• 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!

More dangerous lineside behaviour around Flying Scotsman

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mintona

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2006
Messages
3,592
Location
South West
It would be a shame to see it banned. I last saw it about 12 years ago in the NRM being repaired. But today I passed it whilst it was stopped at Didcot Parkway, and it was really nice to see it out working again. There were people everywhere but nobody that I saw was in any position of danger.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
Unfortunately "so be it" doesn't quite cut it. What about the poor soul who ran the trespass over for example? Some drivers involved in nasty incidents such as fatalities never could go back to work, so that's their innocent careers ruined, for what exactly?

Personally I don't care too much about those idiots, but I do care about the wellbeing of everyone else unwittingly victimised by such actions, and I believe I am certainly not alone in thinking that. For that reason alone even one is too many to me.
My honest opinion? I think it is what it is. Truly horrific though I am aware they are, it's just not possible, without taking disproportionate measures, to prevent fatalities on the railway. I'm not saying that all involved should stop trying to keep incidents as few and far between as is reasonably practicable. But, the key word there is 'reasonably'. To me, I don't think that there is anything more than is already being done that can reasonably be done.

I really, truly feel for those staff who have to deal with the aftermath of the incident which will seemingly inevitably happen because of this moronic behaviour; but I don't think any responsibility at all for that incident now rests with the railway. I genuinely think we've reached a point where nothing more should be done, and if a stupid person chooses to ignore all the warnings they are given, that's entirely their own fault.

I also want to bring up the purely economic argument. Human lives have a value, of course they do, but that value is not unlimited. At what point does the cost of measures being taken to save lives become too high to justify? It's a question that comes into play in this case, as well as with level crossings, etc. There are numerous ways (yet more additional staffing, policing, barriers/fences, etc.) that the railway could be made safer to operate, but for the number of lives that might be saved, I just don't think it is appropriate to spend the sums of money that would be required.
 

Peter C

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2018
Messages
4,514
Location
GWR land
Have we heard of any trespassing incidents surrounding the steam services into and out of Waterloo this summer so far? No. Do people trespass when they see the Black 5s over Glenfinnan? No. Flying Scotsman is the issue and as sad as it is, she may have to be pulled from the mainline if people won't stop trespassing.

-Peter

EDIT: Both of the above are cases of mainline steam (in regular use). Maybe another way to try and keep Scotsman going on the mainline is to run it on a small line somewhere with no times published every day for a few weeks? Pie in the sky idea, though.
 

Peter C

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2018
Messages
4,514
Location
GWR land
Is the woman in the red coat at the foreground of the picture with a kid?!
Looks like it. But, really, considering what some people get up to, I'm not surprised.
It always seems to be Joe public who go to these events, trespass with kids, and then ask "Why can't I do it? It's a public highway!", which it is and isn't; it's railway property. Trespassing on railway property is a crime and they should all be charged £1000. The mum £2000 maybe for endangering the child's life as well. Imagine if a fast train had gone through and the child hadn't moved out of the way.

-Peter
 

bobbyrail

Member
Joined
25 Dec 2018
Messages
101
It's silly because the economic value of Scotsman and similar steam tours is enormous; and it helps maintain a vaguely positive image of the railway in the public imagination (albeit that personally I can't fathom why).

There is only so much the railway can, or should be expected, to do to protect individuals who choose to put their own lives at risk. Personally, I disagree with the "even one life lost is too many" stance. These are people who are choosing to behave with immense stupidity, despite very large signs and a very high profile PR campaign reminding them not to. If they are killed as a result of their actions, in my opinion, so be it. Network Rail, BTP, and the operators have, in my view, done everything (and more) that could be expected of them. It's time for people to learn the hard way.

1) Economic value to who? I very much doubt that the Scotsman visiting is pumping much value into towns and villages along its route, most are there to see the loco not buy ice creams, Burgers, and other local wares. Network Rail probably provide these routes at a loss when the normal delays are involved because of trespass and that's not even thinking about the policing cost to BTP.
2) That positive image will only last until someone is killed, when this happens the main stream media will be full of headlines like, "Train that should have been scraped 50 years ago kills young dad" & "Questions asked about why old steam train did not have modern brakes", many more examples could be used.
3) You say that in your view NR, BTP and the operators have done everything that could be expected of them and i agree, so what can they do now apart from end steam from NR metals?

As an aside any fatality that does occur with a steam loco on the network will also create a very negative image for heritage railways running steam.
 

pieguyrob

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2018
Messages
571
I presume it was scotsman I saw at Didcot, about an hour and a half ago. I passed it on an IET.
 

Adsy125

Member
Joined
22 Dec 2016
Messages
421
Instead of the proposals of an outright ban, if it is absolutely necessary could it just be allowed after dark. As well as is areas where trespass hasn’t occurred, for example (correct me if I’m wrong) Scotland and the South West?
 

Peter C

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2018
Messages
4,514
Location
GWR land
I presume it was scotsman I saw at Didcot, about an hour and a half ago. I passed it on an IET.
Was it a larger steam engine in dark green? If so, it was Scotsman. If it was smaller, it was "Clun Castle".


-Peter
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,771
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
Why is my post silly? Because I hold a different view to you? Because I value safety above anything else?

I wouldn't have called your post "silly", but on an average day just under five people die on the roads in the UK and sixteen die as a result of an accident in the home - so what else would you propose to ban?

What if a train comes the other way as they're hanging over the edge facing the other way? Do they not have brains?

I expect the driver would sound the horn, and perhaps apply the brakes.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
I expect the driver would sound the horn, and perhaps apply the brakes.

Of course, but trains don't stop that fast. It's absolutely insane that people were leaning beyond the edge of the platform to hold their cameras. Plus the horn could make them fall (not that the driver could possibly not use it as a result of this risk).
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
You say that in your view NR, BTP and the operators have done everything that could be expected of them and i agree, so what can they do now apart from end steam from NR metals?
Nothing. That's what I'm saying. There is nothing more that can be done, nor should it be. If I were Network Rail I'd be publically saying, "there is nothing more we can do, you have been warned, trespass on railway property and if you die, you die."
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
It's silly because the economic value of Scotsman and similar steam tours is enormous; and it helps maintain a vaguely positive image of the railway in the public imagination (albeit that personally I can't fathom why).

There is only so much the railway can, or should be expected, to do to protect individuals who choose to put their own lives at risk. Personally, I disagree with the "even one life lost is too many" stance. These are people who are choosing to behave with immense stupidity, despite very large signs and a very high profile PR campaign reminding them not to. If they are killed as a result of their actions, in my opinion, so be it. Network Rail, BTP, and the operators have, in my view, done everything (and more) that could be expected of them. It's time for people to learn the hard way.

One of the photographs I have seen shows two people with a pushchair standing over a platform yellow line as FS approaches. The child is at more risk than the adults. But is not "choosing to behave with immense stupidity". Additionally, the victim I'm more concerned is the guy who has to scrape the trespasser's remains from train and p way ...
 

SN1 19-5

Member
Joined
23 May 2019
Messages
77
I have to agree with the above. I have been on this planet 57 years. Riding on trains (on and off) for about 44 of them years.

Getting into scrapes/laughs etc at all points. Stations, sheds, lineside, works etc. I never got harmed way back in the day. Never got in trouble either! I wonder why!

How come people are dying today?.......
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
It's silly because the economic value of Scotsman and similar steam tours is enormous; and it helps maintain a vaguely positive image of the railway in the public imagination (albeit that personally I can't fathom why).

To whom?
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
Nothing. That's what I'm saying. There is nothing more that can be done, nor should it be. If I were Network Rail I'd be publically saying, "there is nothing more we can do, you have been warned, trespass on railway property and if you die, you die."

But that is not a defensible position. All it takes is for a savvy lawyer to point at the inadequacies of the boundary fencing to show that Nitwit Rail isn’t doing all that it can. Therefore they are likely to carry at least some of the responsibility for any deaths that may occur.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
But that is not a defensible position. All it takes is for a savvy lawyer to point at the inadequacies of the boundary fencing to show that Nitwit Rail isn’t doing all that it can. Therefore they are likely to carry at least some of the responsibility for any deaths that may occur.
How much would it cost to fence off the whole network? If it's more than NR would have to pay in compensation/settlement to the deceased's family etc., and potentially to any affected staff or passengers, then there's only one decision, and it ain't the fencing. As I said above, human lives do of course have an intrinsic value, that value is not unlimited.
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,145
Location
Churn (closed)
I have to agree with the above. I have been on this planet 57 years. Riding on trains (on and off) for about 44 of them years.

Getting into scrapes/laughs etc at all points. Stations, sheds, lineside, works etc. I never got harmed way back in the day. Never got in trouble either! I wonder why!

How come people are dying today?.......

Trains were slower, noisier & less frequent basically!

Also people today live in virtual reality, don't get exposed to danger by playing out all day so cannot see the dangers.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
I have to agree with the above. I have been on this planet 57 years. Riding on trains (on and off) for about 44 of them years.

Getting into scrapes/laughs etc at all points. Stations, sheds, lineside, works etc. I never got harmed way back in the day. Never got in trouble either! I wonder why!

How come people are dying today?.......

And that’s great “back in the day”. But the world has moved on since then and society is far more litigious than it once was. Therefore all sorts of companies are taking actions to protect themselves from potentially damaging legal claims.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Time to ban steam, people really aren't listening.

One life lost is too many.

If they want to get themselves killed by such gross stupidity, I call Darwin. The ones I am concerned about are the drivers and those who have to clean the mess up.

Needs a big purge to arrest and charge a load of them, though.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
One of the photographs I have seen shows two people with a pushchair standing over a platform yellow line as FS approaches. The child is at more risk than the adults. But is not "choosing to behave with immense stupidity". Additionally, the victim I'm more concerned is the guy who has to scrape the trespasser's remains from train and p way ...
Then the parent (assuming they are) should be prosecuted, and not just for trespass. If the child had been killed, then a prosecution for manslaughter would have been in order as well, I would suggest. That's what the law is there for.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
How much would it cost to fence off the whole network? If it's more than NR would have to pay in compensation/settlement to the deceased's family etc., and potentially to any affected staff or passengers, then there's only one decision, and it ain't the fencing. As I said above, human lives do of course have an intrinsic value, that value is not unlimited.

I doubt that you will find that attitude would wash in a court of law. The potential damage to reputation as well as any financial penalties would quickly mount up against Nitwit Rail; hence why I say that such a position is indefensible.
 

Mathew S

Established Member
Joined
7 Aug 2017
Messages
2,167
I doubt that you will find that attitude would wash in a court of law. The potential damage to reputation as well as any financial penalties would quickly mount up against Nitwit Rail; hence why I say that such a position is indefensible.
Bluntly, I disagree. My reading of Health and Safety law is that you take all reasonable steps. Network Rail have done just that. I find it difficult if not impossible to see how a reasonable court could rule otherwise.
 
Joined
1 Feb 2017
Messages
359
I wouldn't have called your post "silly", but on an average day just under five people die on the roads in the UK and sixteen die as a result of an accident in the home - so what else would you propose to ban?

Nice zealotic straw man you’ve built there...
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
How much would it cost to fence off the whole network? If it's more than NR would have to pay in compensation/settlement to the deceased's family etc., and potentially to any affected staff or passengers, then there's only one decision, and it ain't the fencing. As I said above, human lives do of course have an intrinsic value, that value is not unlimited.

But the vast majority is fenced. Then idiots ignore it.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
The national railway museum for a start. I doubt the publicity does any harm to the bank accounts of heritage railways and/or other relevant attractions either.

The NRM chose to spend a huge amount to restore it to mainline condition. They didn't need to. Do people respond to seeing FS by saying "let's visit the Llangollen Railway" (or wherever) ? I don't know but I doubt it's significant.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
Bluntly, I disagree. My reading of Health and Safety law is that you take all reasonable steps. Network Rail have done just that. I find it difficult if not impossible to see how a reasonable court could rule otherwise.

I’m happy for you to disagree, but I’ve heard too many tales of reasonable courts making unreasonable rulings. I don’t disagree that high fences around the entire network seems disproportionate, but, when faced with an individual case involving a fatality where a person accessed the line at a weak point, I don’t believe that any reasonable court would would agree that Nitwit Rail had done all that was reasonably practicable.

You have to understand that there is a world of difference between Health & Safety law which outlines the responsibilities of an individual, an organisation or an employer, and incident investigation. What we’re talking about here is the latter rather than the former, and in this instance ALL factors, whether causal or contributory, will be taken into consideration and lessons drawn from them. It doesn’t matter how much money Nitwit Rail spend on putting up high fences elsewhere if the point at which access is actually gained is weak. That being so, how could Nitwit Rail possibly say it’s taken all reasonable steps to safeguard that person and prevent them from being killed?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top