(slightly OT) Whistleblowers BBC TV

[markw]

I'm fairly certain they still ahven't published the final report for Welwyn, although you are right it was something to do with the point locking mechanism having loose bolts.

Hatfield was down to Gauge corner cracking, something that has been found on high speed mixed traffic lines in Germany and France, and did lead to a derailment in France of a TGV on a normal line, albeit at low speed without injury. It could be argued that regular daytime patrols could have spotted this, although that is open to debate. Of course, it wasn't the worst disaster to occur due to a cracked rail - that dubious status is still held as I'm aware by the Hither Green derailment on 5th November 1967, where two packed Hastings units were derailed at 70mph by a broken rail and 49 people died. Interestingly, the length of line had recently had the speed limit raised to 90mph but the local Permanent Way engineers were concerned the track wasn't of sufficient standard, or could be maintained as such. Turned out they were right. There were also a spate of high speed derailments caused by broken rails on the WCML in the 1980's, and on 16 February 1980 the 20.25 Euston to Manchester (a train I caught a few times in my time!) derailed at Bushey, but thanks to the Mk3 coaches only 19 people were seriously hurt despite the train overturning at nearly 100mph. In other accidents in the same period one person died on 8 December 1981 when a weld broke leading to the derailment of a York-Liverpool loco-hauled train, and another died on 3 February 1983 when an Aberdeen-Inverness train travelling at 60mph hit a broken rail end and overturned, caused by a fracture of a fishplate bolt hole.

Buckled rails also have caused derailments in the past, and in the light of the poor communication described in the programme, it's interesting to relate that in July 1977 two trains stopped at signals after recieving severe jolts near Wolverton, specifically to report a serious track defect. The signalman requested the permanent way supervisor to go to the site to check the situation, but as the one who patrolled the section was away, the neighbouring supervisor was sent. However, it seems he went and checked another fault that was in the same area which he thought was the right one (a wet spot) rather than the one notified by the drivers, and asked that the next train could be sent through to check the extent of the fault. Fortunately, it was a parcels train, which derailed a few hundred yards before the wet spot - on a section of line that had buckled in the heat. It was the buckle that had caused the other two trains to stop and report the fault, not the wet spot. So poor communication, and a lack of maintenance causing a rough wet spot, had combined to mask a far bigger problem just a few yards away.

This is why it can be a bit simplistic to pin the blame for rail problems on privatisation alone. Rail breaks and buckles, poor communication, and deaths have all occured with BR and pre-Nationalisation companies as well as under Railtrack, although obviously the organisational upheaval and culture change of course contributed to making communication even more difficult and a greater emphasis on cost control. I'd be more inclined to blame cost cutting in general over many years - we forget the railway was developed when labour was cheap and plentiful, and built in a labour intensive way that needed a lot of men doing preventative maintenance. When labour and materials were cheap, that wasn't a problem, but now it is, and sometimes the introduction of mechanised methods is accompanied by a reduction in manpower which means there are fewer people out and about seeing faults as they happen, and sometimes the first time a fault is detected is when the train passes over. Had Nationalisation not happened, it would not have been any better, we'd have had a smaller, and less well maintained railway because the private companies would have been hit by rising labour and material costs just the same.

[fgrsimon]

What I find quite worrying was that unless the BBC had specific tip-offs that there were bad practices going on in the particular area they targeted, they found a lot of, at the very least, worrying things in a small area over a short timescale. It may be arguable just how unsafe the tracks with the unsecured rails were but some of the other issues were clear cut; such as the lead track worker being drunk, the examiner 'helping' failing students to pass the exam, hours of worktime being lost waiting for some shovels to turn up.

The worrying thing is that they apparently found all these problem completely at random, by infiltrating a couple of work gangs in one area of the country. So just how many more issues may there be on a wider scale?

Comparing with the bus or car industry is somewhat pointless, standards may well be lower there, I'm sure they are but that doesn't excuse poor standards on the railways

[markw]

Comparing with the bus or car industry is somewhat pointless, standards may well be lower there, I'm sure they are but that doesn't excuse poor standards on the railways

Far from it. Rail only accounts for 6.5% of journey miles undertaken by the average person in the UK, which means that 93.5% (I've excluded walking) of journey miles are made in some sort of road vehicle, so the lower standards in the road industries if of far greater impact than the supposed low standards in the rail industry - and don't forget, a large chunk of that 6.5% is going to be distorted by London (in fact 0.8% is accounted for by London Transport), so if the BBC really wanted to do a public service, it would focus on lorry drivers hours, the increasing use of foreign drivers whose driver training and maintenance may not be to our standards which are pretty low, unroadworthy cars, speeding, poor driver training, and so on.

Every journey, unless you live on a railway station and work on one, will involve the road at some stage in some form or other.

[jbilton]

These discussions could go on and on Mark....but basically I dont see any dissagreement.

I agree the railways are in a state due to a lack of funding over 40 years...but privatising them just cannot help.

We shouldn't allow foriegn lorries on our roads....but again that is down to weak goverment.

Hell we shouldn't allow these huge lorries ....full stop....but its been sucessive goverments policy.

We shouldn't allow faulty buses....again poor laws.....allowing companies to be driven by greed.

Jon

[fgrsimon]

We shouldn't allow foriegn lorries on our roads....but again that is down to weak goverment.

Hell we shouldn't allow these huge lorries ....full stop....but its been sucessive goverments policy.

Absolutely, just like the Swiss who force more or less all lorries entering the country on to the railways. Just wish we had a government brave enough to do that here.

[jokey]

Thanks Micheal....they're the ones I am reffering to....I do include the Paddington crash...as although it was driver error....that signal had been SPAD 109 times ....and still nothing was done

You're a bit confused here The signal number that was SPAD was SN109, this signal had been SPAD a number of times in the past due to the way the trains were signalled and the sighting of the signal behind a bridge. Signalling practices were revised and the number of SPADs at SN109 were reduced. I think that day was the first time SN109 was SPAD since the revisions to signalling practices were made.

It's not fair to blame the crash on driver error; that was the immediate cause but there were many underlying causes which turned a SPAD into a disaster. If all trains were fitted with APT (when Paddington was redesigned it was assumed all trains would have APT fitted) then it never would have happened.

I can think of two other signals which were introduced in the remodelling of the Paddington area which were prone to SPADs; One was on the Up Relief near Acton Main Line (which protects Old Oak Common West Junction) and the other was on the carriage line by Old Oak Engineers.

Paddington was different from Hatfield and Potters Bar, the lack of APT made it an accident waiting to happen from day 1, not slack maintenance procedures.

[mickoo]

Mark,

Yes your quite correct, the number of accidents due to misaligned track or hidden defects has not risen in recent years...despite who maintains them, under BR ownership there have been some horrific accidents.

I dont think the track is actually any worse than it ever was, its just now that its in the private domain people expect it to be better or in reality they see fat cats raking off a % for doing very little, on the ground l doubt very little has changed in the last 25 years to be honest.

I know thats a general statement as areas have improved but on the whole l still think the man at the end of the line does prety much the same as he always used to do.

Jokey,

My apologies, l didnt mean to inrefer that the Paddington accident should have all the blame heaped on the driver, the poor soul was caught out by difficult circumstances and the dice fell the wrong way.

Theres a program currently running on discovery called ' seconds from disaster ', very interesting, covers many accidents but the one that brought it home was the DB Escelde accident, even though the wheel imploded the root cause was many other factors, if it had happened 1 min later or earlier then the aftermath would have been completely different, granted it would still have been a mess, there would have been loss of live but it probably would have been in single figures.

As an aside l see no one mentions Clapham ?, was that not a signaling error caused by a contactor being shorted out in a control box from previous track and signal working ?.

Lorries, well from what l hear a lot is about to change, l hear that very shortly lorries will be banned from the roads on Sundays and that will be expanded to all weekend in the future, this will bring it in line with most of Europe.

However l was in France a while ago and to see the number of lorries caught out of location at Sat 23:59 is worrying, these guys have to park where they are and in this instance the main motorway north of Paris and in the only place possible....the hard shoulder....its no exaggeration to say it was almost a constant line of parked trucks for 24hrs, they are fined but the fine for driving past 00:00 Sun is massive, l asked around and no driver was prepared to even driver another 10 mins to the next service station.

What they should have done is stop earlier, however due to there strict speed limits that previous service station was over 30mins prior, they do like most normal people do....push as far as they can in the time allowed...and then get caught out.

I belive in Holland and Germany you are allowed to travel to the nearest stop or if near your destination to complete the journey, a grace period of 60mins being the norm, however its still a 24 hr ban, thus you must not restart until 01:00 Mon if you used all of your grace period.

Thats my understanding but l'll fully admit, whilst working with lorries all day...or in an enviroment that deals with them all day ( Port Of Felixstowe ) l may not know the precise ins and outs of European trucking law, further enlightenment would be appreciated.

Kindest regards

Michael

[jokey]

My apologies, l didn't mean to inrefer that the Paddington accident should have all the blame heaped on the driver, the poor soul was caught out by difficult circumstances and the dice fell the wrong way.

No need to apologise mate, it's the way the media choose to report the matter. I was involved in the incident so know the whole story

Clapham was caused by signalling wires shorting out; a signal which should have been at danger (to protect another train) was randomly changing aspects. The area was going through some sort of signalling upgrade at the time by BR employed technicians who were working 24/7 to get the job completed.

Prior to the Clapham incident there were no restrictions on the hours that railway staff could work. Before the incident I worked for 3 months without taking a day off; this all changed after the Hidden Report and we were restricted to a 72 hour maximum working week and having to take one day off a fortnight (there were a lot of other recommendations regarding signalling renewal practices). Hidden also recommended the fitting of APT to all trains.

Lorries, well from what l hear a lot is about to change, l hear that very shortly lorries will be banned from the roads on Sundays and that will be expanded to all weekend in the future, this will bring it in line with most of Europe.

Haven't heard this yet (now work in the road transport industry) but it doesn't mean it's not going to happen. Personally I don't think it will happen though because were a small island that is almost totally dependant on trucks to transport goods.

Tacho laws are very complicated; most drivers work under the European regs which basically state you can have another 30 mins to drive to a destination if you have been unexpectedly delayed or you can have an hour to find suitable parking if you have just disembarked from a ferry or train (why don't they have truck stops near ports).

I see a lot of foreign registered trucks parked on the hard shoulder in this country, I don't know why the Police make them move to a suitable area (the police are the only people who have authority to do this). Something else to bear in mind that a lot of MSA truck parks are full at night so this limits the drivers options.

IMHO a lot of the problems with bandit operators are caused by lack of enforcement by the authorities. Vehicle Inspectors are paid a pittance (around £16,000) so they can't get people to do these jobs. A fitter can earn twice that working for a garage so you can see the problem.

I hardly ever see the Police whilst driving because they have been reassigned to issue ASBO and the like.

This is all political, why spend money on providing vehicle inspectors, traffic police etc, it doesn't win any votes so it's a low priority. Same can be said for the HMRI and the factory inspectors both of which are understaffed. Despite this I still feel safer on the road than in a train; I have more control and can make judgements in any given situation rather than having to put my faith in the powers that be to look after me.

Regards,

John.

[thenudehamster]

Hi
Redtez....thanks for your defence....and I fully agree with your comments on the Nude nuissance.
He's on the mis-interpritation that if he shouts loudest we'll start to agree with him.
Its a bit like dealing with an old guard dog....lots of growling and siliva...the louder it growls the more scared it really is.

So, unless someone agrees with your biased and extreme views, they're a nuisance, and not worth listening to? That's a reasoned argument if ever I heard one. And I'm not shouting. I'm rebutting what you consider to be a factual argument - as I have a perfect right to do. I could ignore it entirely, but then as was said by a far wiser head than mine, "All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." If someone doesn't try to rebut your specious conclusions, then people may actually start to believe you - just as they did with Hitler.

So far you haven't managed to justify your position with facts or reasoned argument; all you've done is to cast aspersions on my motives and my personality - typically the response of the weak-willed, the fearmongers, and those who have no facts to back up their tirades.

My comment about investment businessmen is based on my belief that some of the largest investers in our privatised railways do not travel by their own trains....in fact they do not travel via public transport at all.

Ah. I see. So it's your 'belief' that the investors in the railway don't use it. No facts, no statistics, just a 'belief' by which you happily slander a section of the travelling public. While you, the proponent of public transport, public ownership and spending taxpayers' money on subsidising the railways, refuse to travel on them. That's a wonderful illustration of how to make the railways a success - you just don't use them! Of course, when the railways are closed through lack of business it 'proves' that the management was a failure - not that their 'supporters' refused to use them.

[jbilton]

Barry
I call you the "Nude Nuisance"...because that is my view of your ramblings and rantings in your postings.
At best they state the obvious....but usually they add nothing to the conversation....and on a technical level are often mis-informed.
I'm not sure I like being compared to a fascist dictator...but I'll let it pass...bearing in mind the above.
As to whether I've proved my point....as I'm not the only one with the opinion in this thread...I'm not sure I even need to.
Your views are as normal...totally opposite to the majority who post on these forums and more importantly actually live in this country.
Jon

[thenudehamster]

Barry
I call you the "Nude Nuisance"...because that is my view of your ramblings and rantings in your postings.
At best they state the obvious....but usually they add nothing to the conversation....and on a technical level are often mis-informed.
I'm not sure I like being compared to a fascist dictator...but I'll let it pass...bearing in mind the above.
As to whether I've proved my point....as I'm not the only one with the opinion in this thread...I'm not sure I even need to.
Your views are as normal...totally opposite to the majority who post on these forums and more importantly actually live in this country.
Jon

Hmmm.... so now I have to live in the UK to comment on something that happens over there? Then apply the same standard to everyone who lives in the UK and comments on US policy in Iraq, or US politics, or the President - on or off of these forums.
Seem I 'ramble and rant' when I disagree with you, and logically support my arguments. And I'm only a nuisance to those who disagree with me.

I was not comparing you to a fascist dictator, only comparing the results of allowing someone unfettered space to expound their views without rebut.
So I disagree with the majority of forum members? The majority is not always right, just because they're the majority. It was a majority that elected Hitler and Mussolini; that elected Verwoerd in South Africa, and Arafat in the Palestinian territories - and I'm sure you would agree that they were not good decisions.

I will never agree with your position, and you will never agree with mine - but it does not mean that I have to let you put yours forward unopposed. Who was it who said, "I disagree violently, Sir, with every word you say - but I will defend to the death your right to utter them."? I agree with that. Do you?

[biggles99]

it seems to me nude nuisance you are nothing but a bully,not a physical bully or a verbal bully just a bully with words.i get the distinct impression just lately that you come on this forum just to wind people up with your clever words.but it seems that people are at last starting to see you as you really are.
keep up the good work
biggles99

[allypally]

Not really, if you don't like Barry, don't read his posts, it's as simple as that. I like to see people fighting for their values, you should fight back in the same way, thats how debates work.

[37413]

This thread is getting out of hand with slagging matches now going on. Come on chaps grow up and leave personalitys behind, enough views have been stated on the television program and if any moderator is looking on this thread should be closed and padlocked up.
Alan.

[37413]

This thread is getting out of hand with slagging matches now going on. Come on chaps grow up and leave personalitys behind, enough views have been stated on the television program and if any moderator is looking on this thread should be closed and padlocked up.
Alan.