Trainspotting rules at some stations

[deltic1989]

Informing atation staff that you are there whilst not a requirement is basic manners, you wouldnt want me barging into your house taking pictures of you wife and kids and walking out without saying something, that would be 'unreasonable'. at all the staffed stations I go to I always make an effort to interact with the staff and in the main they are a barrel of laughs, and very helpful to talk to. Once at Newark a member of staff even showed me the best place to take pictures, taking into account light and things, and also as said, station staff often know about special workings so with thier help you can get stunning shots. Some people who have posted on this topic seem to want to promote a feeling of 'them and us' between enthisiasts and railway staff, but it needn't be like that. As for terrorism, the 7/7 bombers had to do recces at some point so there is a reason to be suspicious terrorists belive they are fighting a war, and in a war the bast way to take down a country is to take out transport (major railways etc), as trainspotting is such a popular hobby in the UK then the perfect cover for taking recce shots would be out in the open posing as a trainspotter, so in that line staff are correct and within thier rights to challenge someone who may in thier view be acting suspiciously. Paranoia has been mentioned one or two times as well, if the average man on the street firmly belives bin laden is hiding in a bin then why, is it any different for railway staff, or are the people scoffing at terrorist threats labeling them 'scare tactics' suggesting that railways staff don't watch TV or read the papers?

 

[nedchester]

Informing atation staff that you are there whilst not a requirement is basic manners, you wouldnt want me barging into your house taking pictures of you wife and kids and walking out without saying something, that would be 'unreasonable'. at all the staffed stations I go to I always make an effort to interact with the staff and in the main they are a barrel of laughs, and very helpful to talk to. Once at Newark a member of staff even showed me the best place to take pictures, taking into account light and things, and also as said, station staff often know about special workings so with thier help you can get stunning shots. Some people who have posted on this topic seem to want to promote a feeling of 'them and us' between enthisiasts and railway staff, but it needn't be like that. As for terrorism, the 7/7 bombers had to do recces at some point so there is a reason to be suspicious terrorists belive they are fighting a war, and in a war the bast way to take down a country is to take out transport (major railways etc), as trainspotting is such a popular hobby in the UK then the perfect cover for taking recce shots would be out in the open posing as a trainspotter, so in that line staff are correct and within thier rights to challenge someone who may in thier view be acting suspiciously. Paranoia has been mentioned one or two times as well, if the average man on the street firmly belives bin laden is hiding in a bin then why, is it any different for railway staff, or are the people scoffing at terrorist threats labeling them 'scare tactics' suggesting that railways staff don't watch TV or read the papers?

Arghhh!!!

The terrorism argument just doesn't wash. Stations are full of people hanging around, waiting for trains! Are they all suspected terrorists? Should we stop everyone who carries a rucksack? Everyone taking mobile phone pictures on stations (lots of people do that when taking pictures of each other etc). Maybe the average man does think that bin Laden is 'hiding on the bin' but we as a society need to move away from that level of paranoia instigated by the press. Already photographers are being harassed up and down the country (I'm not talking about railway stations here) for just this and it has to STOP.

As for photography I'll give an example. I was at Euston yesterday for the deltic back to Crewe. A joke was made that maybe all of the passengers should report to the duty managers office to say they were going to take photos. Good manners or just a pain in the a*** for the poor manager? We didn't and just wandered around taking photos at will. You see it isn't always practical is it?

Some of us are old enough to remember when this paranoia was not an issue.

 

[curly42]

I'll agree totally with nedchesters posting - how the hell I've managed to photograph on stations for almost 50 years without ever reporting in I'll never know.

 

[Zoe]

I'll agree totally with nedchesters posting - how the hell I've managed to photograph on stations for almost 50 years without ever reporting in I'll never know.

The current terrorism threat started in 2001.

 

[moonrakerz]

Will it cause any problems with VT if I find the picture and post it?!

No - the photograph is your copyright. The Reliant owner might have problems for the breach of VT's copyright on the paint scheme !

This is where people do get confused: The paint scheme copyright belongs to VT (or possibly the person who designed it), but your photograph of VT's paint scheme is your copyright. You would only (possibly) have problems if you tried to make money out of your photo.
That too would be a moot point as VT would first have to prove that the paint job on the Reliant was their copyright, rather than the owner of the Reliant who might claim that his paint scheme was HIS and not VT's.................... if you see what I mean

 

[Peter Mugridge]

If I get time I'll have a look for it at the weekend then. Trouble is I can't remember which open day it was!

Anyone know the dates for all the Crewe Works, Toton, Doncaster and Old Oak ones after VT introduced their original red livery? Or the York Railfest? It's going to be one of those... Having half a dozen dates to look at is much quicker than wading through a decade's worth of pictures!

 

[NSEFAN]

The current terrorism threat started in 2001.

Was trainspotting (in particular photography) ever an issue in the days of the IRA? I don't think this was the case, but I wasn't around then!

 

[nedchester]

Was trainspotting (in particular photography) ever an issue in the days of the IRA? I don't think this was the case, but I wasn't around then!

Simple answer: NO!

 

[40fan]

Was trainspotting (in particular photography) ever an issue in the days of the IRA? I don't think this was the case, but I wasn't around then!

I was around then and it wasn't an issue. It seems to be something that is a result of privatisation.

 

[jon0844]

Terrorism did exist before 2001!

I would expect, almost hope, to be approached if I was walking around stations taking pictures of CCTV, alarms, trying doors to gain access to staff only areas and so on.

Taking a picture of anything else is no different to a tourist.. and if I was a terrorist then I might either pay someone to dress like a tourist and go around in a group standing in places where it looks like you're taking a group shot, while zooming in on security installations. So, the police wouldn't even notice (but, hey, they might when something happens and they go through hours of CCTV footage AFTER the event).

I don't have a problem with someone showing some concern and asking some polite questions, but I would if they came up and demanded to see my camera or ordered me to delete photos (not without a court order). I'd also kick off if they said it was illegal to take photos - as a PCSO probably would and even police officers can and do (but, hopefully a little less after new guidelines were issued).

I am not entirely sure what the 7/7 terrorists had to do before they did what they did. They needed to work out timings and make sure they knew where to go - but they didn't need to photograph cameras. Did they hide for the cameras? Did they care that people would find out who they were? Far from it - they were martyrs and wanted everyone to know.

Now at an airport the rules are different, as there's a security checkpoint. Given railways are open, there's very limited information to be gained by going around taking loads of photos. Unless you plan to bomb a station and run away (and therefore need to avoid being picked up), which isn't how modern terrorism seems to be done.

 

[Oswyntail]

I was around then and it wasn't an issue. It seems to be something that is a result of privatisation.

For once, I don't think privatisation was the main evil. Rather it was the over-reaction by the government as part of the "War on Terror" after 9/11. And, as we found out in London a couple of years later, almost completely ineffective.

 

[curly42]

You see,that's the main problem I have with all this signing in business - just what is the point ?
It's not compulsory,it's not realistic - it doesn't seem to have any other purpose than to just be. You can't do it at unmanned stations,it's not practical when there are dozens (if not more) trying to photograph a kettle or something unusual,and if you'd something to hide you'd use a false name anyway.
As someone until recently involved with the railway,I always found the whole "guidelines" business pretty useless. If I wanted to know who was hanging around my station,I used to have a walk about and use my eyes.
Simple.

 

[Darandio]

This thread is truly unbelievable!

Whether it is a "requirement" to sign in or not, surely it is common courtesy and isn't that hard really, most locations you will no doubt have to pass a member of staff to get to your desired location.

It seems that in certain posts so far, many people won't sign in or inform a member of staff not because they don't have to, but because they want to drive home a point. They are no doubt the same people that have the camera on members of platform staff, waiting for them to question why they are there (how would they know exactly why you are there if you didn't tell anyone?) so they can then pull the enthusiast guidelines out of the holdall, wave it around and preach about how they are being called a terrorist. This can then be put on Youtube and the whole argument can start again.

Whenever I go to a staffed station, no matter which it is, I make a point of spending no more than 30 seconds of my time to inform someone of my presence. This never presents a problem and also helps for any future visits, no doubt helping for any other visiting enthusiast.

If you want to make a point of not informing anyone, whether it's because you feel you don't have to or simply cannot be bothered (yet are willing to stand on the platform end for 7 hours) then you are not helping anything. If you want to continue this, fine, personal choice, but once you spoil it for everyone, I'll look forward to the thread started on this very forum and can guarantee you won't get an ounce of sympathy.

 

[Zoe]

You can't compare the current threat to the IRA situation. They are very different.

 

[jon0844]

You can't compare the current threat to the IRA situation. They are very different.

Really? My dad was working in an office by Wood Green shopping centre when an IRA bomb went off around 1992 or 1993, and I was on a bus just ahead of the one blown up near Tavistock Square on 7th July 2005 (a no 63 bus diverted after the bomb on the Picadilly Line). I heard the bomb and then looked back to see the aftermath.

Okay, so the IRA planted their bombs and ran off while the guy on the number 30 bus stayed with it - but I'd love to know how you can't compare the two.

 

[Zoe]

To start with the IRA in most cases sent a warning.

 

[jon0844]

Glad you said most. And when they did give warnings, they often did so too late or inaccurately.

 

[Zoe]

With the IRA you also knew exactly what they wanted. This is not the case with the current threat. Had the IRA ever tried something on the scale of 9/11 then there most likely would be no power sharing in Northern Ireland now.

 

[jon0844]

I'll give you that, but it's quite irrelevant in terms of the threat we face today, yesterday and most likely tomorrow - perhaps from some other group entirely.

Ignoring the reasons behind the threats, someone being killed is someone being killed. The threat we face existed long before 2001 and that's a simple fact.

 

[Zoe]

The current threat involves suicide attacks though. If someone leaves a bag on a train unattended then if people are vigilent it will be notices and so the train can be evacuated. You don't have the chance to do that with a suicide attack.

 

[jon0844]

And if they're not vigilant? If the bomb is hidden inside a McDonald's bag and left on a seat, luggage rack or even stuffed in a bin with a clear bag (supposedly designed to spot bombs!)?

Both myself and you could easily plant a bomb tomorrow on the way to work and I am 99% certain it wouldn't be detected in time. The difference is we might do so then get off the train, while a suicide bomber holds on to it. I really cannot fathom why you think that makes any difference to the victims.

You might well consider that if you felt uncomfortable around someone acting suspiciously, you might move away or leave the train - whereas the IRA bomber (or someone else) had left ages ago and you're right next to the bomb completely unaware.

You're arguing semantics now. Suicide bombers today, back to the old ways tomorrow? Who knows? You simply can't just say that the only real threat began in 2001!

 

[Zoe]

No, I'm saying the current threat started in 2001. The methods of policing used for the IRA threat are different. Remember also that Al-Qaeda's tactic is several simultaneous suicide attakcs. This takes quite a bit of planning and someone on a platform taking photos and noting train times could be seen as suspicious. Remember also an innocent man was shot dead as police thought he was a terrorist. I don't believe anyone would have been shot by police if they were suspected as working for the IRA. The authorities clearly see this is the most serious threat the the country since World War II.

 

[Jonny]

As I said people have been removed from Heathrow due to plane spotting, they wouldn't do that if there were not genuine concerns.

Apart from paranoia - how's that a genuine concern? People can also find vantage points outside the railway. As long as it's outside of the railway boundary, it isn't going to be trespass. Well, railway trespass anyway.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No, I'm saying the current threat started in 2001. The methods of policing used for the IRA threat are different. Remember also that Al-Qaeda's tactic is several simultaneous suicide attakcs. This takes quite a bit plannig and someone on a platform taking photos and noting train times could be seen as suspicious. Remember also in innocent man was shot dead as police thought he was a terrorist. I don't believe anyone would have been shot by police if they were suspected as working for the IRA. The authorities clearly see this is the most serious threat the the country since World War II.

Trouble is, a lot of what you have described is contained in published information that the TOCs themselves splash all over the internet - known as Timetables. Also, with head/cycle helmet cameras being so small and not obvious except from close range no competent terrorist would bother with a SLR and tripod etc; besides why would they bother with a station when they could get the key info from a viewpoint just outside it, attracting a lot less attention?

 

[nedchester]

Really? My dad was working in an office by Wood Green shopping centre when an IRA bomb went off around 1992 or 1993, and I was on a bus just ahead of the one blown up near Tavistock Square on 7th July 2005 (a no 63 bus diverted after the bomb on the Picadilly Line). I heard the bomb and then looked back to see the aftermath.

Okay, so the IRA planted their bombs and ran off while the guy on the number 30 bus stayed with it - but I'd love to know how you can't compare the two.

But stopping people trainspotting / taking photographs won't stop/help prevent terrorism! If you believe that then you are a little weak of mind.

In fact I would say that the present terrorists perhaps don't need to 'case the joint' as they just find a crowded area and blow themselves up whereas the IRA would be more concerned about being identified and therefore at some later time arrested.

 

[Zoe]

In fact I would say that the present terrorists perhaps don't need to 'case the joint' as they just find a crowded area and blow themselves up whereas the IRA would be more concerned about being identified and therefore at some later time arrested.

If you have watched events 2001 you will see that Al-Qaeda's tactic is simulataneous suicide attacks. The precision timing that has been observed can't be done without advance planning. On 7/7 it is beleived that the fourth bomber was not able to be one a Northern line train at the time due to delays so that's why the bus was bombed later.

 

[jon0844]

But stopping people trainspotting / taking photographs won't stop/help prevent terrorism! If you believe that then you are a little weak of mind.

Huh? I am the one saying you shouldn't stop people taking photos! I'm a journalist; believe me, I've had my fair share of problems with the police, PCSOs and security guards over the years!

My comment about the IRA vs suicide bombers was an off-topic tangent I went down, sorry! Right argument, wrong person.

On 7/7 it is beleived that the fourth bomber was not able to be one a Northern line train at the time due to delays so that's why the bus was bombed later.

I didn't think it was merely believed.. I though this was established as fact and backed by CCTV?

In 2001 we had planes attack a building.
In 2005 we had people letting off bombs simultaneously, and a rather poor copycat attempt shortly after.

However, I think you're naive to think that this is now how all terrorist attacks will be from now on. Far from it, I think the terrorists get the edge by doing things different.

I can't say that they won't attack public transport again, but the one thing to cause panic and keep ahead of the authorities is to do something else, something special, something unexpected.

I hope the security services don't simply have a guidebook that used to say 'How to deal with the IRA' and binned it for 'How to deal with suicide bombers' or they're going to look very silly when the next attack comes.

What if someone wants to bomb us the traditional way? Are you no longer looking around for suspicious packages because you assume they're all hidden in rucksacks on the back of that suspicious person opposite you?

 

[Zoe]

In 2001 we had planes attack a building.
In 2005 we had people letting off bombs simultaneously, and a rather poor copycat attempt shortly after.

Are you sure it was a copycat attack rather than a planned second wave by Al-Qaeda? Also don't forget the Riyadh, Cassablanca, Istanbul and Mardird attacks. They all used the same tactic although the Madrid attaqcks were not suicide attacks they were simultaneous and all most likely required coordinated planning.

 

[jon0844]

Can you direct your questions and assumptions to MI5 please?

By the way, my McDonalds bag is now 'planted' on a FCC 313 on its way to Moorgate. No signs of anyone asking if it belongs to anyone or a breakout of panic yet.

Sent from my MB525 using Tapatalk

 

[Zoe]

Can you direct your questions and assumptions to MI5 please?

The methodology used by terrorists is not an assumption but a fact. MI5 are not in the business of answering questions on terrorism from the public. It seems you are the person assuming things. There is actually an ad on the radio advising people to call the terrorist hotline if you see anything sspicious even though th chances are it will be nothing. It is better to be safe.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

My gut feeling is that the next attack on the UK will be launched overseas.

The general perception is that some continental airports have poorer security than ours do. An aircraft departing from one of the European hubs to the east of the UK for the eastern seaboard of the USA will very likely be passing over London and will at that point be carrying as much fuel as something that has just left Heathrow. And will be going considerably faster.

Have any of you ever flown over London at 35,000 ft on a clear day? You'd be surprised at just how visible the landmarks are from the passenger windows; it would be even more visible from the cockpit windows.

If AQ are indeed putting people through full pilot training as has been suspected ever since 9/11, London is a sitting duck regardless of anything we do at ground level.

And that's just one of a number of possibilities that the media have raised over the past few years.

So, to put this into perspective:

1) To defend against an attack the UK must think outside the box. Expecting attacks to come from the same direction as previous attacks is naive. It won't. It'll come from either a variation of a theme or from a totally new theme.

2) Restricting civil liberties, including photography, is pointless and is simply handing AQ victory on a platter. Remember, the ultimate target of a terrorist is not the people of a country but their freedom and their peace of mind.