Passcom Penalty?

[AlterEgo]

I agree with xfield. I recall having a train fire a year or so ago, where if we'd have stopped where we were, we'd have stopped straddling a major junction so stopping the job, with no position of safety on either side of the line if passengers chose to self evacuate, no access for the fire brigade if the fire became more serious. Made far more sense to continue on into the next station where passengers could be detrained safely onto a platform and kept away from the vehicle on fire.

No passenger is going to think about that if the train is on fire. Hit that passcom immediately. If the train stops, it stops. It's better to be on the track, at some risk, than dying of smoke inhalation because you didn't want to pull the passcom.

Modern trains have an override, as has been mentioned, so the driver can use discretion.

 

[Jonfun]

If a passenger were to discover a fire I don't disagree with you. It needs to be brought to the attention of the traincrew, and nobody would be criticised for using a passcomm in those circumstances if it was the fastest way. It doesn't mean it is the best possible solution, however.

Passengers would not be dying of smoke inhalation because stage one in the emergency procedures of pretty much all trains is for the traincrew to move passengers to an adjacent coach. It makes little difference whether the train is moving or not while this takes place, and if you're closer to a safe location for evacuation then it may indeed be safer to allow the train to continue and detrain there.

I'll save the "what if it was a DOO train" thing for someone else...

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There was the interesting incident in 1961 when a Ms Berry pulled the cord, under circumstances which she believed to be reasonable and urgent (it was claimed that a man was molesting her, and a man was indeed prosecuted for "interfering with her comfort" and for "boarding a train while it was moving".) Nevertheless, she was also prosecuted by the British Transport Commission for pulling the cord, and fined.

She Appealled, won the Appeal, and was awarded costs against the Commission, but was still out of pocket as her costs had been higher than the award.

So, she then launched a prosecution against the Commission for the tort of 'malicious prosecution' and claiming damages, reported in Berry v British Transport Commission [1961] 1 QB 149. This would be a jury trial, for which she applied for, and was granted, legal aid.
That trial turned on a complex argument over 'damages' and although Diplock J couldn't agree that her loss fell under any of the established 'heads of damages', he did allow an appeal so that this point of law could be clarified, and which appeared to be unreasonable in the present circumstances.

But frustratingly, the Legal Aid Commission, who had been willing to fund her claim for 'malicious prosecution, then refused to fund the clarification of the law; Diplock J took this refusal to be a snub against the Court. Eventually, however, the Counsel who had brought her claim agreed to bear their own costs in the Appeal, and after lengthy argument, Devlin JL gave a lengthy analysis of the recovery of costs in civil and criminal proceedings and showed that there were injustices which should be addressed, agreeing that Ms Berry was entitled to recover her costs. Though in the end, the Commission settled out of court, paying her £850.

The fine for pulling the cord was, at that time, just one pound.

 

[AlterEgo]

If a passenger were to discover a fire I don't disagree with you. It needs to be brought to the attention of the traincrew, and nobody would be criticised for using a passcomm in those circumstances if it was the fastest way. It doesn't mean it is the best possible solution, however.

Passengers would not be dying of smoke inhalation because stage one in the emergency procedures of pretty much all trains is for the traincrew to move passengers to an adjacent coach.

...if they know about it.

It's entirely possible that a carriage could have a fire in it and the traincrew don't know about it, unless you pull the cord.

 

[edwin_m]

But if there's a derailed bogie bouncing along the four-foot, that conversation could be time wasted that results in deaths. (As noted above Eschede was of course a good example of this - as soon as the incident happened the passenger should have pulled it without asking about anything - and the fear introduced by threats of fines etc could well be what prevented this and thus caused deaths).

FWIW Germany has a dual system - green for passcom, red for emergency brake.

I'd agree that the train at Eschede should have been stopped, although I don't think it was actually derailed until some time after the piece broke off the wheel so the motion of the train might have seemed quite normal to most people. However if someone had called the driver on the intercom and said that a piece of wheel had just come through the floor I think the brakes would be on pretty quick.

As with so many of these things it's a question of balancing risk. For every incident when it's essential to stop the train quickly there are several others when it would be better to keep moving to the next station. Even though these may be less severe incidents, the balance of risks on the whole is in favour of the intercom rather than the immediate brake, just as the safety cards advise people to stay on the train unless there is an immediate danger.

Some years ago there was a fire at Maidenhead when a fuel tank dropped off a HST power car and started a diesel fire further back in the train. The only person killed was someone who got out quickly and was hit by a train on another track.

 

[Jonfun]

...if they know about it.

It's entirely possible that a carriage could have a fire in it and the traincrew don't know about it, unless you pull the cord.

Isn't that what I said in the first paragraph of the post you quoted?

 

[a_c_skinner]

It was of course originally installed for communication with the train crew, hence communication cord, after a murder in a non-corridor train. Obviously the only way to communicate was stopping the train.

Now I may be confabulating, but I've a recollection (which might be a bit irrational) of a story of a dining car attendant stopping a runaway when the train passed through a scheduled stop at a good speed. The story was the driver could only apply the locomotive brakes and the communication cord applied the train brake. (Deltic, Doncaster spring to mind, but it may merely have been a lurid if specialised dream.)

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Think I read that story. A recollection by the late Harry Friend in Traction magazine springs to mind. Or in the book "tales of the old railwaymen" which i dont have access to right now.

As a guard/train manager myself Id rather the chord was pulled to a trivial/false alarm situation than not pulled at all. As I have often said on here, " how can i deal with it if I dont know about it?"

 

[edwin_m]

It was of course originally installed for communication with the train crew, hence communication cord, after a murder in a non-corridor train. Obviously the only way to communicate was stopping the train.

Now I may be confabulating, but I've a recollection (which might be a bit irrational) of a story of a dining car attendant stopping a runaway when the train passed through a scheduled stop at a good speed. The story was the driver could only apply the locomotive brakes and the communication cord applied the train brake. (Deltic, Doncaster spring to mind, but it may merely have been a lurid if specialised dream.)

Darlington. On the way from York the train ran over something on the track that dislodged a traction motor casing from the loco. This bounced up between it and the first coach and managed to close the isolation cock on the train pipe without doing any other damage that might have punctured the pipework and applied the brakes. Thus the driver had only the loco brakes. Fortunately the train didn't derail on the speed-restricted junction into the platform loop, but toppled a DMU on an adjacent track and was on its way up the Bishop Auckland branch before coming to a halt.

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?eventID=554

 

[Harbornite]

If you see something wrong, better to report it and find it's nothing (as gimmea50 inferred). If not, you have the potential for incidents like the Eschede derailment in Germany.

 

[causton]

Now I may be confabulating, but I've a recollection (which might be a bit irrational) of a story of a dining car attendant stopping a runaway when the train passed through a scheduled stop at a good speed. The story was the driver could only apply the locomotive brakes and the communication cord applied the train brake.

I took one of the sleeper trains a while ago and at one of the small remote stations, I went to go to the toilet and saw two members of staff, one with their head out the window and one with their hand on the emergency brake and the train slowed to about 5mph, then when the carriages were approaching the correct stopping point the first member of staff shouted at the second to pull the passcom and thus the train stopped in the right place!!

Not going to ask how that one works, surely the driver knows where to stop I won't even mention which sleeper it was to preserve anonymity

 

[a_c_skinner]

"managed to close the isolation cock on the train pipe"

I did recall it was the brake pipe cock as the cause of the trouble, but in this august company hesitated to say. It must have been a startling tip though Darlington at speed.

Andrew

 

[jindivik]

As a dispatcher the passcom comes up every now and then as a reason for delay (we have to log every delay over 2 mins). Last week I had a driver come down after an emergency lever pulled in the toilet before departure, I know of no instance where anyone has actually been prosecuted though.

 

[edwin_m]

"managed to close the isolation cock on the train pipe"

I did recall it was the brake pipe cock as the cause of the trouble, but in this august company hesitated to say. It must have been a startling tip though Darlington at speed.

Andrew

I read the report I linked to after I posted, which suggests the unknown object struck by the train actually separated the reservoir pipes, which then flailed around and closed the cock on the brake pipe. As so often happens in accident reports, the guard was just reaching for the brake valve when he was thrown to the floor by the overspeed through the turnout.

 

[BestWestern]

I took one of the sleeper trains a while ago and at one of the small remote stations, I went to go to the toilet and saw two members of staff, one with their head out the window and one with their hand on the emergency brake and the train slowed to about 5mph, then when the carriages were approaching the correct stopping point the first member of staff shouted at the second to pull the passcom and thus the train stopped in the right place!!

Not going to ask how that one works, surely the driver knows where to stop I won't even mention which sleeper it was to preserve anonymity

There are plenty of reasons why the Guard may need to position the train, generally if it is an 'out of course' event. I would imagine the sleepers perform all manner of odd stops, and unless there are stop boards fitted it is surprisingly difficult for a Driver to accurately guess precisely where a certain part of his train is. Many a times a train requires a shunt move or for a particular portion to be alongside a short platform, and the Guard will advise the Driver of when he needs to come to a stand (or in your case just do it for him!)

 

[Alteran Ancient]

I saw a rather surreal event at Victoria the other week. There was a 377 parked on Platform 7, with all of the BIL lamps on both sides of the train all flashing at the same time. Not too sure what was going on there.

Is there a reason other than pulling the passcom that would cause this to happen?

 

[ComUtoR]

Is there a reason other than pulling the passcom that would cause this to happen?

Positively

 

[AlterEgo]

Instead of pulling the passcom, why not just break the emergency exit? That's what someone on my train - the Texas Eagle - has just done, causing an hour delay.

Still, it's all relative, and it is Amtrak!

Allegedly it was a fare evader who was escaping the police. All good fun here in Tucson.