Trespassers: Travel at caution or stop the job?

[Mag_seven]

Mental health in society is generally reported to have gotten worse as are some economical and societal outcomes since Covid

I'd venture the mental health crisis that is sadly leading to a lot more railway fatalities can be attributed in some way to Covid lockdowns and the general air of fear and hysteria prevalent at the time. Some people warned about this effect but were shouted down and labelled as "conspiracy theorists", "granny killers" or "Covidiots".

In my - anecdotal but relatively good experience - there just seem to be a lot more events than there were even 5 years ago.

Agreed.

 

[tspaul26]

And I assume from your lack of further comment you’ve realised that my numbers are correct and your 35 is not?

Nope. My numbers remain the correct ones taken from the relevant ORR historic dataset.

Anyway, it’s not for me to run the analysis. It’s for the railway to have balanced the delays on the one hand against the lives saved, if any, by delaying or stopping services.

The railway has and has defined that cautions with occasional stops are the appropriate solution.

If you wish to argue to the contrary the onus is on you to justify it, but you refuse so to do.

Case not proven.

It is if you’re going to make suggestions about reducing safety to improve reliability, and want them to have any credibility whatsoever.

Exactly right

 

[Meerkat]

As it happens, delays caused by people being on the track when they shouldn‘t be are at record highs. They have grown by about 30% in the past year and continue to grow, whereas delays due to all other summary categories are roughly static (with the exception of severe weather).

For comparison, the number of delays caused by Tresspassers and Fatalities is almost the same as those caused by all types of failures of the signalling system (signals, track circuits, axle counters, power supplies, cable faults, interlocking failures, AWS, TPWS, etc etc).

Any data on why?
ie more ASB (graffiti etc), more suicides, more dumbness (“not allowed, really?”), or more short cut, don’t care?

 

[43066]

That last is an interesting statement. Is there any information on the follow-up? Did those individuals get appropriate support or did they go on to commit suicide elsewhere or in another way?

Not sure what this has to do with anything when we are talking about deaths on the railway.

Just to take the example mentioned, if someone was walking steadily just inside the fence but away from the tracks, showing no sign of moving onto them, what would typically happen? I fully accept that running at 50mph the train cannot stop, but isn’t that slow enough for a non-suicidal, sober trespasser to stay out of the way?

No it isn’t, and many trespassers are not sober, so again, what is the relevance? You do appear to be ignoring the points made again and again.

As it happens, delays caused by people being on the track when they shouldn‘t be are at record highs. They have grown by about 30% in the past year and continue to grow, whereas delays due to all other summary categories are roughly static (with the exception of severe weather).

For comparison, the number of delays caused by Tresspassers and Fatalities is almost the same as those caused by all types of failures of the signalling system (signals, track circuits, axle counters, power supplies, cable faults, interlocking failures, AWS, TPWS, etc etc).

Interesting to hear it has increased - but it would be interesting to know how trespass delays break down as distinct to fatalities. Most trespass events in my experience are short lived - obviously there’s the odd shocker where someone is on a bridge for hours at a time before being “talked down”. Fatalities will pretty much always tend to involve the job stopping for 1:30-2:00 (more if suspicious).

 

[furnessvale]

They certainly do. Should that be at the expense of safety?

The safest day on the railways for passengers and trespassers is Christmas day.

Every death on the railway is a tragedy, but a holistic view must be taken of such deaths. If the alternative is that people travel by road instead, and are killed in greater numbers, you have defeated the object.

Given the current state of H & S and MSM outrage, it would be a brave politician to make that holistic decision.

 

[172007]

Doesn't help when the Midland Metro has at the Jewellery Quarter no boundary fence. Any other areas which are simular.

i came a cross a tram being Evacuated at this point with the general public walking along and trains not being captioned reported it and no trains were cautioned even though very young children were involved

 

[Horizon22]

The safest day on the railways for passengers and trespassers is Christmas day.

Every death on the railway is a tragedy, but a holistic view must be taken of such deaths. If the alternative is that people travel by road instead, and are killed in greater numbers, you have defeated the object.

Given the current state of H & S and MSM outrage, it would be a brave politician to make that holistic decision.

Are people really driving because of trespassers on the railway? That's a huge stretch to be making. In fact I find passengers are at their most understanding when there's a fatality or a vulnerable passenger on the line.

I'd find it more realistic if you talked about varied punctuality/reliability on the line of which trespass incidents are only a part.

 

[Spet0789]

Are people really driving because of trespassers on the railway? That's a huge stretch to be making. In fact I find passengers are at their most understanding when there's a fatality or a vulnerable passenger on the line.

I'd find it more realistic if you talked about varied punctuality/reliability on the line of which trespass incidents are only a part.

That’s absolutely true, so it’s the railway’s responsibility to look at all causes of delay and see how many of them can be eliminated / minimised.

It feels like some minds are quite closed on these topics. The job of the railways is not to maximise safety. If it were we’d have a Christmas Day service every day. It’s to optimise it alongside all the other considerations, mindful that every traveller who chooses to go by car has increased their risk substantially.

No it isn’t.

I’m not being obtuse - please educate me. Why is it hard to avoid a train at 50mph? Especially if it is using its horn through the area where trespassers were seen? I avoid cars at those speeds all the time as a pedestrian, and even cross roads far busier than any railway line.

 

[Horizon22]

That’s absolutely true, so it’s the railway’s responsibility to look at all causes of delay and see how many of them can be eliminated / minimised.

No my point was people aren't driving because of trespassers, but presumably the overall pereception of a lack of punctuality or reliability. I would also argue fare prices is probably an even bigger factor.

I’m not being obtuse - please educate me. Why is it hard to avoid a train at 50mph? Especially if it is using its horn through the area where trespassers were seen? I avoid cars at those speeds all the time as a pedestrian, and even cross roads far busier than any railway line.

You are assuming the person is trying to avoid the train, which they sadly might not be. And many people know they shouldn't be on the track and are sneaking around (grafitti artists, cable thieves, other criminals escaping pursuit etc.)

And are you really darting into 50mph live road traffic? Plus cars can move left and right for a start...

You say you are not being obtuse but are not listening to a lot of people in this thread who are coming up with some very basic and simple reasons for why things are done.

 

[Harpo]

The job of the railways is not to maximise safety.

Victorian mill owners would have understood your point entirely.

The Health & Safety at Work act comes at things a little differently, especially the ALARP risk principle.

 

[Spet0789]

Victorian mill owners would have understood your point entirely.

The Health & Safety at Work act comes at things a little differently, especially the ALARP risk principle.

That’s a selective quote. Clearly safety is very important. It’s all about the interpretation of RP.

 

[tspaul26]

I’m not being obtuse - please educate me. Why is it hard to avoid a train at 50mph?

Trains have a nasty habit of sneaking up on you and are very hard to see and hear from a distance when on or about the line.

Especially if it is using its horn through the area where trespassers were seen?

Constantly using the horn? For how many miles? At all hours of the day and night?

I avoid cars at those speeds all the time as a pedestrian, and even cross roads far busier than any railway line.

The railway environment is rather more hazardous than your typical road.

 

[yorksrob]

Job stopped at Macclesfield today.

They need to be more hard nosed about it.

 

[43066]

Job stopped at Macclesfield today.

They need to be more hard nosed about it.

You wouldn’t say that if you’d seen what I saw a couple of days back…

 

[yorksrob]

You wouldn’t say that if you’d seen what I saw a couple of days back…

Probably true !

 

[43066]

Probably true !

Not to single you out, but never be blase about this stuff, is all I will say on the matter.

Much better to prevent it from happening in any way we possibly can.

 

[yorksrob]

Not to single you out, but never be blase about this stuff, is all I will say on the matter.

Much better to prevent it from happening in any way we possibly can.

Single me out as much as you like.

Seems to be happening more and more unfortunately.

 

[43066]

Single me out as much as you like.

Not my intention at all.

Seems to be happening more and more unfortunately.

Indeed it does mate.

 

[yorksrob]

Not my intention at all.

I know it wasn't

 

[D6130]

Very sadly, the couple of months leading up to Christmas are always peak season for suicide attempts....both on and off the railway. I used to wonder whether it was connected with the appearance of all the Christmas tat in the shops....and the effect that it had on lonely single people.

 

[Bald Rick]

Job stopped at Macclesfield today.

They need to be more hard nosed about it.

It wasn’t Macclesfield, it was between Stockport and Manchester.

Without giving too much detail, the individual concerned was on the tracks, threatening themselves harm and also threatening harm to any individuals that approached them to remove them from the line. That is a job stopper, unfortunately. But such incidents are a tiny, tiny, fraction of tresspass.

 

[Bikeman78]

Purely for info, it is a standard cause of delay in Germany.

It's been mentioned on another thread that Brussels has been stopped because someone was walking in the tunnel. On branch lines, I have seen plenty of trespass over there. For example, someone getting off at the back of the train and walking across the track because that is quicker than walking to the front to cross on the level crossing. It's a lot easier with low platforms and no fences.

 

[yorksrob]

But such incidents are a tiny, tiny, fraction of tresspass.

It certainly sounds like it !

 

[Indigo Soup]

And are you really darting into 50mph live road traffic? Plus cars can move left and right for a start...

The only viable walking route to my local railway station is to cross a busy 70mph all-purpose dual carriageway, at a point with poor sightlines and weaving between two junctions, on foot. There is a footpath along the road to the crossing point with no physical separation whatsoever.

The line speed through the station in question is 100mph, with similar sightlines to the road, and there are 6tph - and occasionally a 7th - of which 4 stop. A footbridge is provided to cross the line, and there are heavy penalties for trespass.

Frankly, I like my odds better crossing the railway. I'm just as dead if I'm hit by one of the six trains that can't see me or stop in time as if I'm hit by one of the 91 heavy goods vehicles an hour that also can't stop in time.

The railway environment is rather more hazardous than your typical road.

Possibly not your typical high-speed road, though. Some years ago I came across a claim that the life expectancy of a person on the hard shoulder of a motorway is ten minutes.

The correct comparison, really, is between the rail network and the trunk road network. There is a huge mileage of local roads that see low volumes of traffic at low speeds, which doesn't have a parallel on the rail network.

One of the things that comes out of such a comparison is that motorways (where pedestrians and cyclists aren't permitted) are considerably safer - IIRC by a factor of two or three - than all-purpose roads.

You could attempt to impose rail's approach to safety on the roads. The country would grind to a halt as trunk roads were completely closed for all sorts of reasons, the vast majority of driving licences were suspended, and crossing the road became an offence.

You could attempt to introduce road's approach to safety to the railways. There would be carnage, because road travel is several orders of magnitude more dangerous than rail travel.

The Health & Safety at Work act comes at things a little differently, especially the ALARP risk principle.

Rail managers quite rightly apply this principle in a way that manages the risk for the railway system to a very low level. The issue is that the road system has no such overarching body, and therefore there's no ability to impose a similar ALARP standard.

Viewed at a system level, an increase in rail usage at the expense of road could be accompanied by quite a large reduction in rail safety, and still see an overall improvement in transport safety. But there's nobody who's in a position to make that choice. And even if there were, it's unlikely that a reduction in safety could drive that modal share, because the limitations on rail use lie elsewhere.

 

[al78]

A question to the railway experts… why is it that trains often stop running when there are trespassers on the line, at huge inconvenience to the travelling public?

It could be noted that we don't apply the same proceedure on motorways. If there is a reported obstruction or pedestrian on the carriageway, the overhead gantries will display a message to that effect and it is left up to motorists to do what they see fit with the information. The police do not come out and stop the traffic on the motorway as a general rule.

<snip> the vast majority of driving licences were suspended </snip>

We've swung the pendulum the other way in the UK:
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/call-mandatory-driver-retraining-dozens-000100121.html

"More than 50 people in Britain hold valid driving licences despite racking up at least 30 penalty points, sparking calls for repeat offenders to undertake mandatory retraining.

Three male licence holders have more than 100 points, including a 26-year-old with 176, according to analysis of official figures by the PA news agency. The woman with the most points is a 50-year-old with 96. Some 53 people have at least 30 points.

Points are issued following convictions for road offences, such as driving without due care and attention (three to nine points), drink-driving (three to 11 points), and speeding (three to six points).

Under the totting-up process, drivers are usually banned for six months if they receive 12 or more points within a three-year period, unless they convince a court this would result in exceptional hardship, which could relate to their ability to work or care for their family.

A total of 10,056 drivers hold a valid licence despite having at least 12 points.
Nicholas Lyes, director of policy and standards at road safety charity IAM RoadSmart, said: “These shocking statistics call into question whether the definition of exceptional hardship needs reviewing.

“Any driver that is on the cusp of a ban would normally take heed of the risk of losing their licence, but it seems that a minority continue to break the law without any consideration.

“At the very least, those that accrue 12 or more points on their licence should be required to take an additional training course, even if they are allowed to keep their licence because a court has deemed that losing it would cause exceptional hardship.”
Points remain on licences for up to 11 years after an offence is committed, meaning some people with multiple driving convictions are legally allowed behind the wheel because they have served a period of disqualification.

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) figures, which are a snapshot from September 14, do not show how many motorists avoided a ban despite reaching the 12-point mark.

Steve Gooding, director of motoring research charity the RAC Foundation, said: “It would be reassuring to know that someone in authority was monitoring both the absolute number of licence holders swerving a ban and the reasons why they’ve been granted leave to keep driving.

“A bit more transparency in the system might ensure the right balance is being struck between personal mobility and our collective safety. It could also improve public confidence in justice.

“Exceptional hardship needs to be truly exceptional.”

The DVLA records information provided by courts, and has no influence on sentences.

The agency said where the threshold of 12 points is met but a disqualification is not imposed, it contacts the relevant court to check that was the intention.

Trains have a nasty habit of sneaking up on you and are very hard to see and hear from a distance when on or about the line.

If you are gawping at your phone and therefore have appalling spatial awareness, which I have noticed seems to be a particular thing in SE England. Part of the issue IMO is that we live in such a safe society that the instinct to pay attention to threats around you has been gradually eroded and replaced with an entitlement to be careless without consequence (because carelessness requires minimum effort). The net result is everyone else has to bend over backwards to accommodate the careless with the resultant inconvenience to everyday life that at its worst, can chip chip chip away at your tolerance.

 

[Indigo Soup]

If there is a reported obstruction or pedestrian on the carriageway, the overhead gantries will display a message to that effect and it is left up to motorists to do what they see fit with the information.

This is, in large part, because of the different way that liability is treated for road and rail accidents. The driver is blamed for road accidents unless proven otherwise. The railway system as a whole is blamed for rail accidents unless proven otherwise.

In the case of Carmont, for example, an equivalent road accident would be written off as 'the (deceased) driver should have driven to the prevailing conditions'.

 

[geoffk]

Further point of information: On Friday 4th October my wife and I were travelling on Trenitalia InterCity 583, 06 05 Milano Centrale-Napoli Centrale. We were more-or-less on time for most of the journey until the booked stop at Formia-Gaeta, where we sustained approximately 15 minutes overtime. On setting off, the Capo Treno announced - in Italian and English - that we would be travelling at a maximum speed of 40 Km/h or 25 mph as far as the next station at Minturno-Scauri (10 Km) due to trespassers on the line. We eventually arrived at Napoli Centrale 35 minutes late....alas not quite late enough to incur delay repay!

In the past, I have been on trains in France, Belgium and Ireland which have been delayed by trespassers on the line.

I was in Switzerland earlier this year and one occasion noted some people walking alongside the line between Lausanne and Vevey, having apparently left the lakeside (one was carrying what looked like a surfboard). The driver sounded his horn (itself an unusual occurrence in Switzerland) but didn't slow down. I assumed this was the required procedure. Swiss tracks are unfenced, as they are throughout Europe, except on high speed lines. Stations all have notices telling you not to cross the line but whether action is taken against those who transgress I don't know.

 

[30907]

It could be noted that we don't apply the same proceedure on motorways. If there is a reported obstruction or pedestrian on the carriageway, the overhead gantries will display a message to that effect and it is left up to motorists to do what they see fit with the information. The police do not come out and stop the traffic on the motorway as a general rule.

They frequently advise a speed reduction - and if someone is threatening to jump they will stop at times traffic. However, the obvious point is that road vehicles can brake sharply and manoeuvre, which trains can't.

 

[ThirteenArches]

If there is a reported obstruction or pedestrian on the carriageway, the overhead gantries will display a message to that effect and it is left up to motorists to do what they see fit with the information.

A motorway driver can generally stop in a much shorter distance than a train. A motorway driver can change lanes to avoid a pedestrian. If the pedestrian/ trespasser is suicidal, the train driver can neither stop nor avoid them. I've only seen (the aftermath of) this once. New year's day, early in the morning. Someone couldn't face another year of whatever their problem was.

 

[greyman42]

I was in Switzerland earlier this year and one occasion noted some people walking alongside the line between Lausanne and Vevey, having apparently left the lakeside (one was carrying what looked like a surfboard). The driver sounded his horn (itself an unusual occurrence in Switzerland) but didn't slow down. I assumed this was the required procedure. Swiss tracks are unfenced, as they are throughout Europe, except on high speed lines.

If they can do this in a civilised country such as Switzerland, then why not in the UK?