Atomic Systems

How many of you saw the BBC program Whistleblowers shown last night (4.11.04) ? Bit of an eye opener wasn't it. Hopefully the majority of the characters featured have been disciplined, sacked or even jailed by now. How many of you want to go over the Forth Bridge now? I only hope this highlighted the attitude of a tiny minority of rail workers.

Can I suggest that people look on the Network Rail Web site and read the letter they produced in response to the program (Interesting)

Alan.

Hi
It didn't surprise me at all.......I dont catch trains anymore......well not in this country.......bloody dissgrace.
And I cant see the point in reading a letter from a boss who proberbly goes near the tracks less than I do.

But a link would be handy.........good for a laugh maybe.

Seesh, not only are they ignoring faults that could cause fatalities, sitting around doing nothing, some are even involved in credit car theft!!!!

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid...

37413 wrote:Can I suggest that people look on the Network Rail Web site and read the letter they produced in response to the program (Interesting)

Alan.

Thanks for that Alan. Here's the link. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Documents/ ... safety.doc

“We take any allegations about safety extremely seriously. But we do not believe the BBC’s investigation has uncovered any risks to train or passenger safety.
“This was a serious subject treated in a sensationalist manner. We maintain the railway to ensure it is safe and fit for purpose.
“Every inch of track is subjected to a frequent, demanding inspection regime, which is supplemented with inspections by the very latest track reading and monitoring equipment..
“While a stretch of track might not be visually perfect to the untrained eye, it can still be safe.â€

jbilton wrote:“We take any allegations about safety extremely seriously. But we do not believe the BBC’s investigation has uncovered any risks to train or passenger safety.
“This was a serious subject treated in a sensationalist manner. We maintain the railway to ensure it is safe and fit for purpose.
“Every inch of track is subjected to a frequent, demanding inspection regime, which is supplemented with inspections by the very latest track reading and monitoring equipment..
“While a stretch of track might not be visually perfect to the untrained eye, it can still be safe.”

Hmm....obviously didn't watch the same programme we all did last night then...

Obviously you have a far higher regard for journalistic integrity than you do for the integrity of rail management. History doesn't bear you out.

Do you really think that rail maintenance managers would knowinglyallow faults that could cause a disaster, the likes of which hasn't been seen since the Tay Bridge, to go unrepaired?
Do you really think that management would allow the system to become so poorly maintained that it would give anyone an excuse to close it, knowing that they are already considered the worst transport system going?

The BBC journalists seem to have found, with the assistance of subterfuge and some disgruntled ex-employees, some apparent, but minor, failures of a rigorous maintenance scheme and have presented them in an inflammatory and sensationalist manner. In common with all jounalists, they allow nobody to see the material prior to publication, allow no rebuttal of the allegations made and then present their case as 'factual and unbiased'. Bullshit.

You're already anti-railway, you've said so, so we should take your opinion as reasoned and worthwhile? You're even less believable than a team of journalists whose only aim is to make themselves look good at anyone's expense.

Reminds me of that character from Paul whitehouse....who used to denied everything........including his name.

And you are so reminiscent of those characters who send me spam emails quoting every urban legend in the business. They believe it is the plain unvarnished truth, because they read it on the Interent.

You're worse; you know it's true - because you saw it on the telly.

When you have an education and experience in railway engineering, experience in railway management, and know what you're talking about, I'll listen to you. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, you can keep your biased, self-serving, and seemingly politically motivated opinions to yourself.

Couldn't agree more there. People might like to read this article:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/14512307

And this guy is often surprisingly anti rail, and likes to knock the railways every chance he gets, so his views here speak volumes about the quality of the BBC "documentary"; Austin Maxis were more reliable!

For instance the guy trumpeted at a rail expert is actually a rolling stock expert!! Need I say more? If my university dissertation was as shoddy, biased and lacking in hard balanced facts as the vast majority of journalism is it'd have been thrown back in my face!

I watched the programme, and sorry, I do not trust the BBC's "undercover" investigations as they have become sloppy and careless in their reporting over the years. Lord Reith would spin in his grave.

I'm still going to catch trains, because whatever faults there are - and there will be faults, some workers will be sloppy, and as for the credit card issue - what the hell has that got to do with track safety? - they are but nothing compared to the millions of poorly trained, ill disciplined and downright careless drivers that are in charge of self propelled and controlled vehicles travelling well in excess of the speed limit weighing anything up to 40 tons, whilst nattering on the phone, thinking about other things, tired, on drugs or drink, being distracted by the radio or passengers. Remember, there are people on the road who haven't taken a formal test (most well known being HM Queen) because they learnt to "drive" (put it in gear, drive forward, drive in reverse, steer, you've passed kind of lessons) during the War, there are people who are on the roads who passed their test in rural areas who haven't been on a motorway but are legally entitled to, and who frankly can't even do something as simple as turn on a microwave or programme a video, yet are expected to be able to drive at up to (or over in most cases) 70mph on some of the worlds busiest roads where you need to have the kind of reactions a pilot would have to be completely safe. That's why every day more people are killed on the roads than were killed on the railways last year.

Like I said, the BBC used to be impartial and trustworthy. If they were they would be investigating the scandal of unroadworthy cars, the poor training of most drivers, the test fiddles, and garage maintenance. Which of course, they are not.

If you get 'scared' by this the BBC have won.

thenudehamster wrote: Do you really think that rail maintenance managers would knowinglyallow faults that could cause a disaster, the likes of which hasn't been seen since the Tay Bridge, to go unrepaired?
Do you really think that management would allow the system to become so poorly maintained that it would give anyone an excuse to close it, knowing that they are already considered the worst transport system going?

.

Quick answer to this YES...........its already happened 3 times....what more proof do you need.

PS
I dont know if you could have even seen the programme.....but that wouldn'y stop you from commenting anyway...would it Barry.

PPS Yes I am politically motivated....the railways should be owned by the people for the people.......not for monatary gain of businessmen who never even dream of travelling by train.

markw wrote:I watched the programme, and sorry, I do not trust the BBC's "undercover" investigations as they have become sloppy and careless in their reporting over the years. Lord Reith would spin in his grave.

I'm still going to catch trains, because whatever faults there are - and there will be faults, some workers will be sloppy, and as for the credit card issue - what the hell has that got to do with track safety? - they are but nothing compared to the millions of poorly trained, ill disciplined and downright careless drivers that are in charge of self propelled and controlled vehicles travelling well in excess of the speed limit weighing anything up to 40 tons, whilst nattering on the phone, thinking about other things, tired, on drugs or drink, being distracted by the radio or passengers.

Well thats up to you.........but the difference in my opinion here is that when I am driving.....I drive defensively....watching for the idiots.
Where as if I catch a train.....I have to blindly relie....that others have done their work properly.....or been allowed to....and at the moment I dont think they do.......I will agree Network Rail are getting the standards back....but theres 7 years of Railtrack rape to get over first.

But surely if you get in a car you have to blindly relie on the fact that the car is safe the road is safe and all the other drivers around you aren't idiots.

Personally i don't belive alot of the bad press that the railways get, when compared to road travel there safer, more efficent, comftable, fast and genrally more reliable.

Tim

I also drive defensively, but it hasn't stopped other morons running into the back of me when stationary (twice) or skidding into me by braking late on wet roads when virtually opposite me, none of which I couldn't do anything about. Had they happened at higher speeds (the rear end shunts on motorways for example) they could have been far more serious.

I've also seen a wheel come off a lorry at high speed, just missing me, which no doubt was due to poor maintenance, again defensive driving cannot guard against being in a safe overtaking manouvre on a motorway just as the rotbox corner cutting poorly maintained haulage contractor's lorry you are overtaking loses a wheel or steering control and slams into you. Regular checks by the Vehicle Inspectorate always turn up drivers going past their regulated hours, and vehicle defects which result in immediate prohibition notices, yet if dear old Aunty reports these, it's consigned to the "cat-up-tree" slot of the local TV news.

It even happens on school buses - when I was at secondary school my school bus provider was taken off the road overnight when he suffered a brake failure - and unfortunately for him (and of course more so for the family concerned) killed a police motorcyclist. You have never seen the VI move so fast. It still happens, which is my why local County arrange their own vehicle swoops with the VI and police without warning to operators. Unfortunately even being this proactive (which many authorities don't even get as far as doing) still leads to some vehicles getting immediate prohibition notices - after having just dropped off a load of schoolchildren. Where is the BBC undercover investigation of that? Or of the poor maintenance which led to First PMT having 60 vehicles grounded last year - First PMT, not exactly Bodgit Brothers one bus part-time operation? Answers on a postcard to BBC Head of News and Current Affairs, White City, London...

I've a cousin who is a haulier - and plays by the rules - but the tales he tells me of some of the stuff he's seen puts me off driving on some trunk roads unless I have to. I also have a dim view of some bus operators, although I use them and having only been in a couple of near-miss bus incidents, both driver related, again I'm reasonably confident the bus will be safe. I've also a friend who is a Railway Inspector, so I do get to hear some of the stuff that even the "fearless" BBC undercover reporters don't see. Of the two, I consider the risks are better managed and policed on the railway than they will ever be on the roads, and whatever you personally do to minimise risk whilst driving, there remains a far higher level of risk which is totally outwith your control, which is never policed or investigated, whilst driving licences are as good as given away - recent improvements and strengthening of the driving test hasn't been backdated and applied to the millions like myself who passed the test (if they took it at all) way back when it was much easier to pass and traffic levels were far less.

Hi ALL

I didnt see the programme wether that be a good or a bad thing but i do remember seeing the rails in thousands of tiny fragments after a rail accident occured on the news not that long ago. The fragmented rail was several hundred yards prior and beyond the accident site but the rail chiefs claimed then that it played no part in the derailment and the railway was 'servicable'. Rail track was dissolved and Network Rail created as a direct response to the inadequacies found from that post accident enquiries if i'm not mistaken.

The Nudehamster you are a very rude and self oppinionated GOF. There is no excuse for you to throw rude and disrespectful claims and accusations at anybody expresing their views on a forum in a respectful and thoughtful manner - even if you completely disagree with them. Why cant you fluff abit and be nice, for a change. If you want to throw your weight around in words, go do it on a doom3 site where i am sure you will find pundits well able to master your nastyness and give you far better than you can dish out, i prefer that these forums could stay within the confines of polite and responsible debate than name calling and insultive label wielding.

In my opinion, if the network rail company was even remotely interested in rail safety as opposed to corporate image (and profits) they would have thanked the bbc for the information, fully investigated them and cleaned up the safety image once and for all not come out guns ablazing. If anyone thinks that rails with securing devices missing and wedges loose is not unsafe then you live in a different version of reality to myself. If then, they found some claims to be unsubstantiated then and only then do they take their challenges to the source of the information.

I hope this thread continues as it is very interesting, i just wish though it would be in a friendlier more respectful manner.

As always Best Regards ALL