Glorious NSE Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 It implies (not infers) that the man arrested was the one who put it on the track. It doesn't say that man was the driver. It's much easier to move a car by driving it than by other means though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcm@gwr Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) That's the trouble with 'legal speak'* though, it's used to confuse the 'man in the street' so they can get away with saying anything and be able to twist it to suit themselves. (* read gobble-de-g o o k) Edited July 21, 2015 by jcm@gwr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 21, 2015 We don't know how many people were involved in this incident. We know only the words in the report. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 We don't know how many people were involved in this incident. We know only the words in the report. Well, that's true... If you wanted to be really pedantic, he may have been causing some kind of an obstruction on the railway completely unrelated to the instance of a car on the track....but I think it's unlikely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 21, 2015 We don't know how many people were involved in this incident. We know only the words in the report. Indeed. I'm concious of the problems with pure speculation but I can imagine a few scenarios, such as someone pushing the car there "for a laugh". Please bear in mind I'm not saying that there's any reason to think that's what's happened and I'm not trying to suggest that it is, I'm purely using it as an imagined example. The wording may be somewhat open simply because various scenarios involving various different people can't be ruled out yet even though there's no reason to suspect them either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Every few posts this seems to happen. I too took the arrested man to be the driver. I'm sure I'm not the only one? If I'm wrong, I'll sleep at night. Petty, petty, petty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 21, 2015 According to rumour the car was driven along the railway, the driver got out and left it on the tracks. 170101 was the unit involved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 We haven’t run out of idiots yet then, Dave? Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 21, 2015 We haven’t run out of idiots yet then, Dave? Best, Pete. Never ending supply Pete. So far he hasn't blamed the SatNav ... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold griffgriff Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 21, 2015 Well, that's true... If you wanted to be really pedantic, he may have been causing some kind of an obstruction on the railway completely unrelated to the instance of a car on the track....but I think it's unlikely. Could be arrested for joint enterprise. May not have been the driver though. Griff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meil Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The latest stupidity: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/must_see/33647679 Driver comments (at the end) "Didn't you see me?" waving a red hanky next to the car. Is this driver so stupid that he expects a train to stop within a few meters? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 24, 2015 The latest stupidity: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/must_see/33647679 Driver comments (at the end) "Didn't you see me?" waving a red hanky next to the car. Is this driver so stupid that he expects a train to stop within a few meters? To be fair he did say "I know I'm sorry" so his "Did you see me?" was probably a desparate cry rather than blaming the engineer. Glad no-one was hurt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 24, 2015 it worked for Jenny Agutter. How many carry a red hanky around with them? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 24, 2015 it worked for Jenny Agutter. How many carry a red hanky around with them? The last time I took my pants off when a train approached resulted in a police warning. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Just saw the Indiana incident. Amazingly the vehicle didn’t sustain as much damage as expected (presumably sliding sideways on its frame), the engineer was sanguine and unhurt, thank God. Could have been much worse - and the anti-climber worked. Best, Pete. Edited July 24, 2015 by trisonic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caradoc Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The last time I took my pants off when a train approached resulted in a police warning. You should have kept your pants on and just removed your petticoat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad_Hatter Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The last time I took my pants off when a train approached resulted in a police warning. Next time they should be worn outside your trousers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) The latest stupidity: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/must_see/33647679 Driver comments (at the end) "Didn't you see me?" waving a red hanky next to the car. Is this driver so stupid that he expects a train to stop within a few meters? An absolutely priceless bit of dialog there! :PMSL: "Didn't you see me?" It would take 200 yards to exhaust all the air from the brake pipe just to apply the brakes!! Then there's the small insignificant matter of 10'000 tons to take into consideration. There really is one born every minute. Atleast he did apologise to the engineer though. Edited July 24, 2015 by Gary H 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 24, 2015 it worked for Jenny Agutter. How many carry a red hanky around with them? It clearly showed the difference in warning effectiveness between a red flannel petticoat and a red hankerchief (as well as the difference 10,000 tons of train makes - in fact it seemed to stop in quite a short distance). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 24, 2015 It clearly showed the difference in warning effectiveness between a red flannel petticoat and a red hankerchief (as well as the difference 10,000 tons of train makes - in fact it seemed to stop in quite a short distance). Perhaps if it had been a younger Ms Agutter waving the red hanky the engineer might have acted even sooner!!!! Jamie 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I was surprised it wasn't a compressed limo by the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted July 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Just saw the Indiana incident. Amazingly the vehicle didn’t sustain as much damage as expected (presumably sliding sideways on its frame), the engineer was sanguine and unhurt, thank God. Could have been much worse - and the anti-climber worked. Best, Pete. I was surprised it remained intact, stretch limousines are notorious for splitting in two. I follow a recovery group on Facebook and there usually one or two a month that end up banana shaped when on suspended tow. Perhaps if it had been a younger Ms Agutter waving the red hanky the engineer might have acted even sooner!!!! Jamie Was she wearing a red petticoat? Oh sorry I was thinking of her next film (Walkabout). Edited July 24, 2015 by PhilJ W Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 The old style gates seem a lot safer as these cover the whole road, unless you smash through them that is. With the new type of barriers driver race to get under them to get across, with the gates they block the road off. Darren Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanders Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 The old style gates seem a lot safer as these cover the whole road, unless you smash through them that is. With the new type of barriers driver race to get under them to get across, with the gates they block the road off. Darren Perhaps we should start thinking about using hydraulic bollards that rise out of the road? There's no racing those... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) The old style gates seem a lot safer as these cover the whole road, unless you smash through them that is. With the new type of barriers driver race to get under them to get across, with the gates they block the road off. Darren Yes, but they can potentially trap vehicles in the crossing, so now you need someone/something monitoring the crossing and signals far enough out so that a train can stop. This then means that you have to start the crossing sequence a lot sooner, delaying the road traffic even more. Automatic half-barrier - train strike-in at about 27 seconds out. Full gates - signal needs to be about 1.5 miles out. At 45 mph that means that the crossing has to be closed and clear ~2 minutes before the train arrives, so the sequence is more like 2:20. This also assumes that you don't have multiple crossings in that 1.5 miles, which would complicate the signalling further. Adrian Edited July 27, 2015 by Adrian Wintle 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now