On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 04:46:23 +0100, "Jonathan" wrote:

I believe that that sort of gross-overcrowding situation is dangerous, and
will result in people being badly hurt or possibly even killed at some point
in the future.

As some have pointed out, and I will as well, it is unpleasant but not
really dangerous. It is true that if something happened to the
vehicle concerned more people would be killed than otherwise, but
that's just because the vehicle *contains* more people. I don't
believe a given person in a train carriage containing 150 in a
crush-load would be any more at risk of being killed in such an
accident than if it contained 70 all in seats. Indeed, they might be
a bit safer, because the crush-load might prevent them being thrown
the length of the train in a collision.

There is the issue of those who can't stand for long or can't handle
the high temperatures you might get, but the best option for them if
they know that is to get off and wait for the next one. With your
suggestion, realistically that's what they'd end up having to do
anyway.

Now, I don't think crush-loading is something that should be happening
day-to-day as a matter of course, and there are some routes where it
is that should be sorted out with more capacity. (There are some such
bus routes in Central London which really should get a few more buses
per hour taken from other very quiet routes, for instance). But if it
is necessary to clear disruption, it isn't harmful and it happens the
world over.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.