|
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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? |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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? |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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. |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... 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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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 |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
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. |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 2017-08-04 08:05:20 +0000, Roland Perry said:
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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 04/08/2017 09:44, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-08-04 08:05:20 +0000, Roland Perry said: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil Indeed - a quick search for coach overturned on google returns a considerable number of examples. Some where the driver had also fallen asleep... |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 09:44:03 on Fri, 4 Aug
2017, Neil Williams remarked: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more There's a lot more buses and coaches with double decker buses/coaches than Do you have a cite for one where it was speed, rather than a side effect of the bus/coach having also left the road first? it has from trams (once). Sixty casualties. That's a whole bus-load in one go. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 10:05:25 on Fri, 4 Aug
2017, Someone Somewhere remarked: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil Indeed - a quick search for coach overturned on google returns a considerable number of examples. All the ones I found in a quick search were either because they'd swerved to avoid another vehicle, or they'd left the road and typically toppled into a ditch. Neither of these is very likely to be echoed on a tramway. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 04/08/2017 10:20, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:05:25 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, Someone Somewhere remarked: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil Indeed - a quick search for coach overturned on google returns a considerable number of examples. All the ones I found in a quick search were either because they'd swerved to avoid another vehicle, or they'd left the road and typically toppled into a ditch. Neither of these is very likely to be echoed on a tramway. First link for coach overturned speeding on google is an accident from 2008 near Heathrow where the driver took the bend too quickly - 40 advisory limit, tachograph showed he was doing 55 in a heavily loaded bus, and court was informed that over 45 given the circumstances would cause the bus to become unstable. 3 killed, 60 injured - roughly the same number of casualties as the Croydon tram crash. |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 11:13:10 on Fri, 4 Aug
2017, Someone Somewhere remarked: On 04/08/2017 10:20, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:05:25 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, Someone Somewhere remarked: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil Indeed - a quick search for coach overturned on google returns a considerable number of examples. All the ones I found in a quick search were either because they'd swerved to avoid another vehicle, or they'd left the road and typically toppled into a ditch. Neither of these is very likely to be echoed on a tramway. First link for coach overturned speeding on google is an accident from 2008 near Heathrow where the driver took the bend too quickly - 40 advisory limit, tachograph showed he was doing 55 in a heavily loaded bus, and court was informed that over 45 given the circumstances would cause the bus to become unstable. He left the road (see above) and bounced off crash barriers. I suspect that ironically it was the knock from the second barrier which flipped the coach. 3 killed, 60 injured - roughly the same number of casualties as the Croydon tram crash. Agreed, he was driving far too fast, but he hadn't fallen asleep. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 04-Aug-17 9:44 AM, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2017-08-04 08:05:20 +0000, Roland Perry said: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil A bus and a tram met in Croydon, the bus derailed the tram. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...m-pile-up.html --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 13:30:44 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017,
Tony Dragon remarked: On 04-Aug-17 9:44 AM, Neil Williams wrote: On 2017-08-04 08:05:20 +0000, Roland Perry said: 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. It certainly does happen. Indeed, it's happened a lot more with double decker buses/coaches than it has from trams (once). Neil A bus and a tram met in Croydon, the bus derailed the tram. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-horrific-bus- tram-pile-up.html 'We do not know at this stage know how many people were on board the bus or the tram, nor how many people were in the car,' a Metropolitan Police spokesman said. Because even if we take our socks off, we can't count up to four or five, being the likely maximum number of people in the car. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
|
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 04.08.2017 11:05 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
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. Are there a lot of instances of trams doing so, then? I must say that when walking around L'viv, Istanbul, Bucharest, Moscow or Amsterdam - all with larger tram networks than London (hell, than the UK I'd wager in most cases), and in the case of L'viv at least extraordinarily low standards of rail maintenance to boot - trams toppling like dominos at every corner do not appear to be common... In fact, I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug
2017, Clank remarked: I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a kerb/barrier doesn't count). And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a kerb/barrier doesn't count). And why is that, pray tell? I presume this means the Croydon tram incident doesn't count either, since it left the rails and hit an OLE support... And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams. I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant - solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than solving the problem of trams rolling. |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked: On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a kerb/barrier doesn't count). And why is that, pray tell? The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused by the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks. I presume this means the Croydon tram incident doesn't count either, since it left the rails toppled and hit an OLE support... Having slid on its side. And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams. I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant - solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than solving the problem of trams rolling. Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many vehicles. In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast. Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up rolling. -- Roland Perry |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
On 18.08.2017 7:00 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a kerb/barrier doesn't count). And why is that, pray tell? The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused by the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks. I presume this means the Croydon tram incident doesn't count either, since it left the rails toppled and hit an OLE support... Having slid on its side. And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams. I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant - solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than solving the problem of trams rolling. Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many vehicles. In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast. Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up rolling. I'm going to ask a question I already know the answer to: Is your interest in this to, (A) consider safety recommendations which might have a positive effect on the rate of injury in public transportation, (B) to reassure yourself that you're always right and everyone else is wrong by asserting that it is a scandal that the world did not implement provisions to guard against a scenario whose definition is entirely within your whim and will indeed change every time you are challenged? The corollary question is, Does your answer make you feel good about yourself and your priorities? To make you feel comfortable, I will award bonus points for not answering the question, general obfuscation, and appeal to authority/breeding/former employers/the Hackney Carriage Licensing Board (Cantab). |
Latest RAIB on Croydon tram catastrophe
In message , at 17:35:34 on Fri, 18 Aug
2017, Clank remarked: On 18.08.2017 7:00 PM, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:23:07 on Fri, 18 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: On 18.08.2017 12:18 AM, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 18:05:20 on Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Clank remarked: I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the last 12 months than trams in the last ten years... While still on the road (remember, leaving the road and hitting a kerb/barrier doesn't count). And why is that, pray tell? The activity being measured is over-speed causing the vehicle (bus or tram) to topple over. A lot of the KSI in such a situation is caused by the scraping of the broken windows on the ground/tracks. I presume this means the Croydon tram incident doesn't count either, since it left the rails toppled and hit an OLE support... Having slid on its side. And what's the ratio of installed base of buses vs trams. I'm terms of investment to protect the most people, that's irrelevant - solving the problem of buses rolling will save many more people than solving the problem of trams rolling. Not if the investment has to be implemented on 1000x times as many vehicles. In any event, we are still a little short of reports of buses which toppled over sideways *while on the road" and taking a curve too fast. Vehicles leaving the road for a number of reasons, then eventually hitting some obstacle which unusually toppled them over, will have a different injury profile. Especially the ones that didn't end up rolling. I'm going to ask a question I already know the answer to: Is your interest in this to, (A) consider safety recommendations which might have a positive effect on the rate of injury in public transportation, Yes; and those recommendations should of course take into account the severity and frequency of incidents, as well as the costs of rolling out technological change. (B) to reassure yourself that you're always right and everyone else is wrong by asserting that it is a scandal that the world did not implement provisions to guard against a scenario whose definition is entirely within your whim and will indeed change every time you are challenged? It hasn't changed one iota. Nor have you produced much evidence of buses trying to take bends at 3.5x the speed limit and toppling over as a result. -- Roland Perry |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk