I think if they did that and the correspondence came out it would make it very easy to get a corporate manslaughter conviction. Doing the sort of assessment required would mean quite a lot of people knowing about it and lots of bits of paper. They would never get away with it.
-
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!
Guard 'ignored red light and refused to let passengers off'
- Thread starter yorkie
- 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
royaloak
Established Member
Unfortunately I have to agree with you Failed Unit, money is king.
Metro-land I was using the maidenhead HST to argue the opposite side of the argument to yourself
, if the guard hadn't made announcements telling people to stay on the train it could have been a lot worse than the 1 fatality, just shows how the same thing can be used for both sides of a debate
Dolive21, unfortunately everything has a price, when a road scheme is being developed one of the first things they look at is the cost of the scheme against the number of lives saved, the cost I believe (not sure) is about £200,000 per life saved, on the railways I believe it is £1million per life, yes your life is worth more on the railways than the roads.
Metro-land I was using the maidenhead HST to argue the opposite side of the argument to yourself
, if the guard hadn't made announcements telling people to stay on the train it could have been a lot worse than the 1 fatality, just shows how the same thing can be used for both sides of a debate Dolive21, unfortunately everything has a price, when a road scheme is being developed one of the first things they look at is the cost of the scheme against the number of lives saved, the cost I believe (not sure) is about £200,000 per life saved, on the railways I believe it is £1million per life, yes your life is worth more on the railways than the roads.
Failed Unit
Established Member
It does happen, I used to work in a transport planning department looking at road improvements. The figures never showed the blood as bluntly as my example. But it was always down to cost -v- lives saved. If you were not going to save enough lives then the scheme was shelved. I don't know if the people the died following the descision would be able to sue the council, but no-one has tried to my knowledge.
Exactly! Unfortunately, 200 years of operating experience tends to result in rules that have grown by having tweaks and small additions, rather than ones that actually reflect all the factors I listed earlier. And I appreciate the signallers point of view, but it is really just one more factor that should have been taken into consideration.
Odd then that you should go on to use Ladbroke Grove as an example to make a point. Who was it who put the track circuit clips down that day? To save you the trouble of looking it up, I'll tell you - it was a Virgin XC guard travelling passenger on the HST into Paddington. Perhaps you'd like to revise your opinion that guards can prevent passengers getting out and being hit?:roll:
Failed Unit
Established Member
Although I doubt there was much need to put any clips down in this case as the signaller would be pretty aware something had gone badly wrong here.
As it turned out it destroyed so much signalling equipment AND the signaller sat and watched the train speed by the signal - indeed he was criticised for using signals/points to stop the train first rather than DOO, that by that time track circuit clips were irrelevant.
Last edited:
I'm sure that guard was thinking the very same at the time it all happened..................:roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Driver Only Operation was used to prevent the collision?! What are you talking about?
Last edited:
Failed Unit
Established Member
My point is that in this case and many other recent accidents putting down the clips is like letting off a fire extinguser after a fire has burnt itself out.
Interestingly, the reason the signaller didn't hit the 'all signals to danger' interlocking disconnect buttons on that occasion, apart from complete loss of screen display, is that by just throwing signals back (or indeed just flinging track circuit clips down) you can cause the train to brake to a stand in the direct path of trains that have SPADed and set them up on a collision course.
Of course this was taken as dithering by the inquiry and the unions decided it was profit before safety, it was nothing of the kind.
But the particular actions you describe had no bearing on the accident, as its been pointed out the signalling staff were aware in seconds what as going on, and signals were replaced, DOO emergency stops were sent out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The previous, most serious near miss (between an HST and HEX train) was prevented using DOO and replacement of SN120. Please see the inquiry transcripts.
Of course this was taken as dithering by the inquiry and the unions decided it was profit before safety, it was nothing of the kind.
But the particular actions you describe had no bearing on the accident, as its been pointed out the signalling staff were aware in seconds what as going on, and signals were replaced, DOO emergency stops were sent out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The previous, most serious near miss (between an HST and HEX train) was prevented using DOO and replacement of SN120. Please see the inquiry transcripts.
royaloak
Established Member
Why are people saying DOO when they mean CSR!
And indeed this is true - in some accidents, the signalling equipment is destroyed anyway! But Ladbroke Grove is an example of how a Guard can protect several running lines and prevent a train from ploughing into wreckage and/or people. Metroland's contention that Guards are helpless to stop this from happening on the basis of one example (namely one in which a passenger panicked) is at best misleading and should be highlighted as such.
As an aside, the increased use of axle counters is rendering track circuit clips useless and it's not something I am comfortable with. In track circuit areas, they are a reliable way of protecting your train by showing a section is occupied. In axle counter areas, said clips do the square root of nothing. I genuinely fear that there will be a serious incident in the near future in an axle counter area which could be prevented in a track circuit area just by the use of a bit of metal across the opposite line.
Ah, now it makes a little bit of sense!!!! Say what you mean and mean what you say!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Somebody has a bit of walking to do! A mile and a quarter to be precise! Who does that if the driver is dead?
Failed Unit
Established Member
Unfortunetly you are right it is a matter of if rather than when.
Accident have happened on absolute block sections when a train has hit a landslide and fouled the other direction, but there way of stopping the train coming in the opposite direction in time.
If you get a accident like Great Heck where the 91 was derailed into the wrong line, if the 66 had been say 5 miles further away in a TC area it may have been possible to stop it. I a Axle counter area it would have been like waiting for a bomb to go off. I remember a Eurostar suffered a simular derailment to Great Heck years ago, the main difference there was anything coming the other direction had time to stop.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Which will take over 15 minutes, as I have said early not much good when a train can do it in 1!
No, it's an illustration of what could've been. That VXC guard did not know that the signalling equipment had been destroyed and for all he knew, there could've been further trains on course to plough into the wreckage. What if a carriage had been foul of a running line which wasn't protected by signals, an oncoming train had ploughed into it killing yet more people and it then came out that the VXC Guard and the FGW Guard made an assumption that the signalling equipment had been destroyed. I hear Wandsworth prison does excellent board, free of charge to the user....
Yes, there are pockets of TCs on AB lines, but there are miles and miles of lines outside station limits with no track circuits (unless its an IBH approach the box and you need one for tail lamp).
Ah, now it makes a little bit of sense!!!! Say what you mean and mean what you say!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Somebody has a bit of walking to do! A mile and a quarter to be precise! Who does that if the driver is dead?
Well yes guards are a requirement on Absolute block lines, nobody has argued any different. With Axle counters, there has to be frequent lineside phones and on the WCML GSM-R
Last edited:
Odd you should mention Great Heck - I was thinking the very same as an example of a preventable incident using clips if only that 66 had been even 5 minutes later. It was a cruel twist of fate.
As for absolute block areas, you're absolutely right. That's why there aren't that many left thank God!
Even so, it had no bearing on that accident, the guard in that instance did not prevent anything. If the signalling kit is destroyed, it reverts to red or lights out - which is treated the same as a red.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Preventable accident with clips? Nonsense, it put all the track circuits down in that area and knocked out the comms to the interlocking at Temple Hirst. As you say, it was just a shame the 66 was so close.
Mate, you've missed GB's point!
It takes time to make a phone call, much longer than it takes to put a clip down on the next running line and remember, seconds count. It may also interest you to learn that many Guards (me included) are not trained on GSM-R so in the event of a dead driver, the GSM-R phone would not be a fat lot of use! You can draw your own conclusions as to my opinion on this........
What did? The original derailment or the carnage that was created when 665** hit the GNER train?
No I don't, it was a DOO (P) train. You are the one that keeps talking about CSR. I'm aware of the differences.
The original derailment knocked out the interlocking.
Could anyone pass Metroland a shovel?
If you go back a few posts and replace all of the 'DOO's with 'CSR's, it will actually make sense! For the avoidance of doubt, DOO stands for Driver Only Operation - it is not a means by which the signaller can communicate with a driver. CSR is Cab Secure Radio and is a means by which the signaller can talk with the driver, and CSR does not only apply to DOO trains....
Selective memory by any chance?
If it was CSR (as YOU orginally said) then being as CSR would have been available both on a DOO service or a service with a guard, DOO in its self did not prevent anything.
Edit: A thank you Ferret, who seems to know what hes talking about!
No, but despite all the bluster nor did any guards in any of those instances?
Yes non-DOO trains have CSR, but in this particular case it was a DOO train with CSR fitted as a consequence of DOO. If the train was not DOO, it wouldn't have had CSR - such as the HSTs operating with guards on the same line. A point which you and Ferret have not quite grasped. In the case of the HSTs the signaller has no luxury of sending a stop command via CSR.
Yes non-DOO trains have CSR, but in this particular case it was a DOO train with CSR fitted as a consequence of DOO. If the train was not DOO, it wouldn't have had CSR - such as the HSTs operating with guards on the same line. A point which you and Ferret have not quite grasped. In the case of the HSTs the signaller has no luxury of sending a stop command via CSR.
- Status