|
Title: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: grahame on September 09, 2015, 07:09:21 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/passenger-accident-at-hayes-and-harlington-station
Quote Investigation into a passenger trapped in train doors and dragged along the platform at Hayes and Harlington station, 25 July 2015 At approximately 13:10 hrs, the 11.37 hrs Oxford to London Paddington service departed from platform 4 with a passenger trapped by her hand in the last door of the three-coach train. The passenger was dragged for a distance of approximately 8 to 10 metres before falling to the ground; during the fall her hand became free. The passenger subsequently reported bruises to her hand and head to a member of staff at the station. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: grahame on September 09, 2015, 07:15:33 Noting an appeal for witnesses:
Quote We would like to speak to anyone who witnessed the accident at Hayes and Harlington station. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: JayMac on September 09, 2015, 09:01:51 One for the RMT belligerents currently in dispute with FGW/GWR to use in their arguments against driver controlled doors.
Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ChrisB on September 09, 2015, 11:09:04 Unless the resultant report shows that the driver was shown everything on the CCTV and ought not have moved off...
Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Chris from Nailsea on September 09, 2015, 19:52:35 Hmm. ::)
As ever, gentlemen, we should please resist the temptation to speculate, however obliquely, about the possible cause(s) of this latest incident. Time (and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch) will tell, in due course. :-X Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: grahame on September 10, 2015, 08:19:29 The investigation is also looking at the follow up as well as the accident itself.
Quote Our investigation will examine the sequence of events before, during and after the accident, in particular: * the actions of the individuals involved * the performance of the train and station equipment * the investigation and reporting of the accident (the RAIB was made aware of the accident during week commencing 24 August 2015) It will also examine any relevant management issues. Accident - 25th July. RAIB aware - 24th August. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ChrisB on June 30, 2016, 12:01:32 Can't find a thread for this - we must have missed it.
Very clear that DOO is as safe as two-person working/despatcher if worked correctly with correct equipment. In fact, they report more accidents of this type when two persons were involved in the despatch. The RAIB (https://www.gov.uk/raib-reports/passenger-accident-at-hayes-harlington-station) has reported Quote At around 13:10 hrs on 25 July 2015, a passenger was dragged along the platform at Hayes & Harlington station, London, when the 11:37 hrs First Great Western service from Oxford to London Paddington departed while her hand was trapped in a door. The passenger, who had arrived on the platform as the doors were about to close, had placed her hand between the closing door leaves. The train driver did not identify that the passenger was trapped and the train moved off, dragging the passenger along the platform. After being dragged for about 19 metres, the passenger lost her footing and fell onto the platform. The passenger suffered head, hand and back injuries. RAIB’s investigation found that the passenger had deliberately placed her hand in the closing door in the expectation that it would re-open as a consequence. RAIB has concluded that after closing the doors of the train, the driver either did not make a final check that it was safe to depart, or that the check was insufficiently detailed to allow him to identify the trapped passenger. The driver may have been misled into thinking that it was safe to depart because a door interlock light in his cab had illuminated, indicating that the doors were closed and locked and he was able to take power. Our investigation identified that the train driver and other railway staff held the same misunderstanding: if someone had a hand trapped in a door it would not be possible for the door interlock light to illuminate and a driver to take power. This is not the case, and the door was found to be compliant with all applicable standards after the accident. As a consequence of this investigation, RAIB has made two recommendations. The first, addressed to RSSB to review, and if necessary extend, its research into the passenger/train interface to understand passenger behaviour and identify means for deterring members of the public from obstructing train doors. The second recommendation is addressed to operators and owners of trains similar to the one involved in the accident at Hayes & Harlington, is intended to continue and expand upon a current review into the practicability of fitting sensitive door edge technology to this type of train. RAIB has also identified three learning points. The first concerns improving awareness among train drivers of the limitations of train door interlocking technology and the importance of the final safety check when dispatching a train. The second concerns the potential for drivers to be distracted by the use of mobile communication devices while driving. The third is aimed at train operators to have the necessary processes in place to identify drivers who are showing signs of sub-standard performance or not engaging positively with measures agreed as part of a Competence Development Plan and the provision of briefing and guidance material for driver managers to enable them to identify behaviours and attitudes which are inconsistent with those expected of train drivers. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on June 30, 2016, 16:07:33 The full Report is an interesting read.
Not easy to design a door safety system which protects against trapping and dragging incidents whilst still enabling a train to get away from busy stations without undue delay. I can recall incidents on the Tube when people have put hands in the doors in an attempt to get them re-opened, and the Driver refusing to re-open and the platform staff shouting at them to remove their hands. The difficulty in pulling hands out of Turbo doors, as highlighted in the Hayes re-run, is a cause of concern. Also, I'm surprised (along with, apparently, many GWR staff) that Turbo door interlocks work with up to a 25mm gap between the doors. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: IndustryInsider on June 30, 2016, 16:26:39 Not easy to design a door safety system which protects against trapping and dragging incidents whilst still enabling a train to get away from busy stations without undue delay. I'd go as far as to say it's impossible to design a door in such a way. One of the biggest risks is getting scarves or coats caught in the doors. Items that are wafer thin but can easily lead to the poor wearer from being dragged under the train when it departs. Better equipment is needed - and fortunately it's coming in the shape of body side mounted cameras that feature on the 345s and 387s. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 30, 2016, 17:51:37 Didn't they have problems when the 2009 Victoria line stock came out? Once the doors were 'shut' any attempt to pull something out that was stuck, (a coat, strap of a bag etc, whether it was from inside or the outside) resulted in the train being unable to move and the driver having to walk down the train resetting the doors manually or something, resulting in delays of 2-3 minutes which is catastrophic for the Victoria line.
IIRC the team at Seven Sisters devised a solution that made the train only sense when something was being pulled from outside the train, rather than from the inside meaning someone with the remains of a coat stuck whilst they were on the train wouldn't prevent the train from proceeding. Edit: Just found this on Wiki: Quote A new sensitive door edge, branded Intelligent Sensitive Edge, is being developed by the Victoria line engineers to overcome this problem... Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 01, 2016, 01:02:31 Can't find a thread for this - we must have missed it. No, we didn't. ;) The original topic, posted by grahame, has now been merged here with this one. :) Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Tim on July 01, 2016, 11:52:23 The problem is passenger education. If people know that the doors are dangerous they will take more care. Problem is that many people, not unreasonably given their experience of lift doors and PIR-triggered doors in shops, think that the doors will always open when blocked. I do wonder if their is a difference in perception between swing plug doors and purely sliding ones. Maybe the boffins need to do some phycology research produce a door which by its look, sound, speed of movement etc looks vicious and so is respected more that a gently sliding door. Only half joking but would painting teeth on the door edge discourage people from putting their hands in? That might be preferable to a purely engineering solution which could add complexity and delays due to false positives.
I know that the doors on the Munich S-Bahn are scary with their authoritative beeping and rapid whoosh as they close and I wonder if that acts as a discouragement to take a chance with them? Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Western Enterprise on July 01, 2016, 16:02:36 I've noticed that on the doors on some of the HEX trains that they have put serrated edges to sort of represent a saw blade. If the door was shutting you hopefully would have second thoughts about putting your hand in a saw!. :o
Not all have been fitted though, does look good from a distance though.. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Billhere on July 01, 2016, 16:06:36 I know that the doors on the Munich S-Bahn are scary with their authoritative beeping and rapid whoosh as they close and I wonder if that acts as a discouragement to take a chance with them? If you want to know scary you should have tried the Paris subway in the 60's. Finger amputation stuff there when they closed, and a little handle dropped over as well to secure them (the doors not the fingers). You didn't put you hand in the door twice there ! None of your sissy bits of rubber, pure wood as I remember it. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: stuving on January 11, 2017, 14:31:41 Just thought I had better add this link about a passenger being dragged with their hand caught in DOO train. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/driver-accused-of-dragging-train-passenger-along-platform-with-hand-stuck-in-door/ar-BBy6lTk?li=BBoPOOl&ocid=mailsignout No second person on platform either guard or platform staff I wasn't last year, it was 2015. Discussed in this thread (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16197.msg182347#msg182347). The technical background is in the RAIB report (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/577395aded915d622c0000c9/R122016_160630_Hayes_and_Harlington.pdf). Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ChrisB on January 11, 2017, 14:53:36 Reviewing that, this would seem to explain why thy have prosecuted
Quote The second [learning point] concerns the potential for drivers to be distracted by the use of mobile communication devices while driving. The third emphasises the importance of train operators having the necessary processes in place to identify drivers who are showing signs of sub- standard performance or not engaging positively with measures agreed as part of a Competence Development Plan. It also highlights the need to provide briefing and guidance material for driver managers to enable them to identify behaviours and attitudes which are inconsistent with those expected of train drivers. no doubt the details behind these will come out at the trial. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: TonyK on January 11, 2017, 15:51:10 One thing is for sure: that particular passenger will never try to get on a train when the doors are closing again.
We will see what happens. Having read the RAIB report, I can see reasons for a verdict going either way - but that will not be part of the evidence. It does say that the driver had sent or received text messages while driving - not sensible and forbidden by FGW - it doesn't say he was using it at the time of the accident. In fact, the RAIB investigation shows he wasn't, which is what the court will hear. Guilty or not guilty, the driver will presumably be subject to a FGW disciplinary process after the case is over. He probably won't be alone given the initial inaction after the incident. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: John R on January 12, 2017, 21:07:38 Guilty or not guilty, the driver will presumably be subject to a FGW disciplinary process after the case is over. He probably won't be alone given the initial inaction after the incident. The report notes that he no longer works for GWR. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ellendune on January 12, 2017, 22:28:10 I think it is important to understand that this case does
and the Merseyside case http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-20339630 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-20339630) Does influence how rail workers feel about DOO and therefore affects the ongoing Southern Dispute The technical background is in the RAIB report (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/577395aded915d622c0000c9/R122016_160630_Hayes_and_Harlington.pdf). The list of related incidents on p32-33 is quite long. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: TaplowGreen on January 13, 2017, 08:15:05 Guilty or not guilty, the driver will presumably be subject to a FGW disciplinary process after the case is over. He probably won't be alone given the initial inaction after the incident. The report notes that he no longer works for GWR. Having read paras 85-89, I'm sure that is a relief to all concerned. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: TonyK on January 13, 2017, 09:00:21 The report notes that he no longer works for GWR. Having read paras 85-89, I'm sure that is a relief to all concerned. The unasked question will be how widespread the practice is. However, unless he has hired rookie lawyers to represent him, the court will be told, if the phone is mentioned at all, that his phone was switched on in contravention of company rules, but forensic examination has shown that he did not use it to make or receive a call or send or receive a text at any time that he was at the station where the accident occurred. What he was doing before the incident is not relevant unless you are trying to show him to be a habitual rule breaker, in which case he still wasn't using his phone when it happened. imagine a different scenario: "The defendant was often seen making cutting actions with a sword in the street, contrary to the law on sharp instruments in public places, but evidence shows he wasn't doing it when the unfortunate victim became detached from his head." What he did wrong before didn't have a bearing on the incident. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ChrisB on January 13, 2017, 09:08:59 But that doesn't absolve him from the suggestion that he may have been reading the final text received at the station, as it had recently been received & it has been shown that he has been attending to texts while on this journey.
Does influence how rail workers feel about DOO and therefore affects the ongoing Southern Dispute Which is exactly why Southern has offered their drivers indemnity against them falling foul of this problem except where they are criminally at fault Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ellendune on January 13, 2017, 09:22:18 Which is exactly why Southern has offered their drivers indemnity against them falling foul of this problem except where they are criminally at fault I think the Merseyside case is one which some might see less justification for criminal action and therefore this indemnity was less reassuring. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Tim on January 13, 2017, 11:07:25 Quote from: ChrisB link=topic=16197.msg208176#msg208176 Which is exactly why Southern has offered their drivers indemnity against them falling foul of this problem except where they are criminally at fault I don't understand how that would work. Say a staff member breaks a regulation and something (potentially) dangerous happens. What punishment can they get? Either it is criminal in which case there is no indemnity (nor can their be) or it is an internal disciplinary matter. If it is the latter are Southern really saying that they will ignore disciplinary procedures after a dangerous occurrence? Have they waived the right to retrain, redeploy or sack a seriously dangerous member of staff? If they have then how is Southern meeting their duty under the H&S Act to ensure a safe workplace? Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: ChrisB on January 13, 2017, 11:11:51 I'm assuming that (re-) training is still enforceable, but no further disciplinary action to redeploy/sack or otherwise (financially) discipline is what is covered by the indemnity
Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: TonyK on January 13, 2017, 13:03:06 But that doesn't absolve him from the suggestion that he may have been reading the final text received at the station, as it had recently been received & it has been shown that he has been attending to texts while on this journey. "Your Honour, I object to my learned friend's clumsy attempt to suggest that the driver was doing something for which there is absolutely no evidence - indeed, there is evidence to the contrary." Quote Which is exactly why Southern has offered their drivers indemnity against them falling foul of this problem except where they are criminally at fault If push ever comes to shove, Southern will sit n their hands until the driver has been put through the mill. Then their insurers will try to blame everybody but Southern before settling. True, the driver will not be held liable to pay damages himself in a civil case because of the indemnity, but he wouldn't be even if he acted criminally. Few drivers have the resources to compensate injury victims, so Southern's insurers would still pony up. If the driver was found not to be responsible because of something relating to DOO, then Southern would be liable in all likelihood anyway. So the indemnity changes little. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: Tim on January 13, 2017, 13:35:28 I'm assuming that (re-) training is still enforceable, but no further disciplinary action to redeploy/sack or otherwise (financially) discipline is what is covered by the indemnity Still sounds dodgy. What if the training and assessment shows that, perhaps though no fault of the individual involved, they simply are not cut out to be a driver. Would they really be a bar on redeploying them? And if they were redeployed (say to the ticket office or barrier line) would they really be able to keep on drawing a driver's pay? I'm sceptical that the indemnity can mean anything more than "we promise to be sympathetic and try and support staff who make mistakes" which is perhaps what they ought to be doing anyway. Title: Re: RAIB investigation - Hayes and Harlington, 25th July 2015 Post by: JayMac on January 13, 2017, 17:27:08 If some one is not cut out to be a driver then that should have been picked up in the application, assessment or training phases. To be passed competent and then discovered to be lacking in ability would be extremely unlikely.
Train driving is probably second only to commercial airline piloting in terms of the rigourousness of the application and training process. This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |