted October 11, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 11, 2012 Some of you might know that I work for Network Rail and the company is really struggling with how to deal with behaviours that vary from old lags being complacent about safety to new starters being unaware of the dangers. A recent video includes a bloke who suffered a near miss because....... he actually doesn't know why. He ended up being interviewed by professionals and between them they could still only surmise as to why he was where he was. They seem to think it was a mixture of limited clearances and distraction by the track inspection that he was doing that lead him to be standing in the 4 foot on a curve when a train travelling at 60 mph snuck up behind him. The incident did nothing for him, his family or the driver. You can have all the qualifications, all the PPE and all the knowledge but it don't stop you being hit by a train if you don't understand the risks and above all behave accordingly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidH Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 So having read through this topic, I get the feeling that the answer to James' original question would be: "... it's complicated ..."? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Some of you might know that I work for Network Rail and the company is really struggling with how to deal with behaviours that vary from old lags being complacent about safety to new starters being unaware of the dangers. A recent video includes a bloke who suffered a near miss because....... he actually doesn't know why. He ended up being interviewed by professionals and between them they could still only surmise as to why he was where he was. They seem to think it was a mixture of limited clearances and distraction by the track inspection that he was doing that lead him to be standing in the 4 foot on a curve when a train travelling at 60 mph snuck up behind him. The incident did nothing for him, his family or the driver. You can have all the qualifications, all the PPE and all the knowledge but it don't stop you being hit by a train if you don't understand the risks and above all behave accordingly I am absolutely amazed by this having had more years than I care to remember dealing with writing safety procedures, Rules, and training-in and examining staff in this particular area as well as others. The basic approach is simple - you have easily understood Rules and procedures which should be trained in by people who are competent in such matters (obviously) and more importantly have direct personal experience and who have the personality and knowledge to go beyond the manual and inject real experience and tales of how things can & do go wrong. Similarly examiners should be people with the right experience who don't just want pat answers off the book from memory but who actually do their best to ensure that the examinee actually understands what he is saying and is supposed to do - there is no computerised or written exam paper on earth which can do that as well as a human being (the right human being of course). On top of that once people are trained and at work they need to be watched and supervised to ensure they are doing it right - one of the most important tasks in this day & age for frontline supervision. And finally if people do not know or understand what they are doing in terms of on track safety they should either not be let loose on railway lines in the first place or they should be taken away from any contact with them. These are the only ways lineside staff fatalities will be contained - if people are not 'railway aware' and personal safety conscious there will be incidents like this. As for interviewing him afterwards it is relatively straightforward to establish where he was, it is simple to ask him on which line trains run and it shouldn't be too difficult to establish what he thought his task was - all of that should have been reasonably plain to his supervisor unless the man was totally confused for some reason - which can only go back to inadequate training and/or lack of familiarity with a site where he should have been completely familiar (how else could he patrol it if he didn't know it?? ). If he was interviewed by someone other than his own supervisor/manager I would have expected that person to know the site as well - how on earth could they sensibly interview someone about a site and work they didn't know? Overall I get the impression - rightly or wrongly - from things I hear and from things I see and people I talk to the NR is very keen on making the paperwork and procedures look very good but there are often shortcomings on the human side where the experience to put things into practice is lacking. I might be unfair to some in making that judgement but I know such situations do exist. As for 'old lags' (are there still some about? the answer is much the same - re-train, supervise and manage by folk who know the job. Sorry to rant and I know full well that BR was a very long way from perfect but what seems to go on today it doesn't at times to be any more perfect except the stuff that is written down - while the practical falls short. Edit to correct typos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 Not having a go James (Happy Birthday !) Thank you! Good day with both a gift of a small Class 20 and a pair of them outside the box on the RHTT - they were there for 30 minutes which cause a lot of problems! but the issue is really those who wear orange vests who shouldn't be where they are, be they enthusiasts or even staff. (But don't confuse your lad !) I won't confuse him with this! But it is an issue - although I always enjoyed being out on track with work, it's a very dangerous place and if you have ne purpose there, you shouldn't be there. I've been involved in a near miss (tight curve on a track inspection with a freight train coming at me - turned out the lookout had stood down to have a p*ss!) - not a nice experience and I was meant to be there! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted October 16, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 16, 2012 I guess the ultimate is wearing a hi-vis whilst operating a model railway. I wonder what comments that would bring? Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted October 17, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 17, 2012 Which is pretty much what i said back in msg #61 and re-iterated in #74 I'm increasingly getting the impression that the professionals here, believe that wearing Hi Vis vests & other safety gear is a waste of time and effort because. 1/ Those wearing them are just as likely to be railway enthusiasts anyway, they are probably trespassing and so are just a PITA. 2/ Because such gear won't save you if hit by a train, why bother? I've always believed that safety gear IS part of understanding the risks & surely your training covers a lot more than, 'you MUST wear this at all times, when on duty'. Sure, I can understand the reasoning that it won't save you from being hit by a very solid object, but does that mean anyone should throw the safety gear back in the cupboard? Others have posted statistics showing that death & injury rates have significantly over the past 50-60, so surely something has changed for the better? If part of it now means generic Hi Vis vests are now available at discount shops for next to nothing, does that fact mean safety is now compromised, because 'anyone' can buy them & wander around public & non-public areas, acting as if they own the place? Just to clarify, I DON'T believe that wearing of safety gear is any sort of substitute for the knowledge or the risks of working near or around heavy moving equipment, such as trains, but is part of a balanced approach to safety. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 17, 2012 I'm increasingly getting the impression that the professionals here, believe that wearing Hi Vis vests & other safety gear is a waste of time and effort because. 1/ Those wearing them are just as likely to be railway enthusiasts anyway, they are probably trespassing and so are just a PITA. 2/ Because such gear won't save you if hit by a train, why bother? I've always believed that safety gear IS part of understanding the risks & surely your training covers a lot more than, 'you MUST wear this at all times, when on duty'. Sure, I can understand the reasoning that it won't save you from being hit by a very solid object, but does that mean anyone should throw the safety gear back in the cupboard? Others have posted statistics showing that death & injury rates have significantly over the past 50-60, so surely something has changed for the better? If part of it now means generic Hi Vis vests are now available at discount shops for next to nothing, does that fact mean safety is now compromised, because 'anyone' can buy them & wander around public & non-public areas, acting as if they own the place? Just to clarify, I DON'T believe that wearing of safety gear is any sort of substitute for the knowledge or the risks of working near or around heavy moving equipment, such as trains, but is part of a balanced approach to safety. I think the problem is that the wearing of the kit seems in the eyes of many to have become far more important than the matter of 'railway sense' and taking care for one's own safety. Hence my usual comment when training that 'one of these (an HVV) makes trains bounce off' - part of the way of getting the message over that it does not do that. The other, equally important of course, part of the message is making clear what it does do 'it lets the Driver see you before his train hits you' - and that is what it is meant to do - it lets the Driver see you in time, hopefully, to sound a warning which will encourage you to get out of the way if you haven't already done so. That is the only way in which it improves your personal safety - by making you more visible to a train Driver or, in some situations, a machine operator although nowadays it has also become part of a simple 'badge' system that enables others to ascertain at a glance if you have authority to be there (provided it is in the correct form to do that). And yes, safety is compromised - seriously - if untrained people can get hold of the kit and walk around as if they have a right to be there, especially if they think it confers some sort of 'protection'. Wearing HV clothing in that manner does absolutely nothing for 'safety', however you measure it. Some safety kit is clearly eminently sensible at all times - proper boots for a start make very good sense because they protect your feet from above and below (steel toecaps and steel sole inserts); safety helmets make sense where there is an overhead risk, but they - in my view - become self-defeating where such a risk is not present and may safety professionals are increasingly recognising that fact; gloves and safety glasses also make sense in appropriate work environments but again if there is a blanket requirement to wear them at all times it can become self-defeating as those instructed or required to do so can't see the point, and resentment increases if people are disciplined for not wearing them (as sometimes happens). And equally - provided the wearer understands what it is for - wearing hv kit makes sense in 'on & about the line' situations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yes, and its the driver seeing the Hi Vis, sounding his horn, and then you hearing it and moving aside in plenty of time that is the means by which HiVis stops the train hitting you, which seems to be overlooked by a lot of people on this thread... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I think there is a lot to say for someone's previous suggestion about the difference between HV on a highway and HV on a railway. Stand at the edge of a highway in HV clothing and drivers are more likely to see you and are also able to take evasive action (I'm not suggesting you try this at home, as I suspect the risk is still significant). The visibility also applies to a railway but not the evasive action. Because these days a lot of contractors work in both environments there is an obvious source of confusion here, though I suspect they are heading for trouble if they rely on their HV clothing in this way while working on a major road. It must also be true that the HV clothing is purely an aid to visibility and should not be treated as a form of identification. Someone standing on a platform wearing HV clothing could be absolutely anybody and cannot be expected to behave in any way differently from any other passenger. Exceptions are the distinctive HV tunics that some TOCs provide for train dispatch staff, but even then there could be potential for an accident if a driver sees somebody wearing something similar who happens to be holding a torch in the air. But it is not sensible to try to ban people from a station simply because they are wearing HV clothing - it is a relatively minor hazard that the railway has to manage. Equally the wearers of HV clothing should not expect additional access or other privileges - any who are so entitled will be carrying a Sentinel card or other relevant ID. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 http://www.networkra...k/aspx/777.aspx See the section 'While you are on the platform' Photography You can take photographs at stations provided you do not sell them. Quite right too. Only the government can sell stations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted October 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 17, 2012 Continuing that paragraph, at my daughter's local station it is hard to get a photo without cctv cameras in it, but the best views of them are not from the platform but the public footpath at the top of the bank. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Yes, and its the driver seeing the Hi Vis, sounding his horn, and then you hearing it and moving aside in plenty of time that is the means by which HiVis stops the train hitting you, which seems to be overlooked by a lot of people on this thread... Noooooo ! utterly wrong - if you're on or about the track - there MUST be a system in place to ensure that you are in a place of safety before the driver has even thought about sounding their horn - you don't rely on the driver seeing the PPE and warning you - if you are doing this then you have no business being in that place and will quickly come a cropper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.