rodent279

Something like 5 deaths per year nationwide, and dozens of injuries, during the first 10 or so years, up to about 1994, from when the majority of pasenger trains started to have some flavour of power operated doors, or manual doors under the control of CDL.

Also, of course, Tilbury, Sowfind* & Shoeburyness 🙂 Pedantic? Me? Surely not! * aka Southend

And Morecambe, and Heysham..... Bristol isn't a million miles away from the sea either, but maybe that's stretching the point a little!

Telephone technology had been around since the 1880's, so I'm sure a simple 2 way voice system would have been viable in the early 20th century.

May also have been a composite image, with the loco under test taken with a plain background, and the other loco and track superimposed.

Wonder if that's a posed photo? Can't help thinking where is the photographer? Have they posed the train, and got the loco in the background to move?

No, I know it's not an 08, but how this for something different? Venlo's answer to the Sheffield shunt.

It does in the sense that doors can't be opened until released by the CDL mechanism, which is what i was getting at.

The purists may moan & groan about authenticity, but that is a lovely livery, and it sits well on an already impressive looking machine.

But if the doors are under the overall control of CDL, there would be no more risk of that than with a door with conventional manual handles under the control of CDL. All the push buttons would do is allow the door to be pushed or pulled open once CDL has released the main door lock.

Would they need a new safety case? If you've got CDL and a power supply, why not fit push button door locks, such that pushing the button releases the door lock, allowing it to swing open under is own weight, in a controlled manner?

TBH, reading the Telegraph comments, it makes the D@!ly F@!l look rational, level headed and even handed.

The thing is, they do!

A frightening 38 years ago to the day I took this photo of thumper 60018 at Hastings, 12/04/1986! The occasion was my one & only trip to Hastings on a Thumper. When I took these photos, the catastrophic meltdown at Chernobyl was 4 days in the future, Buzby was still telling us it was good to talk, if you saw Sid, you had to tell him, and almost no one had a mobile phone! Last Saturday (6th April), I was reunited with 1013, for an excellent day out courtesy of Hastings Diesels Ltd. I'd really recommend a trip with HDL, the ambience on board is very relaxed, no premium dining but there is good food & beer in the ex-class 411 buffet car.

And doors were not unknown to fail when leaned on, causing death or serious injury to the unwary, and of course an open door can kill or seriously injury an innocent platform bystander, so it's not quite as simple as people being "sheltered and becoming useless", or "nanny state", whatever that is. Because back in the day of course, people were all big and tough and hard, not like us namby-pamby woftee-softee modern types, and didn't mind a few serious injuries or deaths. Hey ho, you know that's life isn't it?

Does that mean they mainly use 0 hours contract staff?

Would an interesting legal situation if seatbelts were fitted, but not compulsory, and a passenger who chose not to use one got thrown into/against a belted passenger, causing serious injury. How would that work out? Who is responsible? Passenger-but seatbelt not compulsory? TOC- but passenger had belt and could have worn it? Legal minefield which I think TOCs would want to avoid like the plague, unless forced to by government.

I stand corrected then. I was under the impression that the dispute between WCRC & ORR was purely about CDL. Does this mean that:- 1-even if a fully compliant CDL system is fitted, there is no guarantee that WCRC can continue to use Mk1's? 2-Are ORR placing other requirements on WCRC in respect of crash worthiness improvements before granting continued exemption to run Mk1's?

Seatbelts on trains would completely change the economics of (passenger) railway operation. We perhaps ought to be careful what we wish for.

Hmmm.......a train full of MPs.....faulty doors........photo opportunities......I sincerely hope nothing goes wrong there.......

This is true, and the mk1 is in my view one of the unsung heros of the BR era, possibly BR's best legacy. Replacing thousands of wooden framed coaches on steel underframe with all steel, welded coaches was an early decision on BR's part. Mk1 stock was much more crashworthy than the stock it replaced, and is probably responsible for saving hundreds of lives and thousands of injuries overall. The safety concerns about mk1 stock do not really lie in their inherent crashworthiness, rather they lie in the risks associated from misuse and/or failure of slam doors. As long as they are maintained well and are structurally sound, I don't think they are about to be banned on crashworthiness grounds alone. Currently the safety regime focuses on preventing accidents happening in the first place, rightly, through TPWS/ATC etc.

I think that if you did survive, you'd be lucky to get away without life changing injuries. A mk2 or 3 would have fared better.

Could the standard MK1 dynamo be replaced by a 24v alternator & rectifier, used to feed a battery, with enough charge to keep doors locked for say 3-4 hours?

This ^^^^^ 👏👏👏

I worded my post badly- I meant to say that possibly the majority of victims were not drunk, and didn't necessarily do something stupid.