On threads like this one opinions become entrenched and people say things that (probably) in a calmer atmosphere they might not.
I appreciate Tio Terry's point in post 226. Railway track is a potentially dangerous place to be. People who work on the railways and who might have occasion to go on the track should be suitably trained. If they haven't had the training they shouldn't go there.
It's pretty obvious that there are many situations where going onto the track has a high level of risk. Examples in this thread are Doncaster, and the recent post that mentioned Didcot with a non-stop HST approaching.
There are others where the risk is much less. Examples are the one I gave of Overton in post 106 and Uckfield after a train has just departed given by Antman.
Unfortunately we find some posters unwilling to recognise the differences and insisting that no member of the public should ever go on the track, while others want to insist on their right to do so whenever they choose to.
Re-reading the post that started it all, it's clear that the OP has misunderstood the position at Doncaster, and you can't help wondering whether being a person who thinks he can jump down onto the rails when it suits him and having a child who throws his Dad's phone onto the line are connected. But I don't think the more general issue is quite as black and white as some posters say.
You do make a good point 3141, especially about both sides becoming entrenched. The ones saying 'no' are the ones that are trained and have the appropriate certification to be on the line, while the ones saying 'yes'
appear to be lineside observers, enthusiasts etc. The ones who are aware of the risks inherent in going onto the line aren't going to move from their positions because they've been made aware of the risks through professional training and regular updates (Red videos anyone?), while the ones who think its ok as long as common sense is applied, generally appear to have a lesser understanding of the dangers, but equally aren't going to be swayed because they
think they know about the risks.
I think it was NeilMc that posted that this gem;
All this is to do with taking a risk v reward approach which many of us do on a daily basis, but bear in mind that, as other commentators have admitted, obtaining railway employment requires one to submit to psychometric tests which would weed out anyone more suited to, say, a creative approach to work (that's being discreet). And bear in mind that a substantial number of these commentators also are rail employees themselves, which would preclude them from taking a common-sense approach rather than a rule-based one, and that they may be identified from their participation in these forums. So don't expect anything approaching rationality, and do expect plenty of abuse saying you're an irresponsible idiot, etc - they're used to treating all members of the public like morons just because a few are."
The implication appears to be that to follow rules at work, you must be a drone with as much creative ability as a dead dog. Because of course, we all know that following rules and being creative outside of the workplace are totally incompatible. Just like following the rules of the road while driving must mark you out as a dullard and moron :roll:
No railway employee ever wrote a good book, or wrote a song or heaven forbid, became Mastermind champion in 1983 (and International mastermind in the same year) and then won Brain of Britain in 2005 (as a totally random example). Furthermore, the generalisation that we (railway employees) are 'used to treating people like morons' is laughable. Sure, there are plenty of people who won't give you the time of day and are surly and miserable, but aren't there always these types of people where ever you go? I've got just as much chance of meeting someone at McDonalds who would treat me with contempt as I have on a railway station.
But coming back to the point, even locations like Overton and Uckfield have their own risks. So far, everyone has been focusing on what happens if there happens to be a train around at the time that you jump down onto the track to retrieve your phone/wallet etc. I mentioned this on page 7 or 8 and it was ignored, but what about things like red bonds, moving point blades/equipment or even the mundane, slip, trip or fall?
I personally know of two drivers who tripped and sustained injuries at work while walking on designated walking routes! The ones supposedly assessed as being safe to transit on foot. :roll:
The level of risk/injury from walking in the four foot, six foot, ten foot or cess are amplified due to the random nature of those locations. Grease, oil and other unmentionables build up on sleepers (especially wooden ones) to give a nice slippery surface. Likewise, rail heads are usually very highly polished and/or carry surface contaminants. Rain or wet weather makes everything slippery. Cabling is usually laid in troughs, but there are numerous locations where cables are laid on the surface, ballast is uneven and difficult to walk on and there are plenty of missing or loose cable trough covers, all of which provide nice slip, trip or fall hazards to the unwary.
Moving point machinery can easily trap fingers, hands or even feet. Red bonds can give you a nice new hairdo (or worse) and all of this is before anyone has even thrown a moving train into the mix.
While I appreciate that the likes of Antman may have personal knowledge of a particular location and it's timetable, it still doesn't lower the risk of falling, slipping or tripping, becoming trapped in moving equipment or knocking yourself out cold while trespassing on the line. Nor does it mitigate the risk that if you are caught by BTP, they'll 'do' you whatever your excuse may be.
I'm firmly entrenched (for good or bad).
