Incident at Wandsworth Common 07/08/16

[96tommy]

Was very sad to hear of this and condolences to Simon's family and friends. Nice to see a fundraiser do its rounds on social media and on the forum here.

Only echo the words of the above but is window hanging really necessary. You can see out the window and hear the train. There are signs telling you not to do it but now we have seen the impact it can have, follow rules in the future, signs are not there to be ignored.

 

[40135]

I was out on 60103 on Sunday. There were announcements made to ask people not to windowhang as NR says it is 'unacceptable'. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the end of it on the main line.

As for myself, main line I only generally stick an eye out, if that makes sense. Sometimes lean out. Often hold my camera out.

I'm going to stop doing all of that.

This poor lad obviously knew the railways and was used to windowhanging and yet it still happened to him. If it happened to him it could happen to any one of us.

Yes, it's rare, but windowhanging is also unnecessary as others have pointed out. It's something of a novelty these days, sure, and there's an attraction in that, but we can hear the loco just fine inside the carriage. We could even stand at the droplight without leaning out and listen, enjoying the breeze and the close proximity to the tracks speeding by looking wonderfully fluid. We don't need to put ourselves in danger. This is a sobering accident.

I'm just glad that my last experience of main line windowhanging was behind a loco I have been waiting 22 years to experience. Kind of apt, really. It's a bit different on pres lines - though still dangerous, they're much more concentrated, and staff often expect windowhanging. It's also easier to become acquainted with proximity of infrastructure.

RIP Simon, and condolences to his friends and family.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

As a track engineer, I can assist:

. . . . normal minimum clearance . . . . [etc.]

Thank you very much for such a well informned explication.

One other factor which I guess has been taken into consideration is lineside vegetation. I realise that this is apparently not a factor in this very sad and distressing incident, but as others have mentioned, does radically reduce the envelope of clearance, and which can impact on regular train movements by stock with opening droplights.
One illustraion I'm very familar with is the daily 12:00 HST departure from Kings Cross, which at this time of year is well filled with tourists unfamilar with our network, our stock and our procedures. And at this relatively warn time of year, there is little incentive to close the droplight windows. A few hours after rushing though Hertdfordshire in springtime, both of its sides will be scraping between rapidly growing birch, ash and sycamore though the Killecrankie Pass (and also through it's narrow and reachable tunnel). At linespeed, many of those branches can harm a person exposed by just a few millimeters from the window line. Even a face within the droplight window can be injured by branches swinging back though the open window.

[This is simply a neutral comment of fact, which does not have a bearing on the terrible and saddening incident in the Wandsworth area.]

 

[Sprinter153]

Condolences to the family and friends of the chap in question. May he rest in peace.

The rest of you - STOP PUTTING YOUR HEADS AND ARMS OUT OF WINDOWS!

I've known two cases like this over the years - one very similar, one involving a chap now known as "Stumpy" to his friends.

I lose track of the number of times I tell people (usually "enthusiasts") to get their heads in, that if anything hits them it will hurt, and I'll have paperwork. (Also, they are making the train look like a horse box!)

Most do so grudgingly (I know as soon as I walk away it will be back out), some are downright abusive, because they think I'm a grumpy old jobsworth spoiling their day out.

I'm not, I'm just trying to prevent them having live-changing injuries.

It's dangerous. Stop doing it. Tell your friends to stop doing it.

My learned colleague has hit the nail on the head. It's a sad incident but an unnecessary one. I too have no qualms in stopping people hanging and telling them exactly why. I know Pathfinder Tours have come in for a lot of stick from the rowdy 'flailing' brigade for having zero tolerance but it's necessary.

I know a few colleagues know the chap in question. I didn't, but as has been said, every railway death is a sad one. I can't help but feel, though, that, being a member of railway staff, he should probably have known better.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Apart from guards to see trains away and drivers to see when shunting stock, do any other railway functions have a legitimate reason for hanging out the window?

 

[QueensCurve]

Unfortunately, the Fail now has a picture of this young chap window hanging that has been lifted off Facebook.

The picture clearly depicts an unwise act but has not been confirmed to the individual involved.

 

[Bromley boy]

Apart from guards to see trains away and drivers to see when shunting stock, do any other railway functions have a legitimate reason for hanging out the window?

Drivers may also lean out to double check train length after departing a station, and for route learning purposes to check when a particular train length is clear of a junction, speed board etc. Potentially risky as inevitably you are not looking in the direction of travel.

I for one will exercise more caution when doing so in future given what happened at the weekend.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's a bit different on pres lines - though still dangerous, they're much more concentrated, and staff often expect windowhanging. It's also easier to become acquainted with proximity of infrastructure.

It really isn't just infrastructure you have to worry about. A piece of ballast hitting you at 40mph will cause you life-changing injuries if it hits you in the wrong place.

This incident has reminded me of Roald Dahl's guide to railway safety, and those who know me on Facebook will know exactly which illustration from it I mean. I don't want to derail this thread but it isn't worth setting up a new one. I can't help but wonder whether a repeat of that booklet- something that BR gave to all of us at school in the early 90s- wouldn't be such a bad idea.

RIP Simon, and condolences to his friends and family.

Indeed, seconded, it is absolutely heartbreaking.

 

[QueensCurve]

Are we all joining in the popular grief train going on the attack on the papers while blinding ignoring this was no-ones fault but his own? Droplights are not inherently dangerous, today thousands of people today have happily gone around the UK in Mk2 and 3 stock and none have been killed.

Its tragic, for those that know him its horrible, it horrific. Its also entirely self-caused.

As someone who has to work the AGA hauled sets (both big and little) I'll be relieved if this has a decent impact on windowhanging.

The verdict you rarely hear from an inquest these days is death by misadventure.

In this case leaning out of the window is a misadventure. The question is whether the railway should do more to prevent it: they are legally bound to take all practical steps to prevent death or injury.

In this case, I find it difficult to imagine that RAIB will not recommend that TOCs prevent, where possible, droplights being opened wide while the train is in motion.

There is a difference between leaning far out of the droplight on a fast moving train and using it on a stationary or slow moving train to have a peak at the signal aspect or infrastructure. I suggest the term "window hanging" should be reserved for the former.

I for one lament the passing of the droplight for sensible enquiry as to why your train has stopped unexpectedly. The stop on green invariably being the start of a long wait.

It is regrettable that modern multiple units no longer offer glazed bulkheads to see the driver's eye view. Perhaps on trains with WiFi and forward-facing cameras the cameras could be streamed for passengers to view if they saw fit. This would provide a safer alternative to the droplight. I recently traveled on a Finnair A319 that streamed the forward facing cameras to information screens during the take-off and landing runs on flights between Helsinki and Ivalo.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

My understanding is that this would make things more, rather than less dangerous overall. With a handle on the inside it is comparatively easy to force the door open against the central door locking. I believe that this is why the interior handles were plated over in the first place - at least on Mk.3 stock.

That argument is null and void since the trains have now been fitted with remote central locking.

This followed many years of open door accidents being the main cause of passenger fatalities. BR did little about it until a series of exposes by The Observer about such events.

 

[40135]

It really isn't just infrastructure you have to worry about. A piece of ballast hitting you at 40mph will cause you life-changing injuries if it hits you in the wrong place.

This incident has reminded me of Roald Dahl's guide to railway safety, and those who know me on Facebook will know exactly which illustration from it I mean. I don't want to derail this thread but it isn't worth setting up a new one. I can't help but wonder whether a repeat of that booklet- something that BR gave to all of us at school in the early 90s- wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Not doubting what you say, but is there any record of this ever happening?

The Roald Dahl book is amazing, I've got it somewhere. Agree that it should be reinstated.

 

[QueensCurve]

Slightly related, but with a lot of overgrown vegetation around, even sticking your hand out of the window at speed ends up with being whacked by overgrown bushes etc and it is painful...

Insects in the eye are no barrel of laughs either. I have had a few of those over the years, mercifully with no lasting ill-effects.

 

[Cowley]

Insects in the eye are no barrel of laughs either. I have had a few of those over the years, mercifully with no lasting ill-effects.

In 1988 when I was about 15 I had my head out of the window of a loco hauled train going through teignmouth, I was about three coaches back when I saw a spark from the brakes come off the loco and gently float, still glowing all the way back down the train until it hit me square in the left eye, the next morning somewhat in pain I had to go to Exeter eye hospital with my father to have it dug out, by then it had become rusty and quite difficult to remove. I still can't see as well out of that eye compared to the other and needless to say have been very careful ever since.

 

[Phil.]

The verdict you rarely hear from an inquest these days is death by misadventure.

In this case leaning out of the window is a misadventure. The question is whether the railway should do more to prevent it: they are legally bound to take all practical steps to prevent death or injury.

In this case, I find it difficult to imagine that RAIB will not recommend that TOCs prevent, where possible, droplights being opened wide while the train is in motion.

There is a difference between leaning far out of the droplight on a fast moving train and using it on a stationary or slow moving train to have a peak at the signal aspect or infrastructure. I suggest the term "window hanging" should be reserved for the former.

I for one lament the passing of the droplight for sensible enquiry as to why your train has stopped unexpectedly. The stop on green invariably being the start of a long wait.

It is regrettable that modern multiple units no longer offer glazed bulkheads to see the driver's eye view. Perhaps on trains with WiFi and forward-facing cameras the cameras could be streamed for passengers to view if they saw fit. This would provide a safer alternative to the droplight. I recently traveled on a Finnair A319 that streamed the forward facing cameras to information screens during the take-off and landing runs on flights between Helsinki and Ivalo.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That argument is null and void since the trains have now been fitted with remote central locking.

This followed many years of open door accidents being the main cause of passenger fatalities. BR did little about it until a series of exposes by The Observer about such events.

As someone who was there when the MkIIIs were introduced I can give you the real - and surreal - reason why the original inside opening locks were removed. The original MkIIIs on the prototype HST had fixed door windows that could only be dropped by the activation of the lock by a carriage key. Passengers were so used to reaching out to gain access to the outer handle to open the door that when they couldn't pull the window down they though that pulling the handle (the handles weren't like the normal inside locks as fitted on S.R. EPBs etc but a proper marked "pull to open" handle" which they thought/assumed opened the window. After a few weeks in service on the Bristol route it was realised that passengers were difficult to educate to modern ways so it was off with the handles and hello opening door windows.

Passengers falling out of train doors tended to be passengers p155ing about.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Passengers were so used to reaching out to gain access to the outer handle to open the door

For whatever reason, it required far less effort to drop the window and use the exterior handle than the internal handle. Regular travellers in the 1970s were well used to this. I don't ever recall the HSTs even having an internal handle. I'm not sure about the Mk2s.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The MkIID coaches on the ECML had interior handles to start with but after a couple of incidents these were quickly removed.

One of them lay in the C&W office at KX for some years afterwards, together with one of the original tape machines that was fitted for the auto train announcing. Another spectacular failure.

 

[QueensCurve]

Passengers falling out of train doors tended to be passengers p155ing about.

I know that was the official BR line at the time.

Whether it was true or not is as far I know an evidence vacuum. At that time my preferred way to travel was to stand in the vestibule I always checked the door wasn't in danger of opening as we departed.

Modification to the stock as a practical safety measure then prevailed over the argument that such deaths were just due to misadventure. Something we may find in relation to the present incident.

 

[Tetchytyke]

For whatever reason, it required far less effort to drop the window and use the exterior handle than the internal handle

Yep, I remember when the 308s were used out of Leeds the internal handles were extremely difficult to open, it was always easier to just lean out and use the outside handle.

I have a vague memory of the HSTs having an internal handle in the late 80s.

Most of the fatalities were "misadventure" (i.e. messing about or leaning on the door whilst in motion) but the simple solution was central door locking and no internal handles.

I can well imagine that barring the windows- as has happened with the MkIIs used on the Cumbrian Coast because of long-standing restrictions on that line- will be the solution. I think it would be reasonable too.

 

[snowball]

Passengers falling out of train doors tended to be passengers p155ing about.

I seem to remember a story that there was a concentration of incidents in the Trent Valley area where people who had been drinking from Euston needed to visit the toilet and opened the wrong door.

 

[QueensCurve]

I seem to remember a story that there was a concentration of incidents in the Trent Valley area where people who had been drinking from Euston needed to visit the toilet and opened the wrong door.

The Trent Valley was implicated by The Observer's use of the embarrassing term "Tamworth Triangle".

 

[BRX]

This is a very sad story and my condolences to anyone here who knew this guy.

It seems to me that the sensible response to this, rather than demands for all opening windows to be locked closed, is for those of us who sometimes put their head out of a window to see it as a sobering reminder of the dangers.

It's something I do from time to time and enjoy and I'll miss it once all the Mk2/3 stock is gone. At anything other than a very low speed I never lean out by more than about 50mm, I never lean out looking backwards and if it's a section of track with foliage alongside, I am very cautious about looking out or even having my face close to the opening.

I'll be even more careful now but will still enjoy it as a way to get some fresh air, see what's going on when the train is at a stop, hear and the see loco if of any interest and generally feel a bit connected to the outside world.

The post a few pages back about how clearances are calculated allowed confirmed what I (thought I) knew - that standard clearances are more than enough to accommodate someone leaning out a bit, but that sometimes they are reduced and therefore have to be watched out for. The minimum possible clearances (100/50/25mm) are quite a bit smaller than I would have thought through - definitely something to bear in mind.

It's clear the young man involved in this incident also enjoyed open windows - I didn't know him but would imagine that he would rather the result of this was that fellow enthusiasts were a bit more careful, instead of the activity becoming completely banned in all circumstances.

As others have said, the risks have to be seen in context. It's overwhelmingly more dangerous to let people drive cars in close proximity to pedestrians and cyclists than to have trains with windows that open - windows that invariably have notices informing people that it's dangerous to lean out of them.

 

[Temple Meads]

This is a very sad story and my condolences to anyone here who knew this guy.

It seems to me that the sensible response to this, rather than demands for all opening windows to be locked closed, is for those of us who sometimes put their head out of a window to see it as a sobering reminder of the dangers.

It's something I do from time to time and enjoy and I'll miss it once all the Mk2/3 stock is gone. At anything other than a very low speed I never lean out by more than about 50mm, I never lean out looking backwards and if it's a section of track with foliage alongside, I am very cautious about looking out or even having my face close to the opening.

I'll be even more careful now but will still enjoy it as a way to get some fresh air, see what's going on when the train is at a stop, hear and the see loco if of any interest and generally feel a bit connected to the outside world.

The post a few pages back about how clearances are calculated allowed confirmed what I (thought I) knew - that standard clearances are more than enough to accommodate someone leaning out a bit, but that sometimes they are reduced and therefore have to be watched out for. The minimum possible clearances (100/50/25mm) are quite a bit smaller than I would have thought through - definitely something to bear in mind.

It's clear the young man involved in this incident also enjoyed open windows - I didn't know him but would imagine that he would rather the result of this was that fellow enthusiasts were a bit more careful, instead of the activity becoming completely banned in all circumstances.

As others have said, the risks have to be seen in context. It's overwhelmingly more dangerous to let people drive cars in close proximity to pedestrians and cyclists than to have trains with windows that open - windows that invariably have notices informing people that it's dangerous to lean out of them.

An excellent, well balanced post - I concur wholeheartedly.

 

[Nippy]

The picture clearly depicts an unwise act but has not been confirmed to the individual involved.

Fair enough, but I was just showing what the Mail alleges.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The daily mail does get a lot of stick on this forum. It publishes the occasional good article but there's plenty of crap which has been spewed by it.

Most of what I read on the Mail website is utter dross. I like looking at the girls on the side bar

 

[contrex]

Most of what I read on the Mail website is utter dross. I like looking at the girls on the side bar

This is exactly how I feel.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

We were involved in a horrible incident involving a fatality at a motor racing event a few years ago and the Mail chose to report it, seemingly only for the shock value, with loads of misleading quotes that implied that the incident had taken place in front of thousands of witnesses and crashes were common at the event - fortunately the crash took place away from most audience areas and was the only major accident of the day.

Fact is, that is how journalism works. People read articles with shocking headlines - "passenger fatally injured on train" versus "passenger decapitated by oncoming train" - unfortunately the writers never consider what effect seeing these headlines might have on those who know the victim or were involved in the incidents.

 

[Busaholic]

I told this story some time ago, but think it's worth reiterating.
In the early 1970s I was commuting daily between Sittingbourne and London. On an evening rush hour train from Victoria a couple and approx. 4 year old son were sitting opposite me, in an open carriage with door on each side, doors which could be simply opened from inside the carriage at any point in the journey i.e. what is now referred to as slam-door stock.
The child is allowed by his parents to go and stand by the door and start fiddling with the door handle as the train leaves Victoria, bound for Bromley South first stop. The person sat next to me, beside the door, decides to do the English thing and pretend they haven't noticed anything. I got angry and demanded that the parents restrain their child whereupon I got the response from the father 'if he falls out I shall sue the railway company.' I then saw red and said I would pull the emergency cord if they didn't remove their child - I think I flashed my London Transport staff pass at the same time, in the hope that they might think I could cause them problems (after all, BR had been in existence since 1948, which seemed to have escaped their attention, so they couldn't be expected to know the difference). It did the trick, though, and they remained seated and silent until getting off at Bromley. I like to think I gave an appropriate glare as they got off! A very likely fatality saved I felt, but it certainly made me think how stupid it was that such an occurrence was possible.

 

[43096]

I have a vague memory of the HSTs having an internal handle in the late 80s.

Your memory is playing tricks on you!

 

[Mojo]

I was on the 14.00 from Victoria to Brighton today and a HMRI inspector was taking photos of the droplight window and making notes.

 

[Bald Rick]

I was on the 14.00 from Victoria to Brighton today and a HMRI inspector was taking photos of the droplight window and making notes.

RAIB surely?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

RAIB surely?

No mention on the RAIB website of them investigating it

 

[Bromley boy]

No mention on the RAIB website of them investigating it

Perhaps a silly question, would an event like this be in the RAIB's remit as an "accident", or would it be classed more along the lines of a fatality owing to trespass/suicide which they do not routinely investigate?