• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Terror attack close to/outside Parliament

Status
Not open for further replies.

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
8,677
There was an interesting article on the BBC a while back about how your can "armour" a street scene without making look like it. The large ARSENAL sign outside the Emirates Stadium is actually an armoured barrier to stop cars and trucks getting up there.

The big bits of art as well, they often fulfill the same purpose. Even a few nice planters made of pretty hardwood and full of soil will provide a fairly decent barrier to all but the largest vehicles.

Very good point. And generally that is what engineers like to do. It doesn't actually take a very high bollard to stop a HGV, it is all about the foundation depths. As with any structure to be fair!!!

Mention earlier of how to bollard major streets in some city centres. Well actually the answer is simple in concept, although difficult to deliver. Pedestrianise them completely with the bollards simply at the ends. Although it takes brave transport planners to work out these sorts of problems and Oxford Street i can see not being simple at all. But hopefully as we as a country develop the concept of green city centres with no traffic zones and better public transport, we can also improve the security against attacks like this.

To me it feels like daesh are more mindless violence than those that have come before. Which has inspired lone wolves which frankly, are impossible to defend against directly. But rather just preventative measures.

One thing that does concern me is what happens if someone picks a target that isn't 24/7 protected by heavily armed police?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
Mention earlier of how to bollard major streets in some city centres. Well actually the answer is simple in concept, although difficult to deliver. Pedestrianise them completely with the bollards simply at the ends. Although it takes brave transport planners to work out these sorts of problems and Oxford Street i can see not being simple at all. But hopefully as we as a country develop the concept of green city centres with no traffic zones and better public transport, we can also improve the security against attacks like this.

Specifically with Oxford Street there is talk of pedestrianising the are anyway. Not relating specifically to do with terrorism but more to do with the area and removing the amount of traffic and pollution that currently exists there.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,024
Location
SE London
Mention earlier of how to bollard major streets in some city centres. Well actually the answer is simple in concept, although difficult to deliver. Pedestrianise them completely with the bollards simply at the ends. Although it takes brave transport planners to work out these sorts of problems and Oxford Street i can see not being simple at all. But hopefully as we as a country develop the concept of green city centres with no traffic zones and better public transport, we can also improve the security against attacks like this.

I agree that, even if you don't think about the terrorism aspect, keeping traffic away from areas where lots of pedestrians congregate would be an excellent idea, and I'd love it if more places were pedestrianized (or at least, pedestrianized except for buses, disabled access or delivery access at certain times). Unfortunately, the expense of doing that everywhere would be huge.

I wonder if eventually the solution to this kind of attack will come with technology - perhaps, devices fitted to vehicles designed either to detect objects (or pedestrians) in front of them, or to detect if they are no longer on the road, and stop them automatically. Sadly, I imagine it'd be at least a decade or two though before that kind of technology becomes reliable and widespread.

To me it feels like daesh are more mindless violence than those that have come before. Which has inspired lone wolves which frankly, are impossible to defend against directly. But rather just preventative measures.

I haven't checked the figures in detail, but I get the impression that a remarkably high proportion of people who commit terrorist acts in the UK and Europe turn out to have existing convictions for petty non-terror-related violent crimes. I wonder if there is some effect happening where people who are somewhat inclined to mindless violence are starting to seek 'inspiration' by IS/Islamist ideology because they see it as a way of justifying the violence that they'd have been inclined to do anyway (albeit on a much smaller scale if they hadn't been influenced by terror ideology)?
 
Last edited:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Specifically with Oxford Street there is talk of pedestrianising the are anyway. Not relating specifically to do with terrorism but more to do with the area and removing the amount of traffic and pollution that currently exists there.

Yes, but then you'd target somewhere else. ANYWHERE else.

This man seemed to want to target the houses of parliament (perhaps for the publicity he got, as he was never likely to get inside the building) but others may just want the casualties.

And any street in the country could suffice.

I can see more innovative designs of bollards and protection of some roads/paths in the future, and companies working to come up with these, but you couldn't do every pavement on every road.

Ultimately, we have to just carry on and hope. It's fair to say that in a few years, there will be another idea of how to create terror.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,532
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Sadly, I imagine it'd be at least a decade or two though before that kind of technology becomes reliable and widespread.

Newer VW Golfs have such a feature (anti-collision automatic brake) though it only works at low speed. Perhaps, given the accidental deaths from lorries etc, it should become mandatory for large vehicles at least fairly soon.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
I'm not sure how you intend to put bollards all the way along Oxford Street, not to mention all other popular roads in London and everywhere else in the country, without creating a wall of concrete and steel, the problem is that it all rather seems to go against your wish not to give terrorists publicity

While you have the current situation in Oxford Street with buses and taxis thronging it, and with the current road layout and street furniture, your life might get shortened by half an hour owing to exhaust emissions from those taxis and the fact that the Borisbuses do not work in their intended electric mode for sufficient periods of time, but the chances of anyone getting a sustained drive along the pavement at a high speed are mercifully small. Even TfL's plans which went to consultation, and doubtless will be implemented almost in full, which mean with associated changes a cut of 40% in the number of buses along the 'core' section will probably still see sufficient buses to help mitigate a terrorist outrage, but pedestrianisation, so wrong in so many ways in my eyes, and its associated opening up of the street area for pedestrians, would inevitably increase the inherent dangers and imo would be a magnet for anyone with malicious intent, whether a lone psycho or a trained ISIS operative.
 

Groningen

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2015
Messages
2,866
My God; with how many buses can Oxford Street cope? Google Streetview is full with it! The pavement is however wide enough for a car!
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
My God; with how many busses can Oxford Street cope? Google Streetview is full with it! The pavement is however wide enough for a car!

I once walked from Oxford Circus to Baker Street after a traffic accident when buses were stationary (with engines switched off) and there were 42 buses one behind the other (with gaps at junctions) and that was just westbound! The pavements are more constricted than you might think, which is why the clarion call has gone out to expand them, a call which should be resisted. The pavements on Westminster Bridge are spacious by comparison and, of course, are not beset with road junctions on the western side. Public transport helped make Oxford Street what it is, for good or ill, and that should be impressed on those making political decisions.
 

Jonny

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,562
Very good point. And generally that is what engineers like to do. It doesn't actually take a very high bollard to stop a HGV, it is all about the foundation depths. As with any structure to be fair!!!

Exactly - it's all about getting rid of the kinetic energy, which increases in proportion to mass and is therefore going to be up to 45 times more (depending on the on-the day weight(loading etc., remember the Berlin Truck attacker went out of his way to hijack a truck loaded with steel)) for a HGV than a 1 tonne car.

I once walked from Oxford Circus to Baker Street after a traffic accident when buses were stationary (with engines switched off) and there were 42 buses one behind the other (with gaps at junctions) and that was just westbound! The pavements are more constricted than you might think, which is why the clarion call has gone out to expand them, a call which should be resisted. The pavements on Westminster Bridge are spacious by comparison and, of course, are not beset with road junctions on the western side. Public transport helped make Oxford Street what it is, for good or ill, and that should be impressed on those making political decisions.

Which is one of the reasons that Oxford Street is a potential security nightmare; bear in mind that there is nothing generally in law to stop pedestrians walking along the carriageway or taking 'shortcuts' at junctions; this is quite likely if the footway is congested and it's something that I am not above (albeit with reasonable care, often for a few metres.

For Oxford Street, London there are plenty of both logistical and environmental (air quality) reasons to pedestrianise at least in part (once Crossrail is available as a relief measure for the tube), and the threat of terrorist attack may grease the wheels for a scheme that can be justified anyway on grounds other than security. Side roads could be maintained for taxi/Blue Badge access for those few who cannot walk significant distances; possibly with gated bollards for delivery vehicles. It would be easier to send busses "round the block" and back the way they came.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Yes, but then you'd target somewhere else. ANYWHERE else.

Yes spot on, the reality is this type of attack can't really be avoided if someone decides they want to do it. All one can do is try and protect particularly high-value targets where a successful attack will carry added propaganda value, somewhere like the Houses of Parliament being a particularly extreme example of this.

I do object to Sadiq Khan's inference that this is something we should expect as a typical feature of modern life. I see that as being well on the road to being an acceptance of it.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
Yes spot on, the reality is this type of attack can't really be avoided if someone decides they want to do it. All one can do is try and protect particularly high-value targets where a successful attack will carry added propaganda value, somewhere like the Houses of Parliament being a particularly extreme example of this.

I do object to Sadiq Khan's inference that this is something we should expect as a typical feature of modern life. I see that as being well on the road to being an acceptance of it.

That is a tiny bit of what he said and takes it completely out of context. I suggest you read the full interview. You can never completely negate the risk of terrorism without the country becoming somewhere you probably wouldn't want to live. Something like 5 people a day are killed on UK roads a day. Should we ban cars?
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,672
Location
Redcar
I do object to Sadiq Khan's inference that this is something we should expect as a typical feature of modern life. I see that as being well on the road to being an acceptance of it.

You've fallen for Trump Jr's bollocks as well?

For the record and as i've not seen it mentioned (probably not looking hard enough), what he did was nothing short of a disgrace. To take an old quote like that and tweet it on the day of the attack to further their own ambitions is sickening.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Just to enlighten others, Mr Kahn's quote on the matter was in relation to the New York Bombings in September 2016

Sadiq Khan said:
...What I do know is part and Parcel of living in a great global city is that you've got to be prepared for these things. You've got to be vigilant, you've got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job, you've got to support the security services...

Source
 

Abpj17

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2014
Messages
1,007
Yes spot on, the reality is this type of attack can't really be avoided if someone decides they want to do it. All one can do is try and protect particularly high-value targets where a successful attack will carry added propaganda value, somewhere like the Houses of Parliament being a particularly extreme example of this.

I do object to Sadiq Khan's inference that this is something we should expect as a typical feature of modern life. I see that as being well on the road to being an acceptance of it.

That wasn't the inference (quite). It's not that we should accept it. It's that we should be prepared because London is a major target. And however many attacks are stopped there remains a risk that some will get through.

London has been a terrorist target for centuries. Recall Guy Fawkes in 1604 who planned to blow up Parliament. There were peaks in the 1880s, 1939, and 1970s/80s/90s from Irish sources. But intermittent attacks from a broad range of other groups. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_London

It's a feature of London especially which combines being a global capital with a difficult colonial past and strained relations with 'home nations'.

In terms of attacked stopped, the numbers vary but include 7 in six months; 10 in two years; 12 attacks in the last year; 50+ since 9/11.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Exactly - it's all about getting rid of the kinetic energy, which increases in proportion to mass and is therefore going to be up to 45 times more (depending on the on-the day weight(loading etc., remember the Berlin Truck attacker went out of his way to hijack a truck loaded with steel)) for a HGV than a 1 tonne car.



Which is one of the reasons that Oxford Street is a potential security nightmare; bear in mind that there is nothing generally in law to stop pedestrians walking along the carriageway or taking 'shortcuts' at junctions; this is quite likely if the footway is congested and it's something that I am not above (albeit with reasonable care, often for a few metres.

For Oxford Street, London there are plenty of both logistical and environmental (air quality) reasons to pedestrianise at least in part (once Crossrail is available as a relief measure for the tube), and the threat of terrorist attack may grease the wheels for a scheme that can be justified anyway on grounds other than security. Side roads could be maintained for taxi/Blue Badge access for those few who cannot walk significant distances; possibly with gated bollards for delivery vehicles. It would be easier to send busses "round the block" and back the way they came.

Banning taxis from Oxford Street between Baker Street and Oxford Circus during shopping hours would I'm sure improve air quality considerably, and with the alternative of accessible buses I can't personally see the argument against. The north-south roads which criss-cross Oxford Street perform a vital function and should remain open, so taxis could use these and some of them are also vital for bus operation. Sending a bus which has just taken 75 minutes to struggle through from Streatham 'back around the block and off again' I'm afraid is totally unrealistic on so many levels. Apart from the operational consideration. exactly which block are you referring to? Other than Wigmore Street, which used to be used by a couple of routes decades ago and has been ruled out by TfL for future use, there is nowhere that fits the bill.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
A 5th person has sadly died of their injuries.

http://www.aol.co.uk/news/2017/04/07/romanian-woman-dies-of-westminster-terror-attack-injuries/

A Romanian tourist who was injured in the Westminster terror attack has died.
Andreea Cristea, 31, was knocked from Westminster Bridge into the River Thames during Muslim convert Khalid Masood's murderous rampage on March 22.
She had been visiting London with her boyfriend, Andrei Burnaz, who suffered a broken foot in the attack.
Scotland Yard said Ms Cristea was receiving treatment in hospital but life support was withdrawn on Thursday afternoon.
Her death brings the number of innocent victims of the attack to five.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
Since the 22nd March, 80 people in the UK have sadly died in road traffic collisions, including Violet-Grace Youens, a 4 year old girl who died in her mother's arms having been mowed down by a stolen car.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,034
Location
No longer here
Since the 22nd March, 80 people in the UK have sadly died in road traffic collisions, including Violet-Grace Youens, a 4 year old girl who died in her mother's arms having been mowed down by a stolen car.

How many of those deaths were murder, though?

Are you equating murder with accidents? While the results are the same, there is a huge moral difference.

PS - very cynical about our response as a nation/city to "terror attacks", but still.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
Since the 22nd March, 80 people in the UK have sadly died in road traffic collisions, including Violet-Grace Youens, a 4 year old girl who died in her mother's arms having been mowed down by a stolen car.

Either state your point or go away.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
How many of those deaths were murder, though?

Are you equating murder with accidents? While the results are the same, there is a huge moral difference.

PS - very cynical about our response as a nation/city to "terror attacks", but still.

While we wax lyrical about what can be done to prevent a very small number of deaths (while ignoring far higher numbers - like the people who die in bath tubs - about 500 brits since 2000), in reality there's barely any point in reporting these things, and of course that has the side affect of reducing a certain number of them (who's going to 'martyr' themselves for a 3 minute piece on the local news)

There's about 500 murders a year in the UK, I fail to see why a deliberate hit and run is any different.

Either state your point or go away.

I thought we were listing people who had been killed in hit and runs in the last couple of weeks. Didn't realise it was a London centric thread.
 

Jonny

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,562
I thought we were listing people who had been killed in hit and runs in the last couple of weeks. Didn't realise it was a London centric thread.

That's as maybe, but it relates to a specific incident that happened in London, and one in which the level of malice was much higher than an inadvertent collision...

In terms of murder vs failure to stop, malice in the former vs a lack of in the latter is the difference.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
While we wax lyrical about what can be done to prevent a very small number of deaths (while ignoring far higher numbers - like the people who die in bath tubs - about 500 brits since 2000), in reality there's barely any point in reporting these things, and of course that has the side affect of reducing a certain number of them (who's going to 'martyr' themselves for a 3 minute piece on the local news)

There's about 500 murders a year in the UK, I fail to see why a deliberate hit and run is any different.



I thought we were listing people who had been killed in hit and runs in the last couple of weeks. Didn't realise it was a London centric thread.

I do understand your point, and to an extent agree that more should be made of in particular road deaths caused by recklessness. However in the case of these "terrorist-related" incidents I think we probably do need to make a big deal out of them. I would hate for us to reach a point where they are part & parcel of daily life, even if sadly a certain mayor of London seems to think we are already at that point.
 

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
I do understand your point, and to an extent agree that more should be made of in particular road deaths caused by recklessness. However in the case of these "terrorist-related" incidents I think we probably do need to make a big deal out of them. I would hate for us to reach a point where they are part & parcel of daily life, even if sadly a certain mayor of London seems to think we are already at that point.
While they're ideologically "inspired", most of these attacks appear to come from known criminals and drug users who perceive a high profile means of bowing out in a manner that fits their previous lives. Few seem to be conventionally religious. If there is a master plan, it doesn't appear to operate at the level of the perpetrators.

Whether petty criminals with delusions of grandeur who imagine they're fulfilling some ridiculous destiny denotes terrorism, is a difficult question to answer.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,034
Location
No longer here
I do understand your point, and to an extent agree that more should be made of in particular road deaths caused by recklessness. However in the case of these "terrorist-related" incidents I think we probably do need to make a big deal out of them. I would hate for us to reach a point where they are part & parcel of daily life, even if sadly a certain mayor of London seems to think we are already at that point.

But terror was a part of daily life in London for about 25 years. It was much more pervasive during those times than it is now. The world didn't crash down around our heads though.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
But terror was a part of daily life in London for about 25 years. It was much more pervasive during those times than it is now. The world didn't crash down around our heads though.

Hmm, I can see the point, although living through the IRA years I didn't really feel under much threat, whereas the current threat is definitely rather different. We can all point to examples where IRA attacks resulted in injuries and fatalities, however it's fair to say that generally the IRA's objective was more to cause damage and disruption, and with a political objective in mind (to a greater or lesser extent). The current threat is indiscriminate, designed to kill or injure as many as possible, and based on a far more irrational ideology.

As to making a big deal of attacks, there's no right or wrong answer. Play it down and one risks it becoming seen as somehow normal, whilst big it up and one risks glorifying and publicising it. Personally, I think it's better to big it up, if nothing else to send out a clear message that every incident will be very thoroughly investigated and no stone left unturned. Touch wood this approach does seem to have helped keep a lid on things over the last decade.

I agree with the point made elsewhere about many of these people being petty criminals who have turned up a gear to another level. The organisation behind attacks like 9/11, or even 7/7, were in another league to what we are seeing now. At least this does appear to indicate that, operationally, the ideology behind this is on the back foot, so to speak.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
The current threat is indiscriminate, designed to kill or injure as many as possible, and based on a far more irrational ideology.
We would be remiss to ignore the idea that the media/establishment had a vested interest in downplaying the threat from the IRA. Whereas the commercial media (at least) has a vested interest in making the threat from Islamic fundamentalist terrorism seem much higher than it actually is.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
Given the vanishingly small likelyhood of being run over by a religious fundamentalist compared to being just run over I don't see the point of playing in to the hands of the "Terrorists" and giving them the oxygen of publicity. It is exactly what they want.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
Given the vanishingly small likelyhood of being run over by a religious fundamentalist compared to being just run over I don't see the point of playing in to the hands of the "Terrorists" and giving them the oxygen of publicity. It is exactly what they want.

I as someone was mowed down on oxford street last night.

As for malice, austerity has caused 30,000 people to die in 2015 alone:
https://www.rsm.ac.uk/about-us/medi...n-2015-to-cuts-in-health-and-social-care.aspx

Researchers exploring why there has been a substantial increase in mortality in England and Wales in 2015 conclude that failures in the health and social care system linked to disinvestment are likely to be the main cause.

There were 30,000 excess deaths in 2015, representing the largest increase in deaths in the post-war period. The excess deaths, which included a large spike in January that year, were largely in the older population who are most dependent on health and social care.

That's a Westminster attack every 90 minutes, throughout the year.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
We would be remiss to ignore the idea that the media/establishment had a vested interest in downplaying the threat from the IRA. Whereas the commercial media (at least) has a vested interest in making the threat from Islamic fundamentalist terrorism seem much higher than it actually is.

I think you have a good point, but also we have 24/7 TV news and the web now. Had that been around during the time of the IRA, I think that anyone trying to keep a lid on things would have massively failed.

Think of all the extra footage from civilians with their mobiles if they were around then. Indeed, you could even begin to wonder if the differences might have actually impacted on the IRA's ability to do what they did, or at least how they did it.

I am also in two minds on how much publicity we give to such incidents today. Sure, you can't pretend they didn't happen, but do you go revealing loads of information about the person(s) involved? Do you show video clips of the incident (and people fleeing in terror, or bodies on the ground) on a loop?

It's difficult, but perhaps a moot point as the media, web and social media means it's always going to be well publicised no matter what arguments there are for and against. On the day, people will fill social media with their own photos and video, and sites like Liveleak will have all the unedited gore.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
I as someone was mowed down on oxford street last night.

Damn the MSM! I read the BBC story and there's no mention of the bus driver targeting the man and murdering him.

Can you send me a link that explains more about how the man was mown down?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top