https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f...ent-in-croydon

But it's not the final report, just a holding-letter.

The first three key recommendations are things the travelling public are
entitled to expect would have happened years ago.
--
Roland Perry

On 2017\08\03 15:08, Roland Perry wrote:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f...ent-in-croydon

But it's not the final report, just a holding-letter.

The first three key recommendations are things the travelling public are
entitled to expect would have happened years ago.

"improved containment of passengers by tram windows and doors"

That could make it harder for the passengers to get out in other
incidents, like a gas attack or incendiary device. Wouldn't train
windows have broken in the same sort of incident? Would they put cages
inside the windows, making Croydon look like a war zone?

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\08\03 15:08, Roland Perry wrote:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f...ent-in-croydon

But it's not the final report, just a holding-letter.

The first three key recommendations are things the travelling public are
entitled to expect would have happened years ago.

"improved containment of passengers by tram windows and doors"

That could make it harder for the passengers to get out in other
incidents, like a gas attack or incendiary device. Wouldn't train
windows have broken in the same sort of incident? Would they put cages
inside the windows, making Croydon look like a war zone?

Just make them more like train windows.

Roland Perry wrote:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f...ent-in-croydon

But it's not the final report, just a holding-letter.

The first three key recommendations are things the travelling public are
entitled to expect would have happened years ago.

For anyone who hasn't clicked on the link:

Key recommendation areas addressed to UK tram operators, are likely to be:

- provision of active tram protection to prevent serious accidents due to
excessive speed at high risk locations

- research into active means of detecting the attention state of drivers
and intervening in the event of inattention

- improved containment of passengers by tram windows and doors

- setting up of an industry body to facilitate more effective cooperation
between UK tramway owners and operators on matters related to safety
performance and the development of common standards


I suppose most of us (me included) hadn't realised that the increasingly
sophisticated train safety systems and standards simply didn't apply to
trams. I wonder how many, if any, of these recommendations are used in
other trams, here or elsewhere? I suspect none, as Croydon uses standard
tram designs, as used elsewhere. So will other tram systems, in the UK and
elsewhere, also need these safety improvements?

On 03/08/2017 17:35, Recliner wrote:

snip

I suppose most of us (me included) hadn't realised that the increasingly
sophisticated train safety systems and standards simply didn't apply to
trams. I wonder how many, if any, of these recommendations are used in
other trams, here or elsewhere? I suspect none, as Croydon uses standard
tram designs, as used elsewhere. So will other tram systems, in the UK and
elsewhere, also need these safety improvements?


Will the final report include their cost-benefit assessments to support
the recommendations or will they - like most coroners - take the view
that it's not their job to consider resources, and so encourage the "no
price is too high to save the life of ..." approach common after any
"disaster" on rails?


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

"Basil Jet" wrote in message
news
On 2017\08\03 15:08, Roland Perry wrote:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f...ent-in-croydon

But it's not the final report, just a holding-letter.

The first three key recommendations are things the travelling public are
entitled to expect would have happened years ago.

"improved containment of passengers by tram windows and doors"

That could make it harder for the passengers to get out in other
incidents, like a gas attack or incendiary device. Wouldn't train windows
have broken in the same sort of incident? Would they put cages inside the
windows, making Croydon look like a war zone?

you mean it isn't?

tim

In message , at
19:15:47 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Robin remarked:

Will the final report include their cost-benefit assessments to support
the recommendations or will they - like most coroners - take the view
that it's not their job to consider resources, and so encourage the "no
price is too high to save the life of ..." approach common after any
"disaster" on rails?

Having something to ensure nothing bad happens if your drivers fall
asleep [sorry - lose awareness] at the wheel seems pretty fundamental.
--
Roland Perry

On 03/08/2017 20:51, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
19:15:47 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Robin remarked:

Will the final report include their cost-benefit assessments to
support the recommendations or will they - like most coroners - take
the view that it's not their job to consider resources, and so
encourage the "no price is too high to save the life of ..." approach
common after any "disaster" on rails?

Having something to ensure nothing bad happens if your drivers fall
asleep [sorry - lose awareness] at the wheel seems pretty fundamental.

Why "pretty fundamental" for trams but not for buses or coaches - often
travelling at the same or greater speeds?

Such devices may offer value for money on trams but not on the road (eg
because the current technology means they are easier to make work on
rail than on road). But it'd be nice to have evidence that are
recommended because they offer value money and not just because they
would have avoided one incident. And, as Recliner intimated, there are
rather a lot of trams operating elsewhere so the evidence might be
expected to include the use - or absence of use - of such devices
elsewhere.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In message , at
08:35:43 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, Robin remarked:

Will the final report include their cost-benefit assessments to
support the recommendations or will they - like most coroners - take
the view that it's not their job to consider resources, and so
encourage the "no price is too high to save the life of ..." approach
common after any "disaster" on rails?

Having something to ensure nothing bad happens if your drivers fall
asleep [sorry - lose awareness] at the wheel seems pretty fundamental.

Why "pretty fundamental" for trams but not for buses or coaches - often
travelling at the same or greater speeds?

Such devices may offer value for money on trams but not on the road (eg
because the current technology means they are easier to make work on
rail than on road).

There's more to do when driving a bus, therefore drivers don't fall
asleep as often. There are also very few instances of buses toppling
over because they took a bend too fast.
--
Roland Perry

On 2017-08-04 07:35:43 +0000, Robin said:

Such devices may offer value for money on trams but not on the road (eg
because the current technology means they are easier to make work on
rail than on road). But it'd be nice to have evidence that are
recommended because they offer value money and not just because they
would have avoided one incident. And, as Recliner intimated, there
are rather a lot of trams operating elsewhere so the evidence might be
expected to include the use - or absence of use - of such devices
elsewhere.

I think it fundamentally raises the question - is a tram a bus on
rails, or a train on the road?

If we see it as the latter, up go costs, which means more people in
actual buses which have none of these standards.

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