safety - why are cars and trains different?

[bryan35]

Apart from the obvious.
you've got trains weighing plenty (over 1000 tonnes for a coal train in total) hammering around at break neck speeds in lots of cases (re passenger trains), but thanks to a system of keeping people away from the lines and driving it home what the consequences of being hit by a train is, you get next to no accidents.
You presecute anyone on a line, and people stay well out the way when an intercity blasts through a station at 120MPH.
Perhaps it's the 'no ifs, no buts, you're dead' reality that forces people to take notice and act like this.

The same with cars, you remove the pedestians from the road (as on motorways) and just like magic, very few pedestrians get hit. Standing on the hard shoulder makes it completely clear that you, as a pedestrian, don't belong there.

waffle, waffle waffle!

[droopsnoot]

I suppose people wouldn't wander about in the road quite so much if cars travelled at the same speed as trains. Plus of course a fair amount of modern car design is about minimising harm to pedestrians in the event of a collision, which train designers don't have do (as far as I know).

As you say, keeping people off the tracks makes a big difference. Even where there are railings along the roadside (such as near a busy pedestrian crossing) you won't have to wait long to see some idiot jumping over them when they're in a rush.

[james_j]

..and you don't get soft-in-the-head fools asking for trains to slow down when people walk on the track and get hit.

No, the response, as it should be with the roads, is "stay of the track or, if you're allowed to cross the track at that point, then watch out..."

[rustybin]

I think one of the big helps is that anyone on a railway line without a reason for being there is considered a tresspasser and therefore to have a very low 'value of life' in a risk assessment compared to a punter. It has been known for the remains of 'one-unders' to be checked for a ticket as if there isn't one you can tick a different box for the statistics as you have killed a trespasser not a customer.

Perhaps a move to the continental system for zebras would help. I don't know the legal position but certainly the (urban) french attitude seems to be that if you are on a zebra and your hit the driver is in serious trouble. If you are on the road then why were you there?

[copen 659 turbo]

Hi
i Work for a train operator and the mind boggles at what people do.As you are aware certain parts of network is electric others is not but people think walking on line is safe but the danger ( 750 volts is only a few feet away)but not many live to tell the tale.on average 1 to 2 people a week get killed on the railway and there a quite a few attemps to commit suicide which get maimed.about 75% survive being hit by a train means serious injuries.our highest concern is safety for all people using service and this includes tresspassers because it is a duty of care.

>> Edited by copen 659 turbo on Thursday 20th January 15:02

[loaf]

In London before Christmas there was a Tube strike - the RMT called out it's members 'in support' of an oik who'd been demoted because he'd gone through 4 red lights.

4 RED LIGHTS.

If he'd been in a car, he'd have been relieved of £240 and his licence for six months - plus the indirect loss of having to pay ££££shedloads for insurance etc in the ensuing years after he got his licence back. But because it's a train, and he's a union member, he didn't even get sacked, just demoted - so this prick is still driving trains.

Railway safety? Bullsh!t.

[copen 659 turbo]

i know nothing about the tube,so can not answer that

[docjan]

Having said that, theres not much public infrastructure around railway lines that lots of people want to get to which means coming into contact with moving trains...

But granted, theres mistakes and theres carelesness. Far too much of the latter.

[kevinday]

droopsnoot said:

Plus of course a fair amount of modern car design is about minimising harm to pedestrians in the event of a collision...

So much so that in fact cars have become more dangerous to all. An example of this is headlight washers and wipers. The 'think of the pedestrian brigade' has meant cars now do not have these, so your headlights get covered in crud in a very few miles at this time of year. Result is virtually no light so far more chance of hitting somebody, or something. An advance in road safety? I think not!

[pmanson]

kevinday said:

droopsnoot said: Plus of course a fair amount of modern car design is about minimising harm to pedestrians in the event of a collision... So much so that in fact cars have become more dangerous to all. An example of this is headlight washers and wipers. The 'think of the pedestrian brigade' has meant cars now do not have these, so your headlights get covered in crud in a very few miles at this time of year. Result is virtually no light so far more chance of hitting somebody, or something. An advance in road safety? I think not!

Cars have still got them. I think cars with Xenon lights have to have them. They are recessed into the bumpers or bottom of the lights, and they are pushed out and retracted when you use the washer function on the wipers

[hiasakite]

~To back Copen up.. I have spent a number of years in the railways, and being a trackside worker is an extremely dangerous job.. unless you keep your wits about you and your lookouts are on the ball for trains you could very easily come a cropper...

However this is people who are supposed to be working on the line, and have been trained (PTS) to deal with red and green zone working on the railways...

Other people on the track often have no idea that you could be walking next to a 750v DC ground line.. or that (I am told).. when people get 'electrocuted' by these they need to use a sledgehammer to knock the charred remains free of the rail...

Plus the fact that once a train sees you, chances are it has no chance of stopping before it hits you...

[rude girl]

rustybin said:

anyone on a railway line without a reason for being there is considered a tresspasser and therefore to have a very low 'value of life' in a risk assessment

Another railway worker here , and with respect, that's rubbish.

The reason people are kept off the lines is principally for their own safety. The unpleasant fact is that a human body hit by an intercity train at linespeed will actually explode. To say that the industry doesn't care is uninformed at best. Even if we thought trespassers were worthless , imagine being the driver of a train who can do nothing to prevent the incident - those things don't swerve that well , and you can't stop either. Or even better, fancy being the bloke whose job it is to clean cooked-on remains from the axle-boxes, or the ones who have to go and try and find identifiable bits of someone's father/son/adventurous child? Sounds brutal? You bet it is! But suggesting that dead people are just a commodity to the railway underestimates us greatly.

The reason most people don't get to hear about what is done to protect people from themselves is that there is a no-publicity agreement for suicides, to prevent copycats.

[rustybin]

rude girl said:

rustybin said: anyone on a railway line without a reason for being there is considered a tresspasser and therefore to have a very low 'value of life' in a risk assessment Another railway worker here , and with respect, that's rubbish. The reason people are kept off the lines is principally for their own safety. The unpleasant fact is that a human body hit by an intercity train at linespeed will actually explode. To say that the industry doesn't care is uninformed at best. Even if we thought trespassers were worthless , imagine being the driver of a train who can do nothing to prevent the incident - those things don't swerve that well , and you can't stop either. Or even better, fancy being the bloke whose job it is to clean cooked-on remains from the axle-boxes, or the ones who have to go and try and find identifiable bits of someone's father/son/adventurous child? Sounds brutal? You bet it is! But suggesting that dead people are just a commodity to the railway underestimates us greatly. The reason most people don't get to hear about what is done to protect people from themselves is that there is a no-publicity agreement for suicides, to prevent copycats.

With respect, it isn't rubbish and I did not say that the industry does not care about tresspassers. It does and for a number of reasons. It cares because it has a duty to do so. It cares because it costs money to clean up the mess. It cares because each such instance causes disruption of some variety. It cares because it costs a lot to have drivers and track staff off on long term leave subsequent to the event.

Any safety measure has a cost and in order to ensure that you have exercised your duty of care you are required to demonstrate that you have reduced the risk to a level that is As Low As Reasonably Practical (ALARP) in order to do this you compare the cost of reducing the risk with the number of lives it will save and the value of those lives. My point is that the value you place on those lives varies dependent upon their actions. Would you consider it reasonable to spend the same money ensuring the safety of an individual who has deliberately tresspassed onto the railway as you would on a passenger who is following all the rules and remaining in locations in which you can (comparatively) ensure their safety? It is the same process as one goes through in normal life. I tend not to move the kitchen knife away from the window at night so as to avoid the risk of a burglar cutting themselves on it, yet I would move it completely if friends with children were coming round.

As a lapsed PICOW (And LUL Track Aware) I fully understand the risks of being on the Permanent Way and in no way denegrate the 'Safety First' attitude of most people in the railway industry. Though I find it very worrying that the RMT attempt to subvert processes put in place to maintain that safety by striking when operators fail to maintain the required standards which does little to create public confidence.

Incidentally, the 'very low value of life' still equates to over a milliion quid but is lower than a customers or member of staff. Though about the same as a road user. If you really want to be looked after you need to be in a plane or a nuclear power plant. I gather their value of life figures are astronomical compared to ours.

[kevinday]

pmanson said:

Cars have still got them. I think cars with Xenon lights have to have them. They are recessed into the bumpers or bottom of the lights, and they are pushed out and retracted when you use the washer function on the wipers

Really? I have not seen one, which current cars have headlamp wipers, I want to buy one!

[TripleS]

kevinday said:

pmanson said: Cars have still got them. I think cars with Xenon lights have to have them. They are recessed into the bumpers or bottom of the lights, and they are pushed out and retracted when you use the washer function on the wipers Really? I have not seen one, which current cars have headlamp wipers, I want to buy one!

I thought high pressure washer jets tended to be used now rather than mechanical wipers.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Mr Whippy]

Roads = cars.

Railways = trains.

Pavements = pedestrians.

Quite simple really.

When you mix one with the other, use caution, or adequate crossing points devised for safe interchanges of type.

People stay of roads, and railways.

Cars stay off pavements and railways.

Trains stay off pavements and roads.


All very simple. If you are in the road and get run over, what were you doing there in the first place is my question? 100kg of mush vs 1 tonne of metal... silly place to be unless your sure it's safe!

Dave

[WildCat]

But ist there not a worrying trend mit kids - trainsurfing. There was the boy who lost a leg doing this last November?

You remember the case - train slows at junction or ist just picking up speed from station und these idiots hop on for the thrill.

Ist it because - there ist no point playing chicken as we are all driving more slowly now?

Or am I being far too cynical? Or even realistic?