Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
He completely balled up the despatch proceedure.
Oops. Imagine he will be in a fair bit of trouble. Oh well, thanks for the explanation.
He completely balled up the despatch proceedure.
Question: Why is it that only trains and not buses and coaches that have to have doors of contrasting colors to aid the visually impaired?
I seem to remember that during the 1980s many LT buses had yellow entrance doors which gave a clear contrast with the red of the rest of the bus. However, despite all the acessability improvements, the doors are now the same color as the rest of the bus.
He was dismissed. Wether he still faces prosecution or not still hasnt been determined.
I agree that any of these factors would have prevented the incident, however the driver wouldn't have taken power if he hadn't been given the 'Go' by the guard. Unless you can show a deficiency in the dispatch procedure, then the guard has to take ultimate responsibility for what happened.If the doors remained open until the train was ready to depart, if the doors opened automatically when they sensed an obstruction, if the train couldn't depart when the doors were obstructed, then this incident would not have occurred and a guard would still have his job.
I agree that any of these factors would have prevented the incident, however the driver wouldn't have taken power if he hadn't been given the 'Go' by the guard. Unless you can show a deficiency in the dispatch procedure, then the guard has to take ultimate responsibility for what happened.
If the doors remained open until the train was ready to depart, if the doors opened automatically when they sensed an obstruction, if the train couldn't depart when the doors were obstructed, then this incident would not have occurred and a guard would still have his job.
Is there any evidence to suggest that the stickers are a reaction to that incident and not simply an adoption of best practice for increasing accessibility to people with impaired vision?And it seems from postings above he has been dismissed (and there appears to be no strike challenging it), so it would appear the blame was placed there, though quite rightly other avenues to reduce the issue have been explored - i.e. the stickers.
Is there any evidence to suggest that the stickers are a reaction to that incident and not simply an adoption of best practice for increasing accessibility to people with impaired vision?
RAIB Report Page 5 said:The RAIB has made six recommendations. One of these is for operators of trains
with this door design to assess the risk of injuries and fatalities due to trapping and
dragging incidents and take the appropriate action to mitigate the risk.
And it seems from postings above he has been dismissed (and there appears to be no strike challenging it), so it would appear the blame was placed there, though quite rightly other avenues to reduce the issue have been explored - i.e. the stickers.
He didnt report it either, TPE were unaware until RAIB got involved. Union couldnt defend the obvious gross negligence on this occasion.
First TransPennine Express became aware of the accident, but not its full details, because one of the passengers on the train sent a customer complaint to the First Group customer relations centre on 6 or 7 June. The RAIB were informed of this accident on 3 July 2013 by FTPE. The reasons for the delay in reporting are discussed in the observations section of the report (paragraph 125).