Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,104
Member is Online
|
Post by Tom on Mar 29, 2005 17:53:53 GMT
It's been interesting to watch this thread develop, there's been a lot of very honest and thought provoking writing in the last few days.
Now my two pence worth, thankfully I've never been involved with a one under in a professional capacity (and hope that I never do get involved), but I did see the aftermath of one a few years ago at Barons Court when someone decided to ride their bike down the steps, wobble at the bottom and promptly go under the next WB picc. I passed through on the last EB before the service was suspended and all I could see was a crowd of ERU staff around the front of the train.
However, bits of the posts I can identify with, not least Igelkotten's comment about ATO operation when a driver realises there are people on the track in front of the train. I've been in this scenario a couple of times, as the person on the track.
The first was at West Ruislip where I was attending a signal failure. Having moved out of the way for each train (acknowledging the driver's warning every time), there was one train that didn't whistle. I moved into a place of safety anyway and it was a very good thing I did as when the train passed we could see the driver was reading a newspaper instead of paying attention to the road ahead.
The second was on the Victoria line when attending a failure. We had stopped the train in the tunnel and used it as our protection, having to run about a quarter of a mile up the tunnel to the end of the track circuit which was failing. The Technician I was with had sprinted ahead and I followed behind, and as I turned a corner I lost sight of the headlights. Now the only source of light I had was my torch, with traction current on and a train fully livened up a few hundred feet away. (For some reason the TO chose not to take the driver's key, I think the train was in slow manual anyway to work through under failure conditions).
At about this point I realised that if the failure cleared itself, and the driver happened to move into coded manual there would be two hundred or so tons of train approaching and I'd have no chance of escaping. It's one of those scenarios you don't really think about the danger you're in until later.
How the drivers would have reacted in these two scenarios had something gone seriously wrong I don't know, but from my own experiences of being on the track when I'm meant to be there, I can't understand why anyone would want to jump in front of a tube train and place themselves in that sort of danger, especially if the risk of not surviving is around 50%.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Team on Mar 29, 2005 18:53:47 GMT
And this expands this whole thinking even further - and thanks for raising a very valid area Tom!
There are several points which - from a T/Ops point of view - are relevant:
Firstly, the question of trains running in ATO where the T/Op is not paying 'full attention'. I'm not familiar with the 'rules and regs' for the Central, so can't comment on if there's a right/wrong about what the signalling section were up to. Should/ had the Technician in charge have told Wood Lane and got them to to have cancelled ATO? What are the rules regarding access on the Central? I had a feeling that it was 'line clear' as opposed to 'Line safe'? Correct me please! But - irrespective of all that - WTF was the driver doing (well, we know) but why didn't your supervisot=r persue that irregularity? I suspect that's because he was in breach of rules too?
Your Vic experience - again the Tech was wrong! He had NOT assured himself or his team' s safety, simply by not taking the driver's key! I (along with most of my colleagues) have taken staff to worksites many times and we 'know the score' - but I can think of a few T/Ops who I would not, under any circumstances, rely on NOT to move their trains.......
Finally we're talking about the 'coming to a complete understanding'. If I take a T/O to site, I want to know 100% what he wants me to do, what he's going to do, and how he'll tell me/how I'll know what to do next.
Personally, I'm NOT insulted if a station supervisor, DMT, DSM, AET or whoever wants my key to assure their safety - I'm happier if they demand it and - if they don't - I insit they take it.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,104
Member is Online
|
Post by Tom on Mar 29, 2005 19:11:40 GMT
This is where I'm not 100% sure of the rights or wrongs of what was going on. IIRC in the first instance there were specific conditions as to whether or not Wood Lane should have been told. I think this was a scenario where they didn't need to be told, as we were within a continuous place of safety and it was in response to a failure, maintenance activities being a different kettle of fish. I believe the current section concerned was line safe as opposed to line clear. As for not pursuing the matter further, as I remember it the TO was up a signal and couldn't see the train operator, wereas I was at the bottom of the signal post.
WRT the second experience, the rules were most definately not being adhered to.Why the DMT in the leading cab didn't say anything either I don't know.
At the end of the day I think that it will always come down to what the staff and the driver are happy with, I can think of a number of old-school colleagues of mine who would in the past ask a driver to follow them down slowly while on failures. My personal preference is to ask for the key unless another method of providing protection is put in place (such as operating protection keyswitches or maintaining signals at danger by other means).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2005 5:47:20 GMT
I've (thankfully) never had a one-under, however I've had a couple of near misses which were bad enough.
The first near miss I had was on the mainline.
It was when I was training at Thames Trains, I was signalled from the Up Relief to the Up Main, and I could see P/way workers on the UM line beyond the junction. Obviously I blew the horn, but they just looked up, acknowledged and carried on working! They only jumped out of the way when I did the emergency horn code continously over the junction, having applied the emergency brake, at the same time as my instructor! I suspect that they assumed I was staying on the relief lines. That's the one and only time I ever used emergency on the main line. Obviously the incident was reported as a near miss, but I never heard any more after my initial interview.
That actually shook me up quite badly, although I didn't realise how badly at first. That's why I like the idea of moving to a place of safety before acknowledging on LUL infrastructure. Obviously on the mainline, this isn't really practical due to the much higher speeds involved. If a driver travelling at 125mph glimpses p-way workers ahead and blows the horn, he will start braking if he doesn't get an acknowledgment within a second or two, because he'll obviously be on top of them a few seconds after that! If they moved to a place of safety before acknowledging, the chances are because of the speed of the train, the driver would assume they hadn't heard the warning and would be in emergency braking!
To make things worse on the mainline (I'm not sure about all traction, but certainly the 165/166 units I was trained on) if you make an emergency brake application, it can't be released until the train is running at less than about 9mph!
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 8, 2005 19:19:23 GMT
Not so much a "one under" more like a "one over" I driver I knew (now dead) who had had a few suicides and worked on the central line was running into a station and just as he left the tunnel a guy on the platform who was standing near the wall ran at speed towards the train and leaped..... He never touched the track. He sailed through the air and hit the offside cab window (the one above the set numbers) smashed it came into the cab and hit the back cab wall. As he did so there was a loud "crack" and this driver just pulled up to the car mark and blew the whistle. The guard opened the train doors and the driver got out via the car doors onto the platform and said to the statrion staff "get 'em all off the train & station and don't look, it's nasty" He then sat on the seat and rolled himself a fag and got his paper out and waited for the police/ambulance guys etc. As I said he was an old hand at this and had grown hard about it. His attitude was "if they want to do then bleedin' well let 'em but I wish they wouldn't pick my train". The crack he had heard was the blokes skull smashing against the wall and the contents thereof were all over the wall and floor. the driver had his statutory 3 days off and returned to work and when asked about the incident said "dozy bastard should have stuck his head in the oven. P.S. Gentlemen this post was not put up to make light of a very serious thing but just to illustrate how some drivers can take even these things in their stride.
|
|
|
Post by setttt on Apr 13, 2005 16:34:08 GMT
To make things worse on the mainline (I'm not sure about all traction, but certainly the 165/166 units I was trained on) if you make an emergency brake application, it can't be released until the train is running at less than about 9mph! According to a Bombardier engineer, the class 171's emg. brake can't be released until the train is stationary!
|
|
|
Post by chris on Apr 14, 2005 16:15:42 GMT
According to a Bombardier engineer, the class 171's emg. brake can't be released until the train is stationary! Makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by setttt on Apr 14, 2005 18:08:20 GMT
Not if an obstruction is moved in time (eg. at a level crossing, if car is crossing as train approaches, driver applies emg. brake. But if the car moves in time, train will brake to a stand even though it's not necessary - if driver can release brake then no real disruption is caused). PS I am aware this is slightly off-topic, apologies.
|
|
|
Post by setttt on Apr 14, 2005 21:02:11 GMT
I just watched The Tube on sky travel. A lad jumped in front of an outer rail circle line at Victoria but luckily the driver stopped short. The boy then put both hands on the + & - rails but the driver got the juice turned off in time, and the a*se hole who jumped was dragged away kicking and screaming. Luckily the driver was just a bit shaken, and was well enough to take the train back to Hammersmith depot.
What I found disturbing, being only 14 myself, was that the lad who jumped was about my age as well. I was just wondering how many kids throw themselves under trains?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,104
Member is Online
|
Post by Tom on Apr 14, 2005 21:06:52 GMT
The person I referred to in my earlier post (at Baron's Court) was still fairly young, only in his late teens I think.
Admittedly he didn't plan on killing himself though.
|
|
|
Post by igelkotten on Apr 14, 2005 23:42:13 GMT
What I found disturbing, being only 14 myself, was that the lad who jumped was about my age as well. I was just wondering how many kids throw themselves under trains? Going from Stockholm data, the age distribution is fairly even, with exceptions for the really young and really old. A lot of teenagers do idiotic things, like running around in tunnels to "prove" themselves or paint graffitti, drink or drug themselves and then lose all self-control and self-preservation, end up in fights where someone is kicked or thrown onto the tracks etc etc. And let's not forget that the teenage years can be a true hell for some people, enough to make them want to commit suicide -especially when under the influence of alchohol or other drugs. From you description, I'd say that the young person who tried to commit suicide was probably heavily depressed, and as such, probably only vaguely in control of himself. Sure, the "angsty teen" is a cliche, but let's not forget that a lot of teenagers, as indeed people of all ages, are truly depressed for various reasons.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 15, 2005 8:43:05 GMT
Mr Igelkotten I could not agree more. A lot of teenage depression/angst is caused by bullying or the fact that they are seen as "not cool" or a "wuss" I am afraid I rather fear for the youth of today.
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Apr 15, 2005 13:06:37 GMT
Not so much a "one under" more like a "one over" Here are my 5 copecks - a gruesome story on a real "one over" .
It happened 9.03.2004 at the "Dynamo" station. After 1:00AM, a passenger was taken... off the roof of the 5th car of train 51, which ran empty as timetabled, but had a short stop on the "Sokol" station after emerging from the reversing siding. A person in question jumped on the train roof from the footbridge, hoping to reach his destination in time... On "Aeroport" station he had been noticed by a station assistant who phoned the line controller immediately, but it was too late: the passenger (a young man about 22-25 years old) hit with his back a floodgate placed between "Aeroport" and "Dynamo". When he was taken off the roof at "Dynamo", he was still alive but deadly injured, and in half an hour he passed. Traces he left could be seen on the floodgate for some time...
|
|
|
Post by subwayrail on Apr 16, 2005 8:54:35 GMT
During a trawl through the WWW for this subject, I came accross this site - www.trackoff.org/personal.html - which has plenty to say on this, and other railway safety issues.
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Apr 29, 2005 8:34:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chris on Apr 29, 2005 18:02:02 GMT
I'm not sure of Russia's legal system, but will the woman be prosecuted? Or will she plead insanity since she may well be up for an involuntary manslaughter charge. Sad story.
i looked at the link, but my Russian is not very good!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2005 23:44:11 GMT
On the central line, if you need track access during traffic hours, it is allowed, however as a controller, you have to remind them that 'ATO trains operate' and stuff like that, 99 times out of 98 the people know, however its more of a 'cover your back' scenario. I have had a couple of incidents where people have nearly jumped, or made it look like they have jumped which has made my heart miss a beat, however i havnt experienced a near miss. I have attended a one under with a DMT, and trust me , it isnt nice, i didnt think much of it at the time, however, when you come to sit down to eat later on, or the next day, the memories come back!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2005 1:24:59 GMT
99 times out of 98 the people know, 99 times out of 98? ROFL! Maths was never my strong point either! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on May 6, 2005 12:15:28 GMT
I'm not sure of Russia's legal system, but will the woman be prosecuted? I can't tell for sure, but most likely she won't be prosecuted... You haven't missed much as I've translated everything that is of interest . Link is there only to attribute the source.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2005 18:50:52 GMT
99 times out of 98? ROFL! Maths was never my strong point either! ;D That was the point, as everyone that does ask for permission knows how it is, what with the operation of automatic trains, however you still have to tell them!
|
|
|
Post by chris on May 18, 2005 6:37:22 GMT
Are there any tell tale signs that a person might jump off the platform? E.g. standing really close to the edge. If so, couldn't you just signal for them to step back, and if they don't, begin to slow down. Although, i expect from a driver's POV, a 'jumper' would look alot like an impacient commuter.
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on May 18, 2005 7:31:42 GMT
Are there any tell tale signs that a person might jump off the platform? E.g. standing really close to the edge. If so, couldn't you just signal for them to step back, and if they don't, begin to slow down. Although, i expect from a driver's POV, a 'jumper' would look alot like an impacient commuter. These event invariably take place at stations (but not always) so you are already slowing down. Additionally the driver isn't looking at the platform, s/he's concentrating on having the right amount of brake applied to stop in the right place as quickly as possible. AFAIK most "jumpers" do so right at the last moment when there is no possibility of the driver taking any action.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on May 18, 2005 10:49:59 GMT
Sometimes it's impossible to know how to avoid these things. A couple of years ago our morning DMU was out in the countryside when a little oldish lady stepped out in front of the train: the driver saw her and managed to stop in time. She was taken aboard the train and to the next station, very flustered but surprisingly calm. As it happened the volunteer guard was a doctor. At the station he insisted on calling her GP who told him the lady was depressed but harmless and there was nothing more need to be done. so they had to let her go despite the misgivings of the guard/doctor.
A mere two hours later the midday steamer was passing the same point when she stepped out from behind a pile of sleepers where she was completely hidden. This time she made no mistake- the driver had not even got his hand on the brake before it was too late.
What could have been done? Nothing I suspect.
As an aside although the WSR has had 4 fatalities, incredibly every driver involved has been a serving or ex mainline driver: one shudders to think of the effect on a volunteer who is there for the 'fun' (as well as all the hard work!) and who may have to go back to a 'dayjob' the next day and not be rostered to drive again for a week or even more. All the mainline drivers had had one-unders before and although shaken at the time the feeling soon became 'not again' as has appeared in a previous post to this thread.
|
|
|
Post by cjmillsnun on Jul 3, 2005 9:31:16 GMT
Sorry to bring this sensitive subject up again, but I thought I'd relate a passenger's experience of witnessing a very near miss.
This happened on the WCML so not a tube experience.
I was returning to my parents after a split with my then partner, and was almost suicidal at the time myself. I had travelled up from Portsmouth to Waterloo without incident and used the Northern Line as normal to get to Euston. I managed to catch the last train from Euston to New Street, and got a table seat. Opposite me was a man who was obviously intoxicated, however he was sleeping and so wasn't causing a disturbance. The train arrived a Milton Keynes Central, and several passengers alighted. The whistle was sounded by platform staff and the gentleman opposite me stirred, realised where he was and walked towards the door. I watched him make his way to the vestibule as the train started moving. He pushed down the drop light and reached out to try and open the door, whereupon he fell out of the droplight apature, his face striking the platform and his legs going down between the platform edge and the train. I was reaching for the emergengy alarm handle as the emergency brakes kicked in. There was no first aider on duty at the time so being a qualified first aider myself, I went to see if I could help.
Apart from the face injuries and some broken ribs, the man was otherwise not seriously hurt from what I could gather, he had feeling everywhere and could move his toes and feet (which were resting against the bogie frame. The emergency services, (Ambulance and BTP) arrived on scene promptly and took over, and the driver and guard were relieved before the train could continue. I was interviewed by the BTP about what had happened before being allowed to re-join the train. Whilst I was shaken up for several weeks afterwards, no counselling was offered, and no support given. I understand that the man involved made a full recovery but was unrepentant, and that the guard had to leave the railway afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jul 3, 2005 11:11:11 GMT
I feel sorry for the gaurd mostly. The incident could have been easily avoided. They never let intoxicated people on planes, so why trains when there is still obviously a danger unto themselves and other people?
|
|
|
Post by cjmillsnun on Jul 3, 2005 22:10:31 GMT
Yes I feel sorry for the guard as well. He was watching the train leave from the next coach and saw the stupid sod fall. However what is forgotten about are the passengers on the train or on the platform who also see this horror. It did have one positive effect on me though. It showed me the hurt that my suicidal thoughts could inflict on innocent people, and made me realise the value of life. I can still remember the awful grizly images though and have no wish to see anything like that again.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,317
|
Post by Colin on Jul 4, 2005 1:35:14 GMT
Well on LUL seriously intoxicated customers are, where possible, only allowed entry if they have someone with them to look after them. Of course if the two people are going to different places or there's no staff on the barrier, there's not much to stop them being someones potential nightmare.
Your point about looking after customers. LUL has recently introduced a team of volunteers, to be utillised at large incidents - which will also be available to Network Rail if requested. The problem is, the train crew/station staff have proccedures which must be followed to ensure the incident area is safe. Once this is done, they will then deal with the incident itself, moving customers away is the next priority. By the time customers are dealt with, many will have moved totally away from the incident - to use other modes of transport for example. These customers are now 'lost' as far as the railway is concerned. They may think nothing of it at the time, till the shock kicks in. At this point the railway company concerned has no idea their ex customer is having problems - unless of course said customer contacts them, at which point AFAIK help will be offered.
In your case, it should have been offered - i'm very surprised it wasn't.
The other thing which really annoys me about these incidents is the emphasis on getting the service up and running again.
|
|
|
Post by cjmillsnun on Jul 4, 2005 16:13:59 GMT
It's good to hear that something is being done regarding this.
My experience was 10 years ago, although I would have thought that BTP would still have offered something or reported what had happened to the NHS or some support group so that counsellors could offer help.
Actually I can understand the need to get the railway operating again quickly and baring any criminal processes that need to be completed (if the person concerned was pushed ie murder) then the scene should be recorded as quickly as possible, the person moved, the scene cleaned and prepared and the service re-started. On LUL there is not enough capacity on alternative routes to cope with a close-down at the best of times.
Luckily I am a bit of a railway nut, and my experience was mentally positive to me (so I was back on the same line about 2 months later) however I feel a leaflet handed to people during the evacuation of the scene giving a number to phone to arrange counselling about the incident would be advantageous, who knows, after the counselling the passenger(s) may start to use the railway again as they would feel that LUL/BTP/NR/the TOC are a caring organisation who look after the needs of their passengers.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,317
|
Post by Colin on Jul 5, 2005 0:32:26 GMT
I like the idea of a leaflet - perhaps someone with 'clout' reading this might come up with something. The only drawback I could see with this is lot's of people ringing a phone number at very short notice. Still a great idea though
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jul 5, 2005 7:22:49 GMT
Passengers on the train wouldn't really see the victim of a 'one under' would they. The passengers on the station may panic or leave quickly, especially with children, so may not be able to find out about the leaflet.
|
|