Dog died after lead trapped in train doors at station

[Clip]

Must admit I'm confused by what happened here (presumably RAIB will clarify) and how the passenger and her dog were both on the platform but with the dog's lead in the doorway.

Whilst the passenger was putting luggage into the racks at the same time ???

Rosalee Barry was putting luggage onto a rack at Elstree and Borehamwood station, but the doors closed, leaving her and pet Jonty on the platform.

Rather confusing reporting and hopefully it will be clarified when they notice

If a system is hazardous enough that people need training and education to use it, should that system be used in a public facing environment where the untrained public will encounter it?

Trains have been hazardous since the dawn of time along with many other things in life which we dont need training on. Like a cooker.

Could the same thing not happen to a small child?
Could a small child be trapped in doors and dragged? A child would weigh roughly the same as a dog.
Or would it be the fault of the parent in that situation for traveling with luggage and a child at the same time, and they should only pick to travel with one?

The dog didnt get trapped in the doors it was its lead. But yes, anything could happen with a small child including being thrown from its pram or falling down stairs or anything else i could think of but im not sure the comparison is really needed

 

[Sir_Sheep]

Taken from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/train-door-accident-at-elstree-borehamwood-station

“At around 14:00 hrs on Friday 7 September 2018, a Thameslink train service, travelling from St Albans City to Sutton, made its scheduled stop at Elstree & Borehamwood station. The doors opened and a female passenger, with a walking frame and luggage, started to board the train; the passenger was accompanied by her dog. While the passenger was boarding the train, and having placed her luggage on it, the doors closed and the train departed. The passenger and her dog were left on the platform, but the dog’s lead was trapped in the train doors. The dog was dragged by the lead, onto the track and was subsequently found, deceased, in a tunnel a short distance from the station.”

 

[OneOffDave]

How thick is a typical dog lead? Unless it was a heavy rope or whopping great leather thing it might not be detected. Sorry, not always unsympathetic but if she hadn't picked up the animal, or otherwise had so little control over it that it was wandering off with its lead trailing, then it's at her risk that something unfortunate happens to it. Just sorry for the nuisance and inconvenience to staff and other passengers. Rail users should have the common sense to realise that if they have more luggage, pets, handbags, babies and/or cups of coffee than they can manage with their own single pair of hands they might need to exercise some extra caution.

In an ideal world, that would be the case but people can and do make mistakes, particularly when they don't have enough experience/knowledge of an environment to make appropriate informed risk assessments (in the informal way we all do when crossing the road etc). Without appropriate knowledge, some of the environments in my workplace will kill you while looking so benign you'd not guess how high the level of hazard is so non-trained individuals are kept away.

In this instance it was a dog and it's lead. It could just have easily been a child's hand in a situation where the parent believed they had the child under sufficient control but half a step plus two outstretched child's arms can make a massive difference in a short space of time. Could have been a trailing rucksac strap that the owner didn't notice. Do all of us check the length of the trailing ends on all our luggage before we board or alight a train? I don't and I suspect very few other people do. It's very easy to forget how different the world looks to those who know about a particular environment compared to those who don't. In my day job we regularly have to re-emphasise the low level of certain risks and find it hard to understand how people don't 'get' it but our subject matter expertise makes us forget how the issues involved look to people without that knowledge

 

[6Gman]

Taken from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/train-door-accident-at-elstree-borehamwood-station

“At around 14:00 hrs on Friday 7 September 2018, a Thameslink train service, travelling from St Albans City to Sutton, made its scheduled stop at Elstree & Borehamwood station. The doors opened and a female passenger, with a walking frame and luggage, started to board the train; the passenger was accompanied by her dog. While the passenger was boarding the train, and having placed her luggage on it, the doors closed and the train departed. The passenger and her dog were left on the platform, but the dog’s lead was trapped in the train doors. The dog was dragged by the lead, onto the track and was subsequently found, deceased, in a tunnel a short distance from the station.”

I believe the technical expression (and apologies to anyone who finds the words offensive) is "Christ on a bike!"

Walking frame, luggage and a dog!

People really do have to take some responsibility for their own decisions sometimes.

(I have travelled by train with a dog in the past. Lesson 1 is never let the dog loose when boarding/ alighting/ at a station.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe the technical expression (and apologies to anyone who finds the words offensive) is "Christ on a bike!"

A bike *as well*?

 

[Dieseldriver]

You are right that you have to go back if you cannot see. You would have to:

1. Call signaller to advise you are having dispatch problems and need to close doors from somewhere other than your cab.
2. Make a PA to advise passengers of the delay.
3. Walk back 4 or 8 coaches as required.
4. Close the doors.
5. Go back to the cab.

Normally this would all told take me about 4-5 minutes, depending how long it takes the signaller to answer. Sufficient then to probably fail PPM and require an explanation to the Performance Department as to why.

Now imagine you have a defective monitor at the 12 car stop position at a major station just outside London. And every driver is doing that on every train in the peak!

If every Driver did do that then they would correctly be fulfilling their biggest and most important obligation, safety. Its not up to us as Drivers to worry about performance in these situations, we are entrusted with the safety of passengers/other staff and that is the top priority.
If the correct and safe course of action results in delays then that shows a deficiency in the system, not the Driver.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Does it really need the expense of an investigation.

Perhaps you would rather wait until another person is killed before we have an investigation? Perhaps its not worth investigating any near misses?

 

[74A]

You are right that you have to go back if you cannot see. You would have to:

1. Call signaller to advise you are having dispatch problems and need to close doors from somewhere other than your cab.
2. Make a PA to advise passengers of the delay.
3. Walk back 4 or 8 coaches as required.
4. Close the doors.
5. Go back to the cab.

Normally this would all told take me about 4-5 minutes, depending how long it takes the signaller to answer. Sufficient then to probably fail PPM and require an explanation to the Performance Department as to why.

Now imagine you have a defective monitor at the 12 car stop position at a major station just outside London. And every driver is doing that on every train in the peak!

Not going to relevant in this situation..Thameslink train with in cab monitors

 

[Muzer]

Absolutely warrants an investigation. PTI deaths are now the only passenger deaths the heavy rail industry has had for the past 11 years in this country (at least, that were within the railway's control; I'm not talking about people dying on the train from a medical incident or suicides). Each PTI incident should be investigated, to work out how we can reduce this figure to zero just as we have (touch wood!) with fatalities from crashes for the past 11 years.

The thing I've been most shocked by is how in so many recent PTI incidents, so many members of staff didn't know it was possible for the interlocking to fail to detect trapped objects. I mean, why did drivers think they had to do the final check?!

 

[Bletchleyite]

How do you do that on a 700 ?

Don't they have porter buttons?

 

[74A]

I must say its quite a strange scenario. You would have thought if you dropped the lead inside it would naturally fall out as the train floor level is usually higher than the platform. I can see how the driver might not see the lead which are typically small and narrow. They are looking for larger objects such as people or dogs.

 

[duffield]

Probably stirring up a hornet's nest but...
A guard might well have had a better chance of seeing what was going on before it was too late.
A guard could possibly have helped this lady with her dog, walking frame and luggage so there would be no risk.
But we're told that having a guard is not necessary for safety....

 

[jopsuk]

alternatively, it's a good argument for platform staff

 

[Bletchleyite]

alternatively, it's a good argument for platform staff

True, dispatchers would be a better bet for stopping this kind of thing happening than a single guard.

 

[edwin_m]

It is a worry that this should have happened with a 700. In a report into a similar incident on a 350 it was stated that the door design was no longer current and the more recent design was more effective at detecting trapped objects. The 700 will be the more recent design.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is a worry that this should have happened with a 700. In a report into a similar incident on a 350 it was stated that the door design was no longer current and the more recent design was more effective at detecting trapped objects. The 700 will be the more recent design.

No design is going to detect a dog lead.

 

[jon0844]

How do you do that on a 700 ?

I guess you have to shut/lock all the doors then walk back to check. This would actually be quite a quick way to do things.

On a 717 the doors are shut one by one with a dedicated close mode so once a door is closed it stays closed. But it wouldn't likely be considered safe to walk along and lean inside to press the close button so I don't know how that would work.

I guess you'd just lock all the doors and then walk the length of the train as per a 700.

What you can't do is spot someone who runs up to try and get on and falls down the side before you've started moving. For that you'd need platform staff to check before giving right away, so while one train could make special arrangements if there's any other issue at that station/platform then you'd simply not call there until the issue is addressed.

Safety first at the end of the day.

In this case, not only would a lead not likely be detected but the lead might not even be visible on a small screen in the cab. Sounds like it is simply a tragic accident.

 

[ComUtoR]

Not going to relevant in this situation..Thameslink train with in cab monitors

Stock type is VERY relevant.

1) Has there been a increase in the door edge sensitivity and any changes to the design of new stock based on previous RAIB reports into trap and drags.
2) What impact, does a in-cab CCTV have compared to traditional DOO monitor design.
3) CCTV quality
4) number of screens the Driver needs to observe.
5) 700 Door close procedure and technical limitations of the doors/stock
6) Updated PTI policy for new stock

Don't they have porter buttons?

Nope

I guess you have to shut/lock all the doors then walk back to check. This would actually be quite a quick way to do things.

And would be against the rule book and company policy. You cannot close the doors if you cannot carry out a train safety check. Potentially you could close the doors on someone.

What you can't do is spot someone who runs up to try and get on and falls down the side before you've started moving. For that you'd need platform staff to check before giving right away, so while one train could make special arrangements if there's any other issue at that station/platform then you'd simply not call there until the issue is addressed.

Exactly. How can you close the doors without checking someone is trapped and then take power without the ability to check the dispatch corridor and carry out a train safety check.

In this case, not only would a lead not likely be detected but the lead might not even be visible on a small screen in the cab. Sounds like it is simply a tragic accident.

Almost an exact copy of the West Wickham incident. Change dog for person and this thread would be 10+ pages already and posted when the incident happened and not weeks later.

 

[edwin_m]

No design is going to detect a dog lead.

From the RAIB report into the Notting Hill Gate trap and drag incident:

The thickness of the bag at the point where it was trapped was about 3 mm.
...
For comparison purposes, the RAIB repeated the tests with the bag on a more modern ‘S’ stock unit, which has been used on London Underground’s subsurface lines since 2010. The S stock door system incorporates a more sensitive object detection mechanism, and in this case the bag did not allow the interlock circuit to make, which would have prevented the train from starting.

The RAIB summary doesn't say how thick the dog lead was, but 3mm is quite possible.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

No design is going to detect a dog lead.

A particularly awful incident in Holborn (LT) when a young lad got his anorak toggle caught in the doors and was dragged along to his end....1997

 

[ComUtoR]

The thing I've been most shocked by is how in so many recent PTI incidents, so many members of staff didn't know it was possible for the interlocking to fail to detect trapped objects. I mean, why did drivers think they had to do the final check?!

It's how we were taught and what was believed at the time. Only through incident has this all come to light.

 

[Panupreset]

If every Driver did do that then they would correctly be fulfilling their biggest and most important obligation, safety. Its not up to us as Drivers to worry about performance in these situations, we are entrusted with the safety of passengers/other staff and that is the top priority.
If the correct and safe course of action results in delays then that shows a deficiency in the system, not the Driver.

You are entirely correct. But systems such as the railway do not exist to be safe. They exist to provide a service and generate revenue. But they must be safe. And that is the performance versus safety conundrum that many business and organisations face.

Absolutely warrants an investigation. PTI deaths are now the only passenger deaths the heavy rail industry has had for the past 11 years in this country (at least, that were within the railway's control; I'm not talking about people dying on the train from a medical incident or suicides). Each PTI incident should be investigated, to work out how we can reduce this figure to zero just as we have (touch wood!) with fatalities from crashes for the past 11 years.

The thing I've been most shocked by is how in so many recent PTI incidents, so many members of staff didn't know it was possible for the interlocking to fail to detect trapped objects. I mean, why did drivers think they had to do the final check?!

Zero policies are very often bad. If you say zero is your aim, it must be achievable. If you exceed zero then you have a problem within your system. Also zero policies encourage non reporting and covering up of incidents.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The first question that should be considered going forward is how realistic is it to expect such thin items as dog leads, bag straps and so on to be detected by sensitive door edges on a reliable basis, ie each and every time without significantly affecting punctuality. If this is genuinely possible then that technology needs to be rolled out ASAP though clearly there is a debate to be had about the cost of retro-fitting existing trains.

But if this proves to be an unrealistic expectation, and reliable operation on LU "S" stock is not guaranteed to translate to National Rail operations, then we are left with the dispatch process. Traditional guarded operation will normally prevent situations arising in the first place or else allow the guard to stop the train as soon as a problem becomes evident. Move to DOO and it gets more difficult. If an apparent "door trapping" isn't detected either by the door edges or by the driver's view of whichever monitors are in use (platform or cab) then an accident of some sort is all but inevitable: this stems from a DOO driver's inability to monitor the Platform Train Interface once the train is moving and there is no way to overcome this shortcoming without undermining the driver's ability to monitor the line ahead of them.

What is needed is the ability to continue surveillance of the PTI beyond the initial instant of departure. It seems to me this is only possible by involving an additional member of staff and that person would still need the ability to definitively stop the train if required. Given sufficient spending on platform-to-train communication it could be possible for a platform dispatcher to provide this enhancement of safety but how much would it cost to fit that equipment and staff every platform? Could it be that the best way to avoid such situations is in fact to have guards on every train with DOO-style monitors removed from the driver's cab and relocated to a guard's control position? Again the question of cost arises.

As to the frequency of such incidents I would add that dispatch incidents involving guarded trains are more likely to be reported since failing to do so when both guard and driver are involved will be exposed as an attempted cover-up should an incident subsequently be reported by other means (like passengers via social media). With DOO at unstaffed platforms there is a much greater temptation for the driver not to report a near miss incident even though the possibility of passenger reporting is just as high. As such it is perfectly possible that the rate of dispatch incidents on DOO trains is higher than reported. RAIB also has to carry out far more investigations into DOO dispatch incidents than non-DOO.

There is of course a price to each and every level of safety. What is missing at the moment is an open discussion, both within and outside the railway industry, about PTI safety in all situations. If DOO is deemed to be necessary then those who advocate it really should be more active in justifying the approach to safety rather than just the savings in staff costs. Up to now all we have had are unreliable reports which were designed to reach a particular conclusion rather than demonstrate a genuinely robust scientific approach.

 

[bishdunster]

So yet another entrapment issue, it is totally irrelevant that the passenger had a dog a walking frame and luggage. It makes my blood boil to see this happening as a DIRECT result of cost cutting measures, and I speak as an ex railwayman of the old school. This would not have happened if we had sufficient staff on stations, i.e. the porter assisting the passenger safely onto the train, then giving the GUARD (remember them???) the tip to give the driver the right away FFS lets get back to proper safe maning levels !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Darandio]

A particularly awful incident in Holborn (LT) when a young lad got his anorak toggle caught in the doors and was dragged along to his end....1997

I remember that, only 8-9 years old i think. Terrible.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The first question that should be considered going forward is how realistic is it to expect such thin items as dog leads, bag straps and so on to be detected by sensitive door edges on a reliable basis, ie each and every time without significantly affecting punctuality. If this is genuinely possible then that technology needs to be rolled out ASAP though clearly there is a debate to be had about the cost of retro-fitting existing trains.

But if this proves to be an unrealistic expectation, and reliable operation on LU "S" stock is not guaranteed to translate to National Rail operations

Is S-stock guaranteed to detect something as thin as a dog lead or hoodie cord? I very much doubt it is.

 

[Chrisgr31]

This story did feature in The Metro when it first occurred. I suspect an issue here is not that the dog lead was trapped but that the driver took power with the lady and dog so close to the train. Presumably the driver should have seen the lady and dog and wondered why they were close to the train.

You can question why there was a lady with luggage, zimmer and dog but if she doesnt go by train how is she is meant to travel around? If stations had staff then of course someone could have helped her board, had their been a guard or OBS they might have seen her and helped her board.

I wonder if the RAIB are doing any research in to the time of day of these incidents. I get the impression most occur off-peak when you would think the biggest risk is in the peak as thats when there are more people around.

I suspect thought there is greater risk with less people as there are fewer people to assist, to pull the door open or activate the emergency stop

 

[swj99]

The only way to stop ALL trap and drags is much more sensitive edge detection, which is certainly possible. The problem with this is that it will cause countless hours of delays as all sorts of minor things (trapped leaves for instance) stop doors closing.

Out of interest, and for the purposes of comparison, how many trap and drag incidents happened per year on slam door trains ?

...........if she hadn't picked up the animal, or otherwise had so little control over it that it was wandering off with its lead trailing......................

Where does it say the dog was wandering off or that she picked it up ? I've read several articles about this regrettable incident, and none mention either of those things. What they seem to be saying is that the woman put her bag on the train, but then the train doors closed, trapping her hand, and the dog's lead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of interest, and for the purposes of comparison, how many trap and drag incidents happened per year on slam door trains ?

I don't know but I suspect very few, as the door would always be closed by someone right next to it who would see if something was stuck in it. Trap and drag incidents are more something that occurs where door closure is done remotely, be that DOO or by a guard.

 

[GrimShady]

The weird thing is this wouldn't have happened with slam door stock. Not that I'm implying we should bring that back, merely stating that a system designed to be safer has it's flaws.