RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Hmmmm, having been on a train that hit someone and assisting the crew as a member of rail staff I can assure you that people are quite prepared to wait calmly when they are told what has happened and looked after, with free refreshments if they are lucky to have a buffet or trolley on board. We were stuck for three hours and we had coaches and taxis waiting for them as due to the very late hour there weren't enough trains left running to cover all the routes. One Salisbury manager who held a bus license once borrowed a bus from Wilts & Dorset and drove the punters home himself! ( the bus company head hunted him afterwards ). Safest place is on the train by a long shot, modern high ballast shoulders, slick sleepers and concrete troughing can easily leave people with sprains and broken bones because they move. Staff don't walk on sleepers because they know they're dangerously slippery. Imagine the extra bill for four sprained ankles a broken leg due to wearing heels and someone falling and nutting the rails . . . Initial reports are that it was only one persons fault but we will have to see if there were any other factors. I've come across pedestrians waving cars over with barriers down and idiots obey them! The Police and fire brigade lock down incident sites until they are sure they have covered everything or the authority might get a very expensive bill due to the modern libellous world. So there's more than one person at fault for the whole sorry mess and it wasn't the Emergency services or the train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Presumably the passengers are not in captivity? If one really wanted to get out and walk, you can't legally stop him? Or does he then become a trespasser? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Presumably the passengers are not in captivity? If one really wanted to get out and walk, you can't legally stop him? Or does he then become a trespasser? Technically yes as the railway is open but I've never known it applied when there's been uncontrolled evacuation, usually its because they might have other lines open or traction supplies nearby that gives staff palpatations. Even overhead has Red Bonds to the track which are lethal if you touch them. In this case it's more about not having someone wander off and still be unaccounted for when they move the train which might hit them too, signing them out assumes they won't wander off and not tell you they've left site. It happens and has in the past so now this is the safest solution and gets the railway moving quickest once the site is released by RAIB or Police. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 I am in Taunton today. The weather is horrible. It has been horrible all day. Why would the passengers have wanted to get off and walk a mile in driving rain? I haven't even wanted to walk the length of the garden. Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I am in Taunton today. The weather is horrible. It has been horrible all day. Why would the passengers have wanted to get off and walk a mile in driving rain? They live in the cottage by the next farm crossing? I was more interested in the legal principle. It isn't always raining. You don't let a 90-year-old grandmother walk along the track, but a 25-year-old rugby player can look after himself? Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Shocking pics on the metro website, should be used by network rail to promote crossing safety http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/21/gallery-level-crossing-crash-2013-3553705/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I have received this unsigned one-line PM: "I suggest that you rethink your comments as they are pathetic" I asked about the legal position of passengers held on a stationary train for several hours. I'm puzzled what is unacceptable about that. What am I missing? Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I have received this unsigned one-line PM: "I suggest that you rethink your comments as they are pathetic" I asked about the legal position of passengers held on a stationary train for several hours. I'm puzzled what is unacceptable about that. What am I missing? Martin. Ironic to send such a comment unsigned!You're not missing anything it's a valid question, hopefully answered above. Like everything compromises forced upon us to meet the requirements of four different bodies to carry out their job without putting anyone at more risk of either life or liability. Not perfect by any means but that's what you have when four independent organisations have to share a site at times like this. The favourite if its going to be this protracted is usually to evacuate by another train but I suspect track damage or wreckage obstructing the other line and evidence gathering might have something to do with not being able to get one alongside. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R A Watson Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 I was surprised originally to read that the passengers were evacuated to first class accommodation, but on watching the local news tonight it transpires that there were only 45 persons on board, including the staff. Do not forget the incident occurred at 06.30 when it was still dark so not conducive to safe track walking, by the time it was light the crossing was sealed off as a crime scene. It was noticible that the midday bulletin featured more highly than the evening transmission, but by then they had an eye witness statement that the barriers were down and the car weaved around them and the " crash" was no longer that spectacular. Perhaps this is not the place to point out that yesterday the same team put out a piece about the proposed flood prevention arrangements at Exeter which include the reporter doing a piece to camera whilst on the wrong side of the fence, back to direction of travel and with no H V or protection, accessed from an occupation crossing. Wally Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Sunrise in Taunton was at 06.09 today. It wasn't dark when the collision happened, despite media reports to the contrary. Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Having been involved in clear-ups after incidents I would not want to march passengers down the track past debris and possibly body parts. Best keep them safe, warm and watered at least until it is safe to take them out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I have received this unsigned one-line PM: "I suggest that you rethink your comments as they are pathetic" I asked about the legal position of passengers held on a stationary train for several hours. I'm puzzled what is unacceptable about that. What am I missing? Martin. I hope you have reported this, Martin, because I think most of us find it unacceptable, whatever we thought of your question. How one sends an anonymous PM is also beyond my understanding, although presumably I'll get one for suggesting the sender's soft bits should be in the mincer! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I hope you have reported this, Martin, because I think most of us find it unacceptable, whatever we thought of your question. How one sends an anonymous PM is also beyond my understanding, Thanks Ian, Not anonymous, unsigned. The sender is identified as 40F which means nothing to me. Not reported -- that requires taking it seriously. Life is too short. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 The Somerset County Gazette is now carrying comments from passengers: "I have to give compliments to the staff because they looked after us very well with food and drinks." "We were very well looked-after. Our thoughts are with the victim and the train driver." "The train company were awesome. They looked after us really well." Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod5 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 It is sad that yet once more someone's life has been lost for whatever the reason. It is also sad that we have people on here who are quite happy to condemn the attending Police for dealing with the matter in the way they have been instructed without knowing the full facts. As there are a number of serving and retired Police Officers on here who know better the problems dealing with incidents and the public they may find some of the comments a 'little' tasteless. It is also sad that any member should think it is ok to send a pm to another in such a manner. Probably best we all take a bit of time out to reflect on the loss of life and the trauma caused to those involved. Once we have done that maybe we could leave out the thoughtless remarks especially those based on no knowledge whatsoever of the incident other than what has been reported. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 Probably best we all take a bit of time out to reflect on the loss of life and the trauma caused to those involved. Once we have done that maybe we could leave out the thoughtless remarks especially those based on no knowledge whatsoever of the incident other than what has been reported. My comments were general questions about such incidents, not related to this one. I know nothing of the facts of this case and was not being critical of anyone involved. I can imagine that it is very distressing for all involved. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 21, 2013 Funny, was sure i posted on this thread just a moment ago! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod5 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Funny, was sure i posted on this thread just a moment ago! You did Gary and I deleted it because I have just asked for everyone to take a step back and hopefully that way we can not have any arguments. So your mentioning of it just after my post doesn't help much. I appreciate you may not have seen my post of course. Before anyone else get hung up on any of this please can we just stick to the topic and not go off on one about who has said what to who. It should suffice to say that the thread has been reported and that report has been dealt with and someone has had a pm from me. Martin I am not saying you have criticised anyone or anything and my remarks were general to try and get the thread back on topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 21, 2013 You did Gary and I deleted it because I have just asked for everyone to take a step back and hopefully that way we can not have any arguments. So your mentioning of it just after my post doesn't help much. I appreciate you may not have seen my post of course. No I didn't but i do appreciate your point! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 I have received this unsigned one-line PM: "I suggest that you rethink your comments as they are pathetic" I asked about the legal position of passengers held on a stationary train for several hours. I'm puzzled what is unacceptable about that. What am I missing? Martin. You are missing nothing Martin - in the circumstances of a long delay it has happened (see below) but it is illegal. As Paul has already explained they become trespassers if the walk about on railway lines without permission, they also commit a Byelaw offence of alighting from a train at a place other than a station (if they do so without proper authority) and they could possibly even be charged with further offences should someone decide to become heavy handed. FGW on-train safety advice tells passengers not to do this as well - mainly as a result of one who decided to do it when his train was delayed for an extended time near Maidenhead a couple of years back; having no idea at all about railways (like most passengers) he made the simple error of getting down on the offside of the train where he met an HST proceeding at a fairly sharpish pace. And as is so often the case the HST won - hence the safety notices and advice not to alight. (and the very common sense approach on a lightly loaded train of getting all the passengers into one place not only for feeding and drinking but also keeping an eye on any who happen to get impatient). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 21, 2013 What I find incredible about this incident is the fact that the passengers have been kept on the train without any regard to their welfare or needs. I find this arrogant attitude of the Police and Networkrail to deal with their customers in such a manner as absolutely disgusting. I wasn’t suggesting that you allow passengers to aimlessly wander over the track but equally it does not take nearly 6 hours to arrange a bus or even a few taxis to ferry passengers away and to get on with their journey. This smacks of the police yet again having total disregard to anyone other than themselves. I'm afraid that what this actually smacks of is someone who doesn't really have much knowledge of what actually goes on during serious, tragic incidents like this. These comments are uninformed, inaccurate and furthermore seem to have a whiff of someone who has some kind of 'issue' with the Police (and, it seems, with Network Rail, my employer). Others, such as Martyn Read and The Stationmaster have made some helpful comments, and I don't need to add to those, save to say that this awful incident happened on my patch, and the people that attended and dealt with the incident are my colleagues, and some of our most experienced, to boot. I can't comment too much on the Avon & Somerset Police, but I do know the BT Police pretty well, and there are none of them who would have willingly kept the FGW passengers on that train a moment longer than necessary. There are procedures that the Home Office require them to follow, and there was also a need to make the set fit to travel back to Taunton. Having seen the images on the 'Metro' website, I'm sure you don't need me to emphasise what this would have involved and the fact that this process would not have been a 5 minute job. Whilst it may have seemed to take a long time to get the passengers back to Taunton, those that have pointed out the hazards of walking on wet, slippery ballast, inclement weather conditions and the risk of seeing something unpleasant, are absolutely correct. The safest place was to remain on the train, and full marks to FGW for the excellent job they did of looking after the passengers. As such, I find Meil's comments highly disrespectful to both the BT Police, FGW and my colleagues, all of whom were working in circumstances they would much rather have avoided. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caradoc Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Well said Captain Kernow. Detraining passengers down steep ladders onto ballast for a long walk along the track is usually a last resort; They are far safer, and more comfortable, remaining on the train until it can be moved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted March 21, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 21, 2013 The Somerset County Gazette is now carrying comments from passengers: "I have to give compliments to the staff because they looked after us very well with food and drinks." "We were very well looked-after. Our thoughts are with the victim and the train driver." "The train company were awesome. They looked after us really well." Geoff Endacott Top marks to the train crew for dealing with the passengers in such a professional way. From the looks of it the Somerset Gazette has also done a good job in reporting this positive work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod5 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 In light of the good Captains post above possibly this is as good a time to lock the thread as any. It may well be opened again at some later time when more details are known or can be released. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.