12 killed and 14 injured in a single incident... maybe it's about time
they did something to warn people where trains run, maybe lay some metal
rails.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10399126.stm

For that subject line, Sir, I salute you.

On 24 June, 14:50, Basil Jet wrote:
12 killed and 14 injured in a single incident... maybe it's about time
they did something to warn people where trains run, maybe lay some metal
rails.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10399126.stm

Although, in different circumstances, the headline might have been
"many crushed/suffocated in subway at station with insufficient
capacity for event".

On Jun 24, 2:52*pm, Adrian wrote:
For that subject line, Sir, I salute you.

I don't.

On Jun 24, 3:21*pm, MIG wrote:

On 24 June, 14:50, Basil Jet wrote:
12 killed and 14 injured in a single incident... maybe it's about time
they did something to warn people where trains run, maybe lay some
metal rails.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10399126.stm

Although, in different circumstances, the headline might have been
"many crushed/suffocated in subway at station with insufficient
capacity for event".

I seem to recall you putting forward an argument that Tube stations
shouldn't be temporarily closed at peak times because of overcrowding
as this creates an increased potential for street level accidents.

On 24 June, 18:00, Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 24, 3:21*pm, MIG wrote:

On 24 June, 14:50, Basil Jet wrote:
12 killed and 14 injured in a single incident... maybe it's about time
they did something to warn people where trains run, maybe lay some
metal rails.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10399126.stm

Although, in different circumstances, the headline might have been
"many crushed/suffocated in subway at station with insufficient
capacity for event".

I seem to recall you putting forward an argument that Tube stations
shouldn't be temporarily closed at peak times because of overcrowding
as this creates an increased potential for street level accidents.

Didn't say I'd agree or disagree with such a headline; just that it
could happen.

I think my past argument was against the principle of "don't let the
accident happen on my patch" regardless of general consequences for
safety.

In particular, I objected to the lack of joined-up thinking on
decisions overall affecting transport safety in London: anything goes
in the street, because road accidents are treated as being
unavoidable, like the weather. Railway accidents are headline news.

But it's also not consistent between and within stations. Whatever
formulas are used to make the rules at certain stations can't possibly
be applied at all of them.

At Oxford Circus, people are forced into the street at one of London's
busiest crossroads with very narrow pavements, even though five out of
six platforms might be safe, but at London Bridge, barriers only to
specific lines are closed and people are allowed inside a ticket hall
with less escape routes than at Oxford Circus and with plenty of safe
non-street gathering places outside. Which decision is right?

At Bank, people must walk in ridiculous spirals rather than be allowed
to enter the DLR platform directly from the stairs, but nearly every
other tube station has stairs leading directly to the platform. Why
are they safe if the DLR isn't?