Grayrigg crash was 'very sad day' (BBC News)

[RF News]

Virgin boss Sir Richard Branson declared the Grayrigg train crash in Cumbria as a "very sad day" for the rail industry.

More from BBC News...

[paul miller]

Now its not very often that I agree with anything any politician has to say, but I have to agree with Tim Farron MP that we should have a full public inquiry. Any incident as serious as this should not be heard behind closed doors. We have had too many incidents since privatisation and maybe this one is the incident "Too Far" that warrents being investigated in the open.
Paul.

[Tony]

I totally disagree with you. The Greyrigg "incident" was bad, but it was an "open and shut" case. The cause was discovered, the inspection regime was found to be faulty and I am sure that the holes will be plugged. With any complicated maintainance regime, faults show up now and again, changes are made, and the show goes on! The reference to accidents since privatisation is dragged out every time someone does something stupid. Look back 30 years or so when BR was in full control, accidents still happened but only the most spectacular ever made the press.
Question; Why is the UK the only country in the world which thinks railways are so dangerous that they have to be totally fenced in?

[paul miller]

I am more than happy to accept your point of view, though I am bound to disagree on the main point with regard to BR accidents only being the spectacular ones which made the news. We did'nt have anywhere near the amopnt of accidents because the whole network was run with unbelievable common sense. The track workers knew their jobs inside out. I am led to believe from reliable sources that some of these people who work on the tracks have, in the short past, been brought in from other civil engineering jobs but with no railway experience. I happen to believe that the railways have always been different and should carry on being.
I am afraid that the major difference in this world by comparison to the world that I lived in is that no one will take responsibility for their actions any longer.
I really dont know why we fence our railways, you tell me.
Paul.

[Tony]

I agree with you about the common sense vs the RULE BOOK. At one time, the railway was a lifetime employment where everybody grew into their job and trained their juniors over a period of years. Nowadays, employment is only until next week and nobody feels any loyalty to their employer (and this is certainly reciprocated).
Unfortunately, accidents do happen, that is why they are accidents - an unforseen circumstance. If public enquiries were called every time, there would be more lawyers on enquiries than people working on the railways. (and all paid from public funds, snouts in troughs?)

[Flying Pig]

Originally Posted by Tony

The reference to accidents since privatisation is dragged out every time someone does something stupid. Look back 30 years or so when BR was in full control, accidents still happened but only the most spectacular ever made the press.

The media (especially TV) still bangs on regularly about Southall and Ladbroke Grove whenever they get the chance. This is particularly annoying since they fail to mention the massive improvements which have come about directly as a result.

Southall has caused a major revamp of the way Safety System failures are dealt with both in Rulebook terms and at operations level, and Ladbroke Grove has lead to an extremely challenging and thorough regime for new Train Driver recruits.

More people die on the roads in a week than on the railways in a year, and nothing is done about it. Yet an occasional railway accident has people clamouring for draconian measures.

Question; Why is the UK the only country in the world which thinks railways are so dangerous that they have to be totally fenced in?

Because the Government are control freaks. They've created a deception whereby it appears to the casual observer that the railway is run by franchise holders, whereas the railway is actually micromanaged by politicians and civil servants. It's the same mentality behind Health & Safety which controls the railway. They think we're so simple that we need protecting from ourselves, but ironically the public often isn't as ignorant or stupid as the people running the country.

[paul miller]

Well I wont argue with any of that, because you are stating what most sensible people think. That politicians,of all colour and creed, think we are simple. You of course are right in saying we are'nt.
You are also right about the media, they are more powerful than any of us realise, and dont always use their power in the right way.
Yourself and Tony have made valid points about these major accidents causing changes in the working practices and safety systems, and the fact that this has happened validates your points. You are absolutely right about the carnage on the road, it is a "world" disgrace, and any other form of transport would have been regulated out of business.
I just want to ask one question, and I am not being "picky". Grayrigg,Ladbroke Grove, Southall, and the numerous other accident sites have been on old established routes where we had no incidents for a 100 years or so. Millions of route miles have been run over these lines. What changed on the "new" railway to need, as you say FP, a major revamp of safety systems at Southall, and at Ladbroke Grove a extremely challenging and thorough regime for new train driver recruits.
I am assuming that you are both railwaymen, or ex-railwaymen, because you know what you are talking about. I am a lifelong railway enthusiast and supporter of the railways, but I am afraid I dont think it is anywhere near as good as I remember it. Perhaps that is an age thing, where people of a certain age think nothing is as good as it used to be.
Paul.

[Flying Pig]

Originally Posted by paul miller

What changed on the "new" railway to need, as you say FP, a major revamp of safety systems at Southall, and at Ladbroke Grove a extremely challenging and thorough regime for new train driver recruits ?

Yes, your question is exactly the right one. Both accidents followed the disassembly of the BR "time-honoured" mechanism of doing things. I'm not saying this out of dewy eyed sentimentalism; but they had reached an empirical practice which worked. It wasn't brilliant, but everybody knew their responsibilities and the system worked. This was largely abandoned at Privatisation, and the new companies were left to make it up as they went along.

With the Southall accident, I believe that this possibly could have happened under BR. The driver never filled in a fault report which was pretty naughty, but platform staff did tell Great Western's Operations department and they were of the opinion that it wasn't a big deal. To be fair, even the Rulebook didn't prevent a train from staying in service with no AWS. This has now been addressed, but it's a sad fact that people have to die before dangerous practice is reformed.

Ladbroke Grove though is undoubtedly a result of privatisation. The old training system was abandoned as it was considered to be tootime consuming and expensive. At the inquiry there was no written evidence that Michael Hodder had ever sat a rules exam or undergone any road learning. There was no documented training plan even. Additionally there was previously an edict that a passed driver may not drive out of Paddington until he/she had got a year's experience under their belt. Thames Trains took a guy off the street, gave him woefully inadequate training and let him drive out of Paddington from day one....and the rest is History. As a consequence, Driver Training is now extremely comprehensive and well documented. The horse has bolted, but I guess we should be grateful they have shut the stable door.

[paul miller]

Thanks for the very honest reply FP.
I dont want anyone on the forum to think I was nit picking. I just feel everything is not as it was on our railway, nor in our country. We are the poorer for that.
Paul.

[davat]

Having been following this thread I think I should post something that I witnessed not far from the Crash scene, although this was before the accident. I was out with the camera when a white van drew up adjacent to the entry point and a workman complete with HV vest got out and took a metal ladder from the van went over the access gate and proceeded to cross the track and then walk along the down road with his back to oncoming traffic and with his ladder on his shoulder.
On arriving at the overhead upright he put his ladder against this and afer adjustin the height climbed up to do some work. On completion he got down crossed the lines and started to walk back once again with his back to the running line, at this point a Pendolino went through at full line speed on the down road.
Once again he got to the point he wanted to be and put his ladder up again and did some work before returning to the access point, where once again he climbed over the gate, put his ladders away and drove off.
I must point out that he did not have a lookout with him and even when working up the ladder he had his back to oncoming traffic.
Perhaps this will help people who look at the forum and are not railway or ex railway people realise why true Railwaymen are so scathing of the new franchises and would prefer to return to the proper railway under one company.
Iwill add that I am an ex Railwayman and when I used to take my rules I was tested on both Overhead Electric and third rail.