Passengers forcing their way off stranded trains

[MidnightFlyer]

Well, you have mentioned France before, so I'll assume it's that!

 

[ainsworth74]

In my defence , I'm not English. I won't say what nationality I am, as it would be a further disadvantage

Well your username suggests you're from the Pyrenees so your either French, Spanish or Andorran (assuming that's what your username means)

 

[EM2]

Check my poll: 23 YES , 43 NO

I'm in the minority, but it's hardly a negligible minority.

Or in other words, just over half as much as the YES vote. Still, we've elected Governments on a similar proportion of votes...

 

[Proud Salopian]

Sorry, I forgot under-20's should have no opinion on anything, as they haven't made any real life decisions, and should leave things to the so-called "Grown-ups". :roll:

Is deciding a career path not a real life decision? Is deciding whether to go to uni a real life decision? Is deciding what uni to do a real life decision? Is deciding to join the army a real life decision? Of course, as you point out, the only real life decision is whether to speed in order to get one's wife a birthday card :roll:

Wow. Touchy. And you don't get it. It's not about "should have no opinion on anything" it's more a case of "doesn't know as much as they think they do"! Sorry to put it so bluntly. I remember when I was younger and I thought I knew everything... ho ho ho..
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes. And I'm fed up of having opinions sidelined and shushed by people who consider age a measure of correctness.

It's not age per se.. it's life experience. I'm only in my mid-20s but I realise how little I've got. You learn little bits constantly, and you learn far more in the "real world" than at school/college/university!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even though your actions would greatly inconvenience a much larger number of people, because no trains would be authorised to move in that area while you are still on track.

Obviously I'd be "on the track" for the minimum time possible, seeing as every second is a second trespassing. First exit off, onto a footpath, lane, platform, etc, I'd take. That's just being sensible. Clearly if some berks decided to go for a 10 mile hike along the WCML... but that's quite different.

 

[Tom B]

As others have said although it may be against the rules, the attitude of TOCs in this situation seems to be very much from the Basil Fawlty school - "you ponce in here expecting to travel places, and I'm trying to run a railway!".

2 hours stuck on a train is far too long - where is the spare locomotive to drag us out/ unit behind to push us out/ etc. It can become dangerously warm at times so although evacuation may be unwise, opening a couple of doors to get air moving is surely better than pressure cooking.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's not age per se.. it's life experience. I'm only in my mid-20s but I realise how little I've got. You learn little bits constantly and you learn far more in the "real world" than at school/college/university!!

I must be one of the more elder of the members of the forum and more than 40 years older than you....but I would be hard pressed to express in better terms, what you have said here in such a brief paragraph.

I concur totally with all that you have said.

 

[Failed Unit]

I wouldnt leave the train, but if I was on an East Coast train and we were say in Alexandra Palace with a nice platform next to the train, I would be annoyed if the doors were not opened!

 

[Old Timer]

....What i think OT is saying, is that although the Guard/Conductor/Train Manager or Driver on a DOO train is in overall charge, safety is the responsibility of ALL staff.
A non safety critical employee or contractor would not assume charge of a situation from someone more qualified, however if that member of staff witnessed a dangerous practice it is their duty to intervene if safe to do so, and also to report the matter.

Absolutely correct, Old Chap. Thank you

Where the opportunity allows, I always advise the Train Manager that I am a member of staff when I travel by train, and where I can be found in the event that I can assist in an emergency.

In a bad situation a combination of Train Crew / Infrastructure staff can be a powerful tool.

 

[Essexman]

Yes, with appropriate care I would.

Only once have I done this. Many years ago (about 30 I should think) when Fenchurch Street train stopped for ages a couple of hundred yards from Barking. Compartment stock & before days of PA on train. Slam doors off course. I and a few others got off & walked back to Barking to get tube - otherwise we'd have missed kick off for an England game at Wembley!

 

[PinzaC55]

Proud Salopian said "I'm a little stunned at how some here seem to think law-abiding is the be-all and end-all. I'm very much on the law-abiding side of society, but ultimately it is up to you if you want to break the law and run the risk of having the penalty of committing a crime handed down to you. There are times when you weigh the options up. "Do I risk 3 points on my licence to get my wife her anniversary card?" Yes = criminal, but not particularly serious = risk of 3 penalty points = no nagging wife! I can't help but suspect quite a few of the "but it's the law!!" crowd on here are actually young (under-20s) who haven't yet had to make real decisions in life yet..

So in your haste to get your wife the vitally important birthday card you do 60 MPH in a 30 MPH zone and bowl over a 9 year old girl, killing her? Would the judge be lenient with you?
My 20's are a distant but happy memory but as far as I remember it the law is literal - if it wasn't it would simply be guidelines.Speeding motorists are very fond of telling the police "you should be out catching criminals" but that is exactly what they are.

 

[SouthStand]

I'm always amused by the "high horse" attitude to railway law expressed by certain members on the forum. I assume these posters have never broken any laws, however minor.

Back on topic, I certainly would consider leaving the train in certain circumstances, but not without considering many factors:

* the location, is this a quiet two track area, or are we stopped in the middle of six lines with passing trains every minute

* the weather, is it uncomfortably hot, or perhaps wet making the ground slippery

* is it a 3rd rail/OHLE area?

* is there a pressing engagement pending, close family funeral etc?

* are we close to "civilisation" or 10 miles from anywhere?

* can I exit the track area onto a field or road, or are we in a steep embankment/tunnel?

* the information (or perhaps lack of) being given from the train crew

* am I alone, or with children/family?

* do I have luggage to carry?

Whilst I would prefer not to inconvenience following passengers by my actions, it seems that the Railway is happy to if it takes several hours on occasions to "rescue" a stranded train.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Whilst I would prefer not to inconvenience following passengers by my actions, it seems that the Railway is happy to if it takes several hours on occasions to "rescue" a stranded train.

The Railway is not sitting around drinking tea, feeling smug that a train has been sitting around for several hours. When there are fines for delays, people try as hard as damn possible to get things moving again. Everyone from Control to the traincrew will be working their derriere off to try and sort the problem out. But, inevitably, some problems take longer than others to sort.

 

[EM2]

Isn't it odd that when it was absolutely bloody freezing cold, with eight inches of snow on the ground and people were stuck on a train outside Orpington overnight, that none of those passengers tried to force the doors open and forcibly exit?

 

[O L Leigh]

No sensible person in a well-managed situation would evacuate other than under supervision.

The problem with that statement is that it assumes that everyone is sensible. Experience shows that not to be the case. Those most likely to bail out are those who cannot be relied upon to act in anyone's interests but their own, often in spite of a situation being well-managed.

Then, increasing ventilation - opening doors would not necessarily result in passengers getting off, especially if the information on the incident was being updated.

Again, I like your optimism. Strictly speaking you're right in saying that "...opening doors would not necessarily result in passengers getting off", but it does vastly increase the likelihood of a bail-out.

Then, what about having two volunteers per carriage who become responsible for keeping people calm. Sure, they cannot restrain idiots, but actually being nominated to pass on information - both ways - would leave the passengers feeling better looked after.

Not a bad idea, and one that has already occurred to me. However, I would be restricting the list to railstaff and members of the emergency services only.

---

I fail to see why we need a seperate thread for this, because all the relevant issues are already under discussion elsewhere.

My answer would still be an emphatic "no", and I hope no-one minds me saying that I hope all those people who said "yes" are not on my train. All you lot sat behind the cab have a role to play in helping to reach a speedy conclusion to any incident, as you do in helping to make the trains run on time. Bailing out after 2 hours (or however long) will only serve to make matters worse and turn a 2 hour incident into a much longer ordeal for all involved. I don't care how many threads get started to cover this topic I shall continue to say the same thing, over and over if necessary.

The selfish actions of a small group of individuals only adds to the misery of others by prolonging the incident.

O L Leigh

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Your posts give the impression that you are an extremely narcissistic tw*t

It is nothing of the sort. It is an expected practice that Railway staff travelling will inform the guard of there presence so if there is a problem, or serious incident, they can be found. The same applies to the BTP, and I believe is a condition of their free travel.

What is narcissistic though is trying to tell others how to do their jobs, and calling all Railway staff stupid, because they have a PhD in Economics. It is also narcissistic to consider yourself so important that you have to detrain yourself to the detriment of others.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

It is nothing of the sort. It is an expected practice that Railway staff travelling will inform the guard of there presence so if there is a problem, or serious incident, they can be found. The same applies to the BTP, and I believe is a condition of their free travel.

What is narcissistic though is trying to tell others how to do their jobs, and calling all Railway staff stupid, because they have a PhD in Economics. It is also narcissistic to consider yourself so important that you have to detrain yourself to the detriment of others.

I think you need to edit your last post !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

---

I fail to see why we need a seperate thread for this, because all the relevant issues are already under discussion elsewhere.





O L Leigh

In case you hadn't noticed, there is a poll attached to this thread.

 

[O L Leigh]

I think you need to edit your last post !

It seems the sensible discussion has ended if we're already resorting to this sort of post.

O L Leigh
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In case you hadn't noticed, there is a poll attached to this thread.

I had noticed, thank you. But that doesn't invalidate my question.

O L Leigh

 

[O L Leigh]

Because Oswyntail raised some interesting points that I wished to respond to. OK...?

O L Leigh

 

[DiscoStu]

Yes, I would ... IF ...

a) I thought my health was in danger by staying on the train (eg dehydration/heat stroke)

b) we were on a quiet stretch of line, and were close to a station or a road that was within easy access.

The law is the law, but if I feel my health is in danger, **** the law ... I decide whether I'm getting off of that train, and I'll deal with whatever consequences are thrown my way afterwards.

But I wouldn't jump off because I had a "bit of a sweat on". It would definitely be a last resort.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I think you need to edit your last post !

Apart from clarifying that the Economics PhD refers to you, not the staff, I fully stand by everything I have said.

 

[Old Timer]

It seems the sensible discussion has ended if we're already resorting to this sort of post.

O L Leigh

Time for the professionals to bale out and leave the trolls to amuse themselves until mother comes home and makes them switch off the Computer, I think Chap.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

82 people have voted : 31 YES and 51 NO.

In all honesty, I didn't expect the 'YES' vote to win, but I am nevertheless comforted by its size.

It would be interesting to analyse the profiles of the 'NO' voters to indicate how many voting 'NO' are employed on the railways.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It would be interesting to analyse the profiles of the 'YES' voters to indicate how many voting 'YES' are employed on the railways.

I voted yes, and I'm not.

 

[O L Leigh]

Sure, you don't have to justify yourself to me !

Oh, really...? Why ask, then?

O L Leigh

 

[Nonsense]

Two hours stuck on a train is the railways failure and its unreasonable to expect anyone to tolerate it. If the train can't be rescued then the situation should be alleviated by some other means. I wonder if the guard and driver on that train had access to an open window while they protected their cargo.

As they say, rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise. Its the fool that would be denied their freedom by a door, not the wise.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Apart from clarifying that the Economics PhD refers to you, not the staff, I fully stand by everything I have said.

Thank-you for correcting yourself- after all error is only human ; which is why people evacuating a stranded train should be 'understood' even if you cannot
defend their actions.

 

[Captain Chaos]

Your posts give the impression that you are an extremely narcissistic tw*t

It's perfectly normal for off-duty staff to notify those on-board of their presence when travelling. I do it all the time and my services were required once in February this year when the train I was travelling on was involved in a fatality at Slough. The driver was quite clearly shaken as you would expect and so I sat with the driver, kept him talking, done some announcements for him and let him concentrate on other more pressing duties. The only reason I done this was because it was a DOO service and there was no-one else who would be able to assist him.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Thank-you for correcting yourself- after all error is only human ; which is why people evacuating a stranded train should be 'understood' even if you cannot
defend their actions.

I can understand why people may WANT to leave the train, but not why they do.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

I voted yes, and I'm not.

Human-error, got my No's and Yes's mixed -up

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Human-error, got my No's and Yes's mixed -up

Then I voted No and I'm not.