York Closed?

kyle14uk · Post by **kyle14uk** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 10:06 pm

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/031230/325/ei2oo.html

delticbob · Post by **delticbob** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 10:13 pm

Cricky! That's only 30 or so miles from me

I do hope they catch the b*'#~$%d.

Bob

ArrivaTrains · Post by **ArrivaTrains** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:03 pm

I spent 2 1/2 hours sat at Haxby Level Crossing while working the 1815 Scarborough - York (1T89). I finally arrived at York at 2139

My 7hr shift turned into a 10 hour one

Thanks,

Lee

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:18 pm

He was probably never there as it was a suspected sighting.

Apparently someone thought they might have seen him, maybe. It was probably a lookalike as they did not find him

So the police decided to close the station, of course with this happening if he was there (which I doubt) he would have realised he was going to be found so would have sneaked away with the crowds. They would have been better off surely carrying on as normal and having plain clothes officers look for him.

The police obviously feel that putting people off rail travel by severely disrupting them thus increasing road usage, and costing the rail company a lot of money, is worth it for the slim chance they had of finding him.

If you look on page 32 of Modern Railways magazine, there is an excellent letter by SR Munday, who shows that an estimated 63 people died on the roads as a consequence of the speed restrictions imposed after the Hatfield derailment.

Oh and by the way, the replacement coach I got today was totally cut up by some totally inconsiderate lorry driver. Our driver had to break suddenly to avoid a collision. it was shocking really.

If we had crashed the police would have not given a damn, and you can be sure that they would have still claimed their hunt for someone on the basis of a suspected sighting was justified.

The road/bus industry must be laughing all the way to the bank.

thedarkness · Post by **thedarkness** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:21 pm

Shut up Yorkie, you're talking rubbish again.
Speed restrictions after Hatfield? So you'd gladly of died in a 125mph rail crash because railtrack wanted trains to arrive on time rather than intact?

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:28 pm

I see the 1600 Kings Cross to Aberdeen is currently running 4 hours late, and hasn't even reached Berwick due to the suicide at Hitchin and then the hoax gunman sighting at York. It will probably arrive at Aberdeen after 0300

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:31 pm

thedarkness wrote:Shut up Yorkie, you're talking rubbish again.
Speed restrictions after Hatfield? So you'd gladly of died in a 125mph rail crash because railtrack wanted trains to arrive on time rather than intact?

EH?!

Have you actually read the letter in Modern Railways?

If so, perhaps you can point out the flaw in the calcuations given?

If not then how can you dismiss it as "rubbish" without actually reading it first?

chriscooper · Post by **chriscooper** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 12:09 am

thedarkness wrote:Shut up Yorkie, you're talking rubbish again.
Speed restrictions after Hatfield? So you'd gladly of died in a 125mph rail crash because railtrack wanted trains to arrive on time rather than intact?

You oviously don't know that much what your talking about because there was no need for the speed restrictions, they were just put in by panicky managers trying to cover their backs. This has been said by people who really do know what they are talking about such as engineers. Hatfield was a turning point for the rail network from alright to awful and it has still not recovered. It was not what happened, it was the way it was handled, and the way similar things have been handled since. I also have to agree with those who have said that closing the station was a bad idea as again it surely just gave him the chance to escape and caused massive disruption. The only people who will benefit will be the SRA due to all the fines they can rake in due to late running and cancelations. Passengers who have been stuck on trains for hours will get nothing due to it being out of the railways control.

thedarkness · Post by **thedarkness** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 12:23 am

Erm funny how the management knew where to put the speed restrictions and which sections of rail to renew, immediatly after the crash.
Once again Yorkie 2 has twisted what somebody has said. I clearly said that the speed restrictions clearly saved more lifes than they cost, i didn't doubt the figures supplied by a magazine, an unoffical source of information, but the bible to those who read such speculation.
I was reading a copy the other day, and it mentioned something i knew about long before it was reported, and the reason given by the magazine is a long way from the actual reason concerning the article.
Yorkie 2, you come on here, blurting out complete and utter nonsense, then twist what people say and actual believe they said it.

thedarkness · Post by **thedarkness** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 12:26 am

Yorkie 2, you mention a suicide at Hitchin. Lets hear you're views on that then. I and i expect several others, will post my first hand experience of suicides on the railways.

slipdigby · Post by **slipdigby** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:38 am

yorkie2k wrote: If you look on page 32 of Modern Railways magazine, there is an excellent letter by SR Munday, who shows that an estimated 63 people died on the roads as a consequence of the speed restrictions imposed after the Hatfield derailment.

It's an interesting thought. Was there not there a report a few years back that basically suggested that fitting TPWS with the associated reduction in capacity would actually lead to a net increase in transport fatalities as people switched to road travel in preference to overcrowded trains.

There was also a well informed article in one of the broadsheets in the past year that indicated that if a similar amount of money then currently being spent on the fitting on TPWS was instead directed to improving road safety, then the number of lives saved per annum would be in the hundreds rather than single figures.

Man bites dog situation though I suppose

Slip

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:42 am

thedarkness wrote:Yorkie 2, you mention a suicide at Hitchin. Lets hear you're views on that then. I and i expect several others, will post my first hand experience of suicides on the railways.

I'd have to be careful what I say but I feel very sorry for the driver and those who have to clear up the mess. Sorry but I don't feel any sympathy at all for the person who took his/her life due to the way they did it, causing maximum disruption and discomfort for others.

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:49 am

slipdigby wrote:It's an interesting thought. Was there not there a report a few years back that basically suggested that fitting TPWS with the associated reduction in capacity would actually lead to a net increase in transport fatalities as people switched to road travel in preference to overcrowded trains.

You're right and I think that's to do with TPWS at terminus stations, where the speed has to reduce to a very low speed long before the buffers, resulting in extended journey times and therefore reduced capacity.

Anything that needlessly reduces capacity on a relatively safe & environmentally friendly mode of transport, forcing people onto dangerous modes of transport has got to be a bad thing but the HSE are totally ignorant of the bigger picture.

Of course we all want a safe railway but not to such an extent where people are put off using it due to prices, overcrowding or delays.

yorkie2k · Post by **yorkie2k** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:55 am

thedarkness wrote:Once again Yorkie 2 has twisted what somebody has said.

How did I "twist" what you said?!

thedarkness wrote: I clearly said that the speed restrictions clearly saved more lifes than they cost, i didn't doubt the figures supplied by a magazine, an unoffical source of information, but the bible to those who read such speculation.

Ok, so you disagree. Supply your figures then please, so we can then debate this properly.

thedarkness · Post by **thedarkness** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:00 pm

Well its quite easy Yorkie. 63 people killed on the roads, verse a train carrying 500 people derailing at 125mph.