Station platforms, it's gone too far, it's crossed a red line (literally)

[mmh]

Getting back to the actual question:

I believe the RED lines are there to allow room for disembarking passengers to get off the train & move along the platform without being barged by boarding passengers racing for a seat

I'm glad finally someone has said what the real purpose is!

 

[contrex]

Why is being killed the metric? Surely being injured is bad enough?

Injured... decades ago I read of a schoolboy found dead in an EMU compartment with what the South London Press called 'severe head injuries' (quoting the police). An SR staff member told me he'd been leaning out of the window and "his head was off".

 

[Justin Smith]

I can assure you, having dealt during my railway career with far too many incidents where people have come to harm, that it is not rubbish.

I actually said :
This is rubbish. People are well ware of the fact if they get hit by a train they will come off much worse, and anyone with half a brain knows trains cannot come to an instant stop, just like trucks and busses and even cars come to that.
Why do some people seem to think everyone is a moron ? Don't get me wrong some people are incapable of looking after themselves, but if they really are that incapable they shouldn't be let out on their own, after all kids aren't. It is not the job of NR, or indeed society, to dumb down everything to a level where even someone with no common sense at all could not come to harm. It really isn't.

And I stand by it, how thick would someone have to be to think a train could :
1 - swerve to avoid them
2 - come to an instant stop
I do not believe such a person (over the age of about 5) exists. And if they do exist their carer should be with them to keep them from harm, it is not up to Network Rail or anyone else.

Getting back to the actual question:

I believe the RED lines are there to allow room for disembarking passengers to get off the train & move along the platform without being barged by boarding passengers racing for a seat

That sounds reasonable, but if that is the case the "marshalls" had no right to ask me to move because there was no train in disembarking passengers !

The OP appears to feel he has had his life disrupted by being asked to obey a simple instruction that was well within his ability and would cause him no disadvantage

I feel it would cause me some "disadvantage.
Unless I have missed it, nobody has been able to come up with the number of people killed by falling off the platforms at Piccadilly in the last 10 years.
Or did I miss it ?
Is it zero ?

 

[zwk500]

I do not believe such a person (over the age of about 5) exists. And if they to exist their carer should be with them to keep them from harm, it is not up to Network Rail or anyone else.

Regrettably, the law does not agree.

 

[nlogax]

I feel it would cause me some "disadvantage.
Unless I have missed it, nobody has been able to come up with the number of people killed by falling off the platforms at Piccadilly in the last 10 years.
Or did I miss it ?
Is it zero ?

Why do you appear so angry about this? Are we missing something here? I can't imagine getting this worked up about something which is of absolutely minimal consequence to how you go about your life.

 

[Justin Smith]

what would this thread have been like if he'd got stuck in Manchester overnight after some "moron" with "half a brain" couldn't use their "common sense" and had caused services through those platforms to be cancelled?

Oh you are opening a can of worms there, you really are.
Whenever anything happens these days the reaction is to close the railway (or motorway) for a ridiculous length of time.
I remember reading about a railway accident (with at least one fatality) on the LNER in the 1930s and the line was open same day. These days it'd be the next day at the absolute earliest......
That said, it certainly isn't just on the railways that people are so dilatory !
I can remember getting in a huge M1 tail back just north of Tinsley viaduct. When we got to the front it was down to one lane, of four don't forget, so that explained it. BUT ! There was no need for only one lane top be open. A caravan had been smashed up by a truck and its wreckage sprawled over road, I don't see how anyone could even have been injured, but if they had they'd long ago been taken to hospital. The second lane out had a small piece of ex caravan poking into its right hand side by a small amount, in fact it was so small one bloke could have moved it over (only about two feet ! ) and the capacity of the road doubled. But whether it was excessive Health & Safety zeal or because nobody could be arsed it was inexcusable.
And the cost of it : If 3000 vehicles with an average occupancy of 1.5 were delayed by one hour that's 4,500 hours in total, and at the national minimum wage that's £45,000, every hour...

 

[Scott1]

That sounds reasonable, but if that is the case the "marshalls" had no right to ask me to move because there was no train in disembarking passengers !

Simple. Its easier to keep it as a blanket rule. If you get to stand over the line then everyone else can too, and then you've got to move them all back again for the next service. Nip it in the bud, and it's considerably easier for all concerned.

 

[Justin Smith]

Why do you appear so angry about this? Are we missing something here? I can't imagine getting this worked up about something which is of absolutely minimal consequence to how you go about your life.

I admit my tolerance for this kind of thing (being ordered about for no good reason that I can see) has never been high, but after the way we were ordered about during the pandemic it is even lower.....
Then there is the trend which must be fought against, as I have said, sooner or later everything will be banned unless specifically allowed. I already find some people taking that attitude when we are somewhere and they are looking for signs telling them where they are actually allowed to go.

Simple. Its easier to keep it as a blanket rule. If you get to stand over the line then everyone else can too, and then you've got to move them all back again for the next service. Nip it in the bud, and it's considerably easier for all concerned.

Oh I see, lowest common denominator, get 'em used to being told where they can go and when they can do it.....

 

[Iskra]

Those platforms at Man Pic are a mess when busy.

The red lines on their own are not the problem- they are trying so solve a genuine issue. It is simply the attitude/tone/dramatic/confrontational nature of those trying to make it work as intended that is the issue- but with management will (and occasional presence) this could be solved fairly easily with some retraining and occasional reminders that the job is a customer service, not a drill sergeant role.

 

[John Luxton]

Oh you are opening a can of worms there, you really are.
Whenever anything happens these days the reaction is to close the railway (or motorway) for a ridiculous length of time.
I remember reading about a railway accident (with at least one fatality) on the LNER in the 1930s and the line was open same day. These days it'd be the next day at the absolute earliest......
That said, it certainly isn't just on the railways that people are so dilatory !
I can remember getting in a huge M1 tail back just north of Tinsley viaduct. When we got to the front it was down to one lane, of four don't forget, so that explained it. BUT ! There was no need for only one lane top be open. A caravan had been smashed up by a truck and its wreckage sprawled over road, I don't see how anyone could even have been injured, but if they had they'd long ago been taken to hospital. The second lane out had a small piece of ex caravan poking into its right hand side by a small amount, in fact it was so small one bloke could have moved it over (only about two feet ! ) and the capacity of the road doubled. But whether it was excessive Health & Safety zeal or because nobody could be arsed it was inexcusable.
And the cost of it : If 3000 vehicles with an average occupancy of 1.5 were delayed by one hour that's 4,500 hours in total, and at the national minimum wage that's £45,000, every hour...

Have to agree here and I think Jeremy Clarkson had some things to say along this matter somewhat controversially a few years ago. Now everything has to be investigated as a potential crime and forensically examined. I have watched a couple of series of BBC Wales "Crash Detectives" which is quite interesting and goes into some detail at what happens following some nasty road crashes some of which have been proved to be fatals. It is quite intensive work. But I wonder if other countries investigate mishaps in quite the same detail as Britain does?

Germany, France, Italy - how do they do it?

Once upon a time one almost sensed a pride in how quick road and rail services could be got up and running again after a major incident - but that appears to have gone.

In the rush to discover if anyone was to blame the thousands of others caught up in road or rail disruption are forgotten about out.

I have always believed in the greatest good of the greatest number and inconveniencing thousands for the one or two just seems wrong.

I know some will probably come back at me with the "what happens if it was one of your relatives involved" - but that doesn't wash.

I am more likely to held up as a consequence of a railway or road incident than I am to come to a sad end in one.

I think we do as a nation have to look at how things are done in other countries and that could be as to how crowds are dealt with on constricted railway platforms.

 

[zwk500]

Whenever anything happens these days the reaction is to close the railway (or motorway) for a ridiculous length of time.
I remember reading about a railway accident (with at least one fatality) on the LNER in the 1930s and the line was open same day. These days it'd be the next day at the absolute earliest......

The railway regularly reopens at least one line within 1-3 hours of fatalities, although of course it depends on the circumstances of each incident. Get your facts straight before launching into a rant.

 

[John Luxton]

I admit my tolerance for this kind of thing (being ordered about for no good reason that I can see) has never been high, but after the way we were ordered about during the pandemic it is even lower.....
Then there is the trend which must be fought against, as I have said, sooner or later everything will be banned unless specifically allowed. I already find some people taking that attitude when we are somewhere and they are looking for signs telling them where they are actually allowed to go.


Oh I see, lowest common denominator, get 'em used to being told where they can go and when they can do it.....

Very true I am generally a very easy going person but get a yellow / orange coated person start ordering me around I will say something. It is a long time since I had a run in with an authoritarian type and for me these incidences happened whilst pursuing my other transport passion shipping - touch wood the railways have been okay so far but I have only been back into serious rail travel for about 12 months. I suppose there is time for me to fall foul.

On the subject of yellow / orange coated authoritarian figures there is someone I know who volunteered with a certain preserved ship now laid up in Bristol Docks. A really nice chap - but given a yellow waistcoat and put him in charge of mustering passengers on a pier he suddenly became a different sort of person.

 

[Dave91131]

Apologies if this has already been clarified somewhere in the thread already.

When on platforms 13 & 14 at Piccadilly earlier in the year I overheard a conversation between a member of staff and a passenger - member of staff informed passenger that the space between the red and yellow lines is to provide a clear walking route up and down the platform for staff, at a safe distance from the platform edge, and to allow a clear line of sight when dispatching trains.

Hope this helps.

 

[RSimons]

[. . . ] member of staff informed passenger that the space between the red and yellow lines is to provide a clear walking route up and down the platform for staff, at a safe distance from the platform edge, and to allow a clear line of sight when dispatching trains.

It has been decades since I travelled regularly in the UK so I need to ask: would the meaning of the yellow and red lines be clear to a) a frequent traveller and b) a casual traveller?

 

[Falcon1200]

I actually said :
This is rubbish. People are well ware of the fact if they get hit by a train they will come off much worse, and anyone with half a brain knows trains cannot come to an instant stop, just like trucks and busses and even cars come to that.
Why do some people seem to think everyone is a moron ? Don't get me wrong some people are incapable of looking after themselves, but if they really are that incapable they shouldn't be let out on their own, after all kids aren't. It is not the job of NR, or indeed society, to dumb down everything to a level where even someone with no common sense at all could not come to harm. It really isn't.

And I stand by it, how thick would someone have to be to think a train could :
1 - swerve to avoid them
2 - come to an instant stop

You may think you know everything about railways (I myself do not, despite having worked for them for 38 years - What is your rail employment experience, as a matter of interest ?), but I repeat, the general public have no idea (not that they should) about how railways operate. Here are three examples:

Two teenage boys (of an age where they would certainly be out on their own), climb on top of a stationary coal train and receive electric shocks; One died, the other survived but with terrible, life-changing injuries. They had no idea of the power of the overhead wires, or that you do not actually have to touch them to be in mortal danger.

A couple at the wrong end of the platform to the footbridge which takes them over the line to the correct side for their train, see their train approaching and concerned about missing it, cross the tracks instead. Only the oncoming train was not theirs but a 90mph non-stop express. Maybe they did know that trains can't swerve, or stop suddenly, but it did not save them. The result was so horrifying that one of the guys I sent to attend, despite having attended many such incidents in the past, had to stand himself down, traumatised.

A guy, having missed the last train, decides to walk home along the track, knowing that the passenger service has finished. He knew it was perfectly safe as there were no more trains, but was struck and killed by an engineering train.

The railway regularly reopens at least one line within 1-3 hours of fatalities, although of course it depends on the circumstances of each incident.

Indeed, and on the odd occasion that the railway is closed for longer it is through circumstances beyond the railway's control, such as the Police declaring the incident suspicious, or difficulty accounting for and recovering all body parts, given what a train can do to the human body as per my second example above.

 

[stuu]

Have to agree here and I think Jeremy Clarkson had some things to say along this matter somewhat controversially a few years ago. Now everything has to be investigated as a potential crime and forensically examined. I have watched a couple of series of BBC Wales "Crash Detectives" which is quite interesting and goes into some detail at what happens following some nasty road crashes some of which have been proved to be fatals. It is quite intensive work. But I wonder if other countries investigate mishaps in quite the same detail as Britain does?

Germany, France, Italy - how do they do it?

Once upon a time one almost sensed a pride in how quick road and rail services could be got up and running again after a major incident - but that appears to have gone.

In the rush to discover if anyone was to blame the thousands of others caught up in road or rail disruption are forgotten about out.

Because the accident may have been caused by some problem which has hitherto not been identified. Look at the history of the aviation industry and how it's safety culture was basically developed by looking at the wreckage of when things go wrong. And sorry to be predictable, but how would you feel if someone you knew died as a result of a problem missed in the hurry to clear up a previous accident?

 

[WesternBiker]

You may think you know everything about railways (I myself do not, despite having worked for them for 38 years - What is your rail employment experience, as a matter of interest ?), but I repeat, the general public have no idea (not that they should) about how railways operate.

Completely agree. It is easy to forget that what we think of as obvious - because of our interest and knowledge in railways - is not obvious to others, regardless of their level of education etc. (That said, there are videos showing some pretty scary near-misses with some enthusiast photographers - usually photographing steam specials - who one would have thought would know better, but clearly not.)

 

[Justin Smith]

Have to agree here and I think Jeremy Clarkson had some things to say along this matter somewhat controversially a few years ago. Now everything has to be investigated as a potential crime and forensically examined. I have watched a couple of series of BBC Wales "Crash Detectives" which is quite interesting and goes into some detail at what happens following some nasty road crashes some of which have been proved to be fatals. It is quite intensive work. But I wonder if other countries investigate mishaps in quite the same detail as Britain does?

Germany, France, Italy - how do they do it?

Once upon a time one almost sensed a pride in how quick road and rail services could be got up and running again after a major incident - but that appears to have gone.

In the rush to discover if anyone was to blame the thousands of others caught up in road or rail disruption are forgotten about out.

I have always believed in the greatest good of the greatest number and inconveniencing thousands for the one or two just seems wrong.

I know some will probably come back at me with the "what happens if it was one of your relatives involved" - but that doesn't wash.

I am more likely to held up as a consequence of a railway or road incident than I am to come to a sad end in one.

I think we do as a nation have to look at how things are done in other countries and that could be as to how crowds are dealt with on constricted railway platforms.

How much more can they learn about a caravan that's been hit by a lorry ? ! ?
Have these people never heard of cameras ? ! ? Take load of pictures, using a drone if necessary, and get the road (or railway) open ASAP.

You may think you know everything about railways (I myself do not, despite having worked for them for 38 years - What is your rail employment experience, as a matter of interest ?), but I repeat, the general public have no idea (not that they should) about how railways operate. Here are three examples:

I have never said I know everything about railways, nor even implied it.
What I do know a bit about is risk probability and, even more significantly, proportionality.
I am not prepared to be bossed about in order to lower the chance one person in 100 years might fall off Piccadilly platforms because they are no concentrating.
Most days I have to walk along the tram platform at Hillsborough, often near the edge as waiting passengers fill it, and the chances of being injured (by a passing car or bus or truck on the very busy road) is FAR higher than if I was to fall off Piccadilly platform 13, it really is. Yet one there is not anyone to stop you and, in fact it is perfectly legal to step down off the platform onto the road ! But if you go on the railway track it's like you've committed the worst crime in the world : "£1000 fine".
What I would say is I am always nervous about walking on the edge of the aforementioned tram platform esp if a vehicle is coming and I am very careful because I have a brain and can foresee potential trouble. We should be educating people to do that, not giving them some false sense of security that the word will be made 100% safe for them (at great cost to people's personal freedom).

A guy, having missed the last train, decides to walk home along the track, knowing that the passenger service has finished. He knew it was perfectly safe as there were no more trains, but was struck and killed by an engineering train.

Was he deaf, and have some problem feeling the vibration the train made ?

 

[MichaelAMW]

I haven't had the time to read this whole thread, so sorry if this point has been made. I was got at by Shouty McShoutface at Manchester a while back and I asked a sensible-looking guard what it was all about. She said that the idea is that you STAND behind the red line so that there is space to WALK along the platform inside the yellow line, without needing to step nearer the platform edge than that. The issue is obviously that it can be very crowded and this should allow people to disperse safely. However, as she pointed out and was apparent, the agency security people who "police" the place don't appear to understand that this is the arrangement and they just shout at anyone who dares to encroach. I guess you could annoy them, if you were that way inclined, by walking along the platform between the lines and when you reach one of them, who will be in your way, walk round them between the yellow line and the edge to make the point.

Can you imagine having a job that mostly consists of shouting at people all day long? You could get a job in a comp and enjoy that pleasure, and not have to be outside.

 

[Justin Smith]

Indeed, and on the odd occasion that the railway is closed for longer it is through circumstances beyond the railway's control, such as the Police declaring the incident suspicious, or difficulty accounting for and recovering all body parts, given what a train can do to the human body as per my second example above.

I know for a fact that many roads are kept closed far far longer than they need to be, the example I gave being about the best I can think of at the moment. Whose fault that is I cannot say, but it remains a fact.

 

[zwk500]

I know for a fact that many roads are kept closed far far longer than they need to be, the example I gave being about the best I can think of at the moment. Whose fault that is I cannot say, but it remains a fact.

If you do not know why the road was kept closed, how can you know for a fact it was closed for longer than it needed to be?

 

[Yorkshireguy]

Unless I have missed it, nobody has been able to come up with the number of people killed by falling off the platforms at Piccadilly in the last 10 years.
Or did I miss it ?
Is it zero ?

Should we keep moving the line forward until there is a fatality? Whilst of course context always applies (and I don’t know enough to comment on 13/14), a low number may suggest an effective safety measure, as opposed to a redundant one.

 

[SynthD]

The place you probably won’t get bossed about is the place owned by you. Everywhere else, you run the risk of disagreeing with management, who have no duty of explaining why it’s done that way. They often aren’t decision makers.

You could do an FOI for the justification.

 

[Falcon1200]

Was he deaf, and have some problem feeling the vibration the train made ?

IIRC he was struck by an MPV coasting down a gradient, so not actually a great deal of noise or vibration was generated. He considered himself safe due to his 'knowledge' of the railway. How wrong he was (and paid a terrible price).

 

[Justin Smith]

If you do not know why the road was kept closed, how can you know for a fact it was closed for longer than it needed to be?

I tell you what, you give me one good reason why that small piece of caravan debris could not have been moved two foot to one side so they could reopen a second lane and double the capacity of the M1 at that point (with a 3 mile queue waiting.....) ?
I think of myself as quite imaginative, and I cannot think of anything. Nothing reasonable or proportionate anyway.
No, "it's Health & Safety mate, we have cross all the Ts and dot all the Is (so don't question it, and we don't care how many people are inconvenienced)" is what happened.

Should we keep moving the line forward until there is a fatality? Whilst of course context always applies (and I don’t know enough to comment on 13/14), a low number may suggest an effective safety measure, as opposed to a redundant one.

Alright, how many fatalities were they in the 10 years before any lines were painted.....

IIRC he was struck by an MPV coasting down a gradient, so not actually a great deal of noise or vibration was generated. He considered himself safe due to his 'knowledge' of the railway. How wrong he was (and paid a terrible price).

Even an electric train coasting still makes a hell of a racket and the rails "sing" and vibrate. Did he have Iplayer headphones on or something ? If so that is his own stupid fault (cynics would say that's Darwinism working....). Sorry, I do not dispute it might have happened because I do not know, but I do think it very strange.
However, 2000 people a year are killed on the roads for Gawd's sake, why are we so obsessed with the very low number of rail fatalities ?

 

[zwk500]

I tell you what, you give me one good reason why that small piece of caravan debris could not have been moved two foot to one side so they could reopen a second lane and double the capacity of the M1 at that point (with a 3 mile queue waiting.....) ?
I think of myself as quite imaginative, and I cannot think of anything. Nothing reasonable or proportionate anyway.
No, "it's Health & Safety mate, we have cross all the Ts and dot all the Is (so don't question it, and we don't care how many people are inconvenienced)" is what happened.

Perhaps the small piece of caravan debris needed it's resting position recorded as evidence for an incident being deliberate/negligent in case somebody were to die from their injuries. Additionally, working within 1 lane usually only 3.5m wide would not be safe for any Police/Highways employees with traffic at 50/60/70mph, especially HGVs. You'd hate to get the motorway reopened back to 2 lanes only for a policeman to fall under a lorry and all 3 lanes closed back down again. Of course, you'd just put it down to the policeman being too thick/clumsy for his own good...

Alright, how many fatalities were they in the 10 years before any lines were painted.....

People still die from falling off the platform edge today, so just accept the risk exists.

Even an electric train coasting still makes a hell of a racket and the rails "sing" and vibrate. Did he have Iplayer headphones on or something ? If so that is his own stupid fault (cynics would say that's Darwinism working....). Sorry, I do not dispute it might have happened because I do not know, but I do think it very strange.

Whatever your opinion on the fault, the law says NR is responsible for the safety of everyone on the tracks, regardless of whether they are supposed to be there.

However, 2000 people a year are killed on the roads for Gawd's sake, why are we so obsessed with the very low number of rail fatalities ?

We're also very concerned about deaths on the road, but the railway has a set of legal obligations and a defined boundary within which it must manage the people on the system.

 

[Justin Smith]

Perhaps the small piece of caravan debris needed it's resting position recorded as evidence for an incident being deliberate/negligent in case somebody were to die from their injuries. Additionally, working within 1 lane usually only 3.5m wide would not be safe for any Police/Highways employees with traffic at 50/60/70mph, especially HGVs. You'd hate to get the motorway reopened back to 2 lanes only for a policeman to fall under a lorry and all 3 lanes closed back down again. Of course, you'd just put it down to the policeman being too thick/clumsy for his own good...

Almost certainly (unless someone was travelling in the caravan) nobody could have died or even been injured, but, even if they had, haven't they ever heard of cameras and tape measures......

No Policeman (or anyone else) would have fallen under a vehicle because :
1 - The lane was coned off ! You just move the cones up one lane.
2 - They had a 30mph limit in place

People still die from falling off the platform edge today, so just accept the risk exists.

Ahh, at last, we agree on something.

 

[zwk500]

Almost certainly (unless someone was travelling in the caravan) nobody could have died or even been injured, but, even if they had, haven't they ever heard of cameras and tape measures......

And you know this for sure, that there was nobody vulnerable (e.g. a Newborn) in the cars involved?

No Policeman (or anyone else) would have fallen under a vehicle because :
1 - The lane was coned off ! You just move the cones up one lane.

Ah, Cones. That magical force field that will utterly baffle (pun intended) the turbulence of an HGV.

2 - They had a 30mph limit in place

Because nobody has ever broken such a limit (1) under Motorway Gantries or (2) after being held up for 2 hours.

 

[Justin Smith]

And you know this for sure, that there was nobody vulnerable (e.g. a Newborn) in the cars involved?

There was no evidence at all that a car had been hit, it was a caravan. But I do not care anyway, take some photographs. Messing about inconveniencing tens of thousands of people will not bring any fatality back to life anyway. It's BS.

 

[zwk500]

There was no evidence at all that a car had been hit, it was a caravan. But I do not care anyway, take some photographs. Messing about inconveniencing tens of thousands of people will not bring any fatality back to life anyway. It's BS.

So the family should forgo justice, and a dangerous driver get off scot-free because other people are missing meetings?