About a year after the July bombings. Why?
-
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!
Unattended bags
- Thread starter Intermodal
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
johnkingeu
Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2017
- Messages
- 38
I wasn't aware that I had stated a view about this topic (don't confuse me with the OP) - I am genuinely interested to know if there had ever been a really serious explosion prevented by a member of the public reporting suspicious luggage. The North Greenwich device was certainly a dangerous thing to have lying around on a tube train - had I spotted it I certainly wouldn't have done a Parsons Green and walked up to it with my camera phone!! Plus, the fact that people look out for suspicious luggage might have some kind of preventative effect, although this is impossible to prove.
There must have been some explosion prevented somewhere in the world? Surely we can do better than North Greenwich and maybe a mysterious secret bomb which has never been publicised?
Nothing in your reply explains why challenging someone who is fairly obviously in charge of some bags whilst ignoring mounds of bags with no obvious owners is anything other than an illusion of safety.
Picking out someone who is standing on a platform might suggest to onlookers that their safety is being protected when they are in just as much, or as little, danger from the mound of bags on the train - addition to which is actively encouraged.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Interestingly the Delhi Metro has airport style security (and as a result restricts to one piece of carry-on per passenger - try that on the Tube!) It does just about work, but obviously that system is a lot less busy than the Tube.
But the key difference is that blowing up a long-distance train isn't going to do much damage nor kill many people - a train is long and thin and an explosion goes outwards. The busy commuter station is much more vulnerable. You can't bring a train down in the way you can an airliner, and people aren't already terrified of rail travel, nor would they be even if one was attacked. Which is why they generally aren't attacked, they are a poor target. All you'd really do if you put airport style security in at Euston is create queues which *themselves* are more vulnerable than the trains.
Eurostar of course is a special case because of the high profile target the Tunnel is, even if again an explosion would not actually cause that much of an issue there. Will be interesting to see if anything is proposed for HS2.
What always gets me is the contradiction between these statements. Do I need to keep it with me, or is it acceptable to leave is 20m away from me in the luggage rack where I got on the train? If the toilet is in the next coach, am I meant to get my suitcase and bring it with me (after all, you're meant to keep all luggage with you while on trains), even though there isn't enough space in the toilet for that?
Define 'fairly obvious'. You're making assumptions that staff will know which luggage belongs to which passenger. Bletchleyite is actually right, the risk is more on a station than on a train.
Military security has been beefed up significantly over the last 20yrs and I'd be very surprised if any operational RAF bases still had holes in the back of the hedge, or that you'd get into anywhere, let alone a control tower, without having appropriate ID. Certainly the ones local to me that I've been to recently have had a mix of MPGS/RAFP/RAF Regiment guards plus regular perimeter patrols, dogs etc and big fencing all round .
Likewise the army bases tend to have armed MPGS and whatever unit is based there on guard duty too.
Interested to know tho do you not think that someone 5 metres away from their luggage is the least likely to be a danger. I am not however saying that you should ever leave it unattended and I am glad people are vigilant, it does wind me up when I have to deal with unattended baggae or cars at the airport.
QueensCurve
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 1,914
My approach to that is to say "it isn't unattended, it is attended by me".
I accept that but the aro officer's that were not interested in the unattended car in an authorised only area happened on the day of the westminster attack's just after they happened a few month's ago.
The former RAF Leuchars and now Leuchars Station just have the mouth of the river Eden on one side, and that's certainly been swum before!
As many others have posted it is well for staff and customers to be vigilant regarding unattended luggage. Whilst the present fashion among terrorists is to keep ones bomb with one, this can change.
My only real complaint is the endless announcements about unattended luggage at nearly empty platforms. To the terrorist, bombs are valuable weapons only available in limited numbers. Are they really going to waste one blowing up an empty concrete platform at outer worzelshire ?
I can the need for vigilance at busier locations, but do we need endless automatic announcements at virtualy empty stations.
My only real complaint is the endless announcements about unattended luggage at nearly empty platforms. To the terrorist, bombs are valuable weapons only available in limited numbers. Are they really going to waste one blowing up an empty concrete platform at outer worzelshire ?
I can the need for vigilance at busier locations, but do we need endless automatic announcements at virtualy empty stations.
Of course it's less likely at remote rural stations but it's to get the public into the habit of not leaving luggage anywhere. Not that most of them do. The present 'fashion' is actually not to keep ones' bomb with one as it happens...
The OP described the situation in great detail. In summary, he was the only person on the platform other than the dispatcher.
RSA BOB
Member
What no one has said was the dispatcher unsure of the OP as he might have been a bad one and she was worried about her safety if she had spoken to him.
Doubt that as she had a go at him once she knew who owned them, he still could of been a bad un .
Yes. Without giving specific details, I know of more than one incident but less than five. All in the last ten years; not all on the transport network.
3141
Established Member
You evidently have considerable experience of security matters and firm views on the subject. If it's the case that passengers have to accept now that their luggage will come under suspicion if they don't remain very close to it, shouldn't the government, the rail industry, local authorities and many other organisations where large numbers of people gather be making this message explicit? Telling us that up till now we might have put our luggage down and strolled along the platform, but now we must stay with it. Perhaps seizing various pieces of luggage somewhere and blowing it up, as an example. If the situation really has changed then it's not enough for the same messages to be coming over the loudspeakers as in the past. I'm always amused at Overton when there are no more than twelve people waiting, and an announcement says that "unattended luggage is liable to be removed without warning" - it clearly isn't going to happen as the station is unstaffed.
Looking at Google and Bing Maps it appears that has a fence all the way round
johnkingeu
Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2017
- Messages
- 38
So there have been between 2 and 4 viable bombs which have been discovered by members of the public in the last 10 years but the public has not been told about them? I am shocked, I have to say.
If these were in the UK then this would represent a significant increase in the threat level. I find it particularly surprising because word usually leaks far too quickly for the security services to hush it up - for instance the North Greenwich bomb was all over Twitter in minutes, before the security services became involved and long before the bomber was caught.
Not all of the MOD property around the country is behind the wire. In fact a large portion of it isn't including at Leuchars. In fact there are large numbers of civilians living in MOD property across the country (And I don't just mean husbands and wives).
Chris M
Member
The messages you are complaining about in this very thread are them doing exactly that.
Manchester Airport
East Croydon
Westminster
So there are never any rail staff, police, or military personnel (on or off duty) at the station? Even when they have been called because of a suspicious package?
The idea is really for the police to intervene before things get 'exciting' enough to end up on Twitter
No reason for anyone other than those directly involved (the minimum possible) to know anything's happening.
I'd also like to point out one of the nuances of my job that some people struggle with. There's a world of difference between things that the public find interesting and want to know, and things which there's a legitimate public interest in knowing. Sometimes, a deafening silence is the ideal outcome; even for us pesky journalists.
johnkingeu
Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2017
- Messages
- 38
The idea is really for the police to intervene before things get 'exciting' enough to end up on Twitter
Yes, but my question was intended to discover whether the reporting of unattended luggage by a member of the public (or indeed by a member of railway staff) had ever actually saved a life. This excludes intelligence led operations and applies only to transport (I think you may have misunderstood as some of the incidents you are referring to are ‘not on the transport network’).
There have been explosions, obviously following the failure to spot something in time, and there have been viable but faulty devices both in the U.K. and India which have been spotted and disposed of. But I haven’t yet seen any evidence of a life actually being saved. Possibly this is because there would only be a very small window of opportunity to spot a viable and fully working device.
This doesn’t mean that our policy on unattended luggage is wrong, but it does suggest the pragmatic approach taken by airports who have to deal with multiple cases (har har) of this per day might be best.
bussnapperwm
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
I don't like to even put my luggage in the luggage racks when I'm travelling with it on the train on my own...
...kind of awkward though if I travel on a 142 and need the loo whilst with a suitcase on my own!
...kind of awkward though if I travel on a 142 and need the loo whilst with a suitcase on my own!
Chris M
Member
Yes.
Just leave it outside the door and keep the door open then you can keep an eye on it.
3141
Established Member
1) I haven't "complained" about any messages on this thread. The messages I've referred to are ones that have been being announced for years. The point I was making, which you apparently didn't grasp, is that if the situation has now changed as mpthomson believes, and we really do need to remain right beside our luggage at all times, then different messages are necessary, backed by an information campaign, to get people to behave in a new and more vigilant way.
2) Yes, I know that occasionally items regarded as suspicious have been blown up or "made safe" in some way, but not frequently or regularly. I don't specifically recall that something was blown up at the three locations you've named. There've almost certainly been others that I don't recall either. That, or at least the removal of items deemed to be suspicious, would have to happen much more frequently to convince people that they really do need to stay with their luggage and that anything that looks as if it's unattended is likely to have something done about it.
3) The ticket office is staffed from 6.00 am till just after 10.00. Occasionally there's someone working on the platform. Yes, of course there'll be off-duty police or military personnel who are passengers for the next train, and the adjacent De La Rue factory which produces paper for banknotes has high security, but if I was there with a bag, and put it down while I walked to the far end of the platform to look at something else, the chances that my unattended luggage would be removed without warning are miniscule. In the fifteen years I've lived here I don't think there's been a single occasion when staff have been called to the station because of a suspicious package.
I don't know why you bothered to make your somewhat hostile post. Mine was intended to build on a point that mpthomson had made. Yours gives the impression that anyone who doesn't fully accept your point of view should be attacked.
I haven't misunderstood. However I would ask you to realise that for all of those of us in a position to have access to security-related information there's a limit to what we're going to post on a public forum. You are, I'm afraid, going to have to be satisfied with the responses you've already had that the system as it is does, indeed, work.
The procedure that railways and airports use to assess unattended items (it's the same) is available online if you wish to look for it.
There's only so much you can do when it comes to bags and that's why people follow the HOT procedure. A bag on a rack is unlikely to cause an evacuation and controlled explosion, but if it's hidden behind something then it almost certainly would.
There needs to be a balance or we'd have chaos every day, and we also need intelligence and other means of determining risk - like watching people and their body language.
Members of the public have a role to play but will usually not want to 'embarrass' themselves by pointing out something that somebody else says is fine.
Fortunately the authorities are usually grateful and thank people for letting them know, and being able to decide what to do from then on.
There needs to be a balance or we'd have chaos every day, and we also need intelligence and other means of determining risk - like watching people and their body language.
Members of the public have a role to play but will usually not want to 'embarrass' themselves by pointing out something that somebody else says is fine.
Fortunately the authorities are usually grateful and thank people for letting them know, and being able to decide what to do from then on.
- Status