Network Rail to be prosecuted

[GB]

Indeed!

 

[142094]

I may be considered cruel, but I still think they were the 'architects of their own terrible end' as they ignored the very clear warning lights. As they were in a rush, any attempt to put more words on (such as saying that if the lights remain on, another train is coming) would have been pointless as they wouldn't have read ANY of it.

I accept a locked gate may have helped, but if someone is sufficiently desperate to get on a train, who says that someone else might not try and force the gate open, or even jump over it? There has to be a limit to how much you can do to protect people from themselves.

I have to agree with you - there has to be a point where nothing more can be done to prevent people from making mistakes and putting themselves in danger. It would be both very difficult and very costly to try and remove all danger from a railway line, and at some point people have to take final responsibility for their actions.

 

[Minilad]

I have to agree with you - there has to be a point where nothing more can be done to prevent people from making mistakes and putting themselves in danger. It would be both very difficult and very costly to try and remove all danger from a railway line, and at some point people have to take final responsibility for their actions.

Unfortunately this is something that seems to be going out of fashion. Someone always has to be at fault and in cases where it is a young person involved people tend to want to protect their memory and try to deflect blame onto others

 

[Greeny]

It’s a sad fact that when it comes to railways, the British Public is, frankly, stupid and cannot be relied upon to look after its own safety. There has to come a time when road/rail/and other operators simply cannot reasonably do, or be expected to do any more to protect people from their own stupidity.

G.

 

[Tomnick]

Now people can be locked into the railway boundary if they're on the foot crossing and a train activates it.

Hooray for safety. Hearts > Heads.

Looking at the current installation, with no signs of miniature red/green lights, I'd guess that the wickets are now locked by the crossing keeper before the protecting signals are cleared (two or three minutes prior to the train's arrival (?) - which I suppose is ok now that there appears to be a footbridge as an alternative route), instead of the red light being displayed 20-odd seconds before the arrival of a train. Hooray for safety - but at the cost of convenience for the rest of us who are capable of following instructions and using the equipment provided to cross the line safely!

 

[Bald Rick]

Looking at the current installation, with no signs of miniature red/green lights, I'd guess that the wickets are now locked by the crossing keeper before the protecting signals are cleared (two or three minutes prior to the train's arrival)

Correct.

Every public highway / public right of way level crossing on the network that has lockable gates / barriers is supervised by a signalman or crossing keeper either on site or remotely via CCTV. In the rare event that someone is 'locked in' it is, usually, because of a signaller error. Such incidents are taken very seriously.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

How was it a health and safety breach? That the girls didn't stop, look and listen? That they didn't pay attention? Hmm...

 

[317666]

I believe the current set-up at Elsenham station is a footbridge, road crossing gates operated manually by the crossing keeper, and pedestrian gates which lock automatically when a train approaches. From what I've heard, the footbridge at Elsenham was very expensive and had to be built to a special design, when after the accident, surely a light-up sign saying "DO NOT CROSS - SECOND TRAIN APPROACHING" like on some open crossings would have sufficed as an extra precaution? Considering that they were hit by an oncoming train whilst running for the one in the platform, it would make a difference potentially. Certainly no reason at all for Network Rail to be sued as far as I can see.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

I believe the current set-up at Elsenham station is a footbridge, road crossing gates operated manually by the crossing keeper, and pedestrian gates which lock automatically when a train approaches. From what I've heard, the footbridge at Elsenham was very expensive and had to be built to a special design, when after the accident, surely a light-up sign saying "DO NOT CROSS - SECOND TRAIN APPROACHING" like on some open crossings would have sufficed as an extra precaution? Considering that they were hit by an oncoming train whilst running for the one in the platform, it would make a difference potentially. Certainly no reason at all for Network Rail to be sued as far as I can see.

Bit too careful? Network Rail have money to spend on things that will be of more use, not because two girls didn't pay attention to the railway.

 

[Bald Rick]

The bridge was £900k - about normal for one of that height. It's a lot of steel.

The gates do not lock automatically, but are locked magnetically by the crossing keeper from his cabin; he then confirms the crossing is clear before giving the release to Cambridge PSB.

Incidentally, there are still regular reports of locals jumping over the locked gates to get to across - I've seen it with my own eyes whilst stood there in High Vis gear. But as the gates were locked (and the footbridge too far) I couldn't go after the chap to 'educate' him.

 

[jon0844]

I guessed that would happen (people jumping the gate). So, £1m spent on a bridge, God knows how much they'll be fined, and compensation for the parents.

And that's a result?

 

[BestWestern]

Quite simply, overkill. Perhaps the previous signage wasn't quite as clear as it could have been, in which case surely replacement signs would have done the trick. Evidence of people jumping the gates is a clear indication that the money spent on installing a locking system was a complete waste, and has served no purpose other than to satisfy those who required somebody to blame for this unfortunate accident.

The simple fact here is that we have an ageing, sometimes not ideal railway network in this country, and some of the associated infrastructure is not as idiot-proof as it might be if it were installed now. However, the lack of a way of physically preventing somebody from hurting themselves does not automatically transfer the blame to NR if somebody has chosen to ignore a clear warning. There are a huge number of open foot crossings on the network up and down the country, and the means simply does not exist to remove every element of risk. Signs are in place and people are expected to obey them. The current trend for NR-bashing annoys and concerns me, those responsible for it would to well to take a step back and allow themselves to be properly informed on the realities of this world. Perhaps next time NR should table a serious proposal to immediately close every level crossing in the land and send everybody round the long way, it might help to focus a few minds.

 

[jon0844]

Two girls ignore red lights and an alarm and get killed - and Network Rail is 'clearly' at fault.

Now that people are jumping the gate, is Network Rail still at fault? Or will the same people say 's/he deserved it'?

Personally, I would have thought lights/sirens would be totally sufficient. Given there are many foot crossings with no such warnings, I would have considered that to be perfectly safe. Now we have a lockable gate, so does that mean that the public that needs protecting from itself will use another crossing with an unlocked gate and just blindly walk under a train?

 

[BestWestern]

I wonder how many people have been killed or seriously injured over the years at traffic light-controlled pedestrian road crossings, reliant in the same way on the user obeying a simple 'GO/STOP' light system and brief explanatory signage? There must doubtless have been many incidents of people ignoring the warning system and dashing across the road, failing to spot approaching vehicles and being hit by them, and doubtless some of these people will have been children. How many of these occurrences have resulted in locking gate systems being installed, or million pound footbridges being built, or prosecutions of the local highways department?! It's a very interesting comparison.

 

[Mr Spock]

I wonder how many people have been killed or seriously injured over the years at traffic light-controlled pedestrian road crossings, reliant in the same way on the user obeying a simple 'GO/STOP' light system and brief explanatory signage? There must doubtless have been many incidents of people ignoring the warning system and dashing across the road, failing to spot approaching vehicles and being hit by them, and doubtless some of these people will have been children. How many of these occurrences have resulted in locking gate systems being installed, or million pound footbridges being built, or prosecutions of the local highways department?! It's a very interesting comparison.

I don't know how many accidents have been caused by this but it always amazes me the number of adults that take children across when the "Red" man is showing.

 

[jon0844]

Funny thing is that the latest pedestrian road crossings, costing around £100k each are causing accidents due to poor design. I am not sure if any council has been sued yet.

Sent from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk