RMweb Premium Coryton Posted March 10, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 10, 2017 I believe the BTP are sometimes wary of accepting evidence from the public regarding level crossing misuse as an aggressive lawyer like the infamous "Mr Loophole" could probably find some flaw in it. On the flip side though the BTP are quite happy with the evidence of a railway official (e.g. LON, Signaller, etc) on the basis that the courts generally believe they are unlikely to have a hidden agenda thus making the chance of a sucessfull prosecution grater. LON? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted March 11, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 11, 2017 LON? I meant to type MOM (Mobile Operations Manager) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 14, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 14, 2017 RAIB report just published, Thetford. Once again it seems the failure is on the railway side. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/58c6aab0ed915d6035000157/R042017_170314_Hockham_Road.pdf Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 14, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 14, 2017 RAIB report just published, Thetford. Once again it seems the failure is on the railway side. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/58c6aab0ed915d6035000157/R042017_170314_Hockham_Road.pdf Martin. I'm afraid it reveals several very disquieting factors of which the worst was undoubtedly the extremely poor (inadequate?) rostering arrangements apart from what i would regard as abysmal frequencies for maintaining competence on the 'unusual' system of control (which is very different from that in the rest of the 'box). Yet again tho' we have an incidence of incorrect information being given to the user at a UWC which suggests that there is need - albeit no doubt at considerable expense nationally - to address the way these crossings are dealt with. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Coryton Posted March 14, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 14, 2017 I'm afraid it reveals several very disquieting factors of which the worst was undoubtedly the extremely poor (inadequate?) rostering arrangements apart from what i would regard as abysmal frequencies for maintaining competence on the 'unusual' system of control (which is very different from that in the rest of the 'box). Yet again tho' we have an incidence of incorrect information being given to the user at a UWC which suggests that there is need - albeit no doubt at considerable expense nationally - to address the way these crossings are dealt with. Well from the report it seems that the issue was addressed, with a system to indicate an approaching train but it had been taken out of service (with reason). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium uax6 Posted March 14, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 14, 2017 (edited) Well from the report it seems that the issue was addressed, with a system to indicate an approaching train but it had been taken out of service (with reason). Yes, but where was the mitigation for the signallers when this extra workload arrived? Andy G Edit: I was quite dumbfounded at the amount of information crammed on each screen. I would find it very difficult to pick out the train on that screen in the heat of the moment... Edited March 14, 2017 by uax6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 I've just found this on the BBC website. Words fail me. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39292289/pregnant-teenage-model-dies-during-railway-photoshoot-in-texas I just feel desperately sorry for all the people involved, however looking at the photo, which seems to have come from the photoshoot in question it beggars belief that someone even dreamed of planning this. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 RIP Poor girl was not looked after properly by those in charge of the photo- shoot. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 RIP Poor girl was not looked after properly by those in charge of the photo- shoot. agree there is a big discussion going on about this incident and another a few months ago both stateside on a modeling forum iam active on most agreeing that they should not be near any sort of active railway whatsoever for this type of shoot . sadly clothed and naked models on or around railway lines appears to be a popular subject for shoots with many, judging by there frequent appearance on the gallerys tho most do seem to be on heritage lines with permission or clearly abandoned sidings .one or two that are not have appeared and rightfully drawn criticism in the forums Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 It's unfortunately an on-going issue in the US, the 4' of a railway line is a popular location to take everything from a high school yearbook photo to scenes for a major motion picture, with predictable results, despite a lot of publicity by railroads and OLS to try and change that habit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meil Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I note the quote in the article: ""We have an ongoing investigation but nothing to suggest there is any criminal activity," Chief Leeth of the Navasota police has told Newsbeat" Well there sure would be in the UK. How about trespass on a railway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) Yet again tho' we have an incidence of incorrect information being given to the user at a UWC which suggests that there is need - albeit no doubt at considerable expense nationally - to address the way these crossings are dealt with. Which was why the Ebi-gate system was initially developed - thus showing the top bods at NR are aware of the risks in general. The fact that those in charge of bringing it to market (i.e. getting all the reverent safety certificates) failed is clearly regrettable, and is perhaps yet another example of a NR 'project' losing focus on things that matter. Similarly the 'resignalling project' also have significant responsibility for the incident as they apparently walked away saying it was a done deal despite the signallers and even their own ergonomic assessments showing that 3 screens were to few to allow the signallers to discharge their duties safely. More recently we had to change a 650V signalling power cable (rodent damage) and killed half the new Thameslink depot at Three Bridges because the 'project' had not got round to giving us updated diagrams a full 6 months after the depot was commissioned (funny how new diagrams turned up the next day) I'm afraid that 'projects' within NR have a nasty habit of wandering off announcing 'project complete' with snagging issues (quite important ones at that sometimes - like providing enough VDU screens, or actually training the maintenance people how to look after the Ebigate system) not done. Not for the first time I wonder ow is it on the one hand you have emergency jobs like Dawlish, Dover or Eden Brow where NR do a fantastic job, yet others like various electrification projects or the Norwich - Ely resignalling where vital tasks are not done (or done very late). Edited March 16, 2017 by phil-b259 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 I've just found this on the BBC website. Words fail me. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39292289/pregnant-teenage-model-dies-during-railway-photoshoot-in-texas I just feel desperately sorry for all the people involved, however looking at the photo, which seems to have come from the photoshoot in question it beggars belief that someone even dreamed of planning this. Jamie I suspect 'planning' might not have entered into their thoughts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Well from the report it seems that the issue was addressed, with a system to indicate an approaching train but it had been taken out of service (with reason). Taken out, but with no safe back-up system in place. Essentially leaving an accident waiting to happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 RIP Poor girl was not looked after properly by those in charge of the photo- shoot. Not forgetting the unborn child. What's happened to Operation Lifesaver? https://oli.org/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 Not forgetting the unborn child. What's happened to Operation Lifesaver? https://oli.org/ It's still going I believe but you would have thought that they would have learned from the incident a couple of years ago when a woman got killed on a bridge when they started filming a movie without permission I think it was CSX trackage, also the parade incident in Texas not long ago. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Simon Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) Taken out, but with no safe back-up system in place. Essentially leaving an accident waiting to happen.Hi, Both the systems at the site at the time of accident were safe, whether it was used correctly by either party was the problem. Simon Edited March 16, 2017 by St. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 Hi, Both the systems at the site at the time of accident were safe, whether it was used correctly by either party was the problem. Simon Both ? - one system was in use, UWC with phone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Simon Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Both ? - one system was in use, UWC with phone. I meant both the UWC+T and the Ebi-gate system, even though decommissioned the concept of the Ebigate system is still safe. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 I meant both the UWC+T and the Ebi-gate system, even though decommissioned the concept of the Ebigate system is still safe. Simon It had been decommissioned by Network Rail following concerns which the company had about the safety integrity of the system. In October 2015 Network Rail withdrew its product acceptance for the EBI Gate 200 system and decommissioned the equipment at Hockham Road crossing. Whether that was because it was dangerous or not is immaterial, it was turned off - meaning it was irrelevant in this incident. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 Having a look at the report I was somewhat (understatment) taken aback by the map on page 9 which has the location of the accident incorrectly labelled at Roudham Hall UWC The accident was at the crossing (Hockham Road) to the left of the one labelled (Roudham Hall) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 4069 Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) The accident was at the crossing (Hockham Road) to the left of the one labelled (Roudham Hall) Our apologies for the mistake, and thanks for spotting it. The online report has now been corrected. Stuart Johnson RAIB Edited March 17, 2017 by 4069 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2017 I note the quote in the article: ""We have an ongoing investigation but nothing to suggest there is any criminal activity," Chief Leeth of the Navasota police has told Newsbeat" Well there sure would be in the UK. How about trespass on a railway! In Ireland breach of Health and safety laws is a criminal offence. Someone would get a prison term here if they could not prove 100% compliance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) I note the quote in the article: ""We have an ongoing investigation but nothing to suggest there is any criminal activity," Chief Leeth of the Navasota police has told Newsbeat" Well there sure would be in the UK. How about trespass on a railway! This one would seem to fit nicely with the offence used on the Merseyrail guard, "Whosoever, by any unlawful act, or by any wilful omission or neglect, shall endanger or cause to be endangered the safety of any person conveyed or being in or upon a railway" Regards Edited March 17, 2017 by Grovenor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Coryton Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2017 Yes, but where was the mitigation for the signallers when this extra workload arrived? Andy G I only skimmed the report. When the workstations were installed, were the Ebi-gate systems taken into account when determining the workload for the relevant workstation? If so, then I would have thought a re-evaluation would be required when the Ebi-gate systems were taken out of service. If not, then I don't think this can be blamed for excessive workload. 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