Russian train crash and implications for High Speed rail

[jas_sl]

As you've probably heard this morning they suspect a Russian train crash was caused by a bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8383960.stm. Although this will be proved or disproved in time.

What, if any, implications could this have on the UK's planned High Speed rail network and what realistic measures can be taken to prevent situations here?

Does security fencing provide enough protection? What about bridges etc?

 

[Darandio]

What difference is there to what we have at the moment, it could happen anywhere at any time? I don't see that this would have any implications on HSR considering the carnage that would be caused with a similar situation and 125mph running.

 

[route:oxford]

There is risk everywhere, you can only mitigate to a certain level.

All it takes is one nutter to hijack a full double decker bus and drive it at speed through a low bridge and there could be greater carnage than this without much in the way of technical or planning skills.

 

[gingerheid]

You can't mitigate against this sort of thing.

A while ago Russia had the flat bombings - also nothing they could do about them.

There are mercifully few nutters around, because our society would be very vulnerable to them if there were loads of them!

 

[jon0844]

The security fencing along HS1 isn't exactly hard to break through, so planting a bomb on the railway (or by the roadside, such that the timing could cause a serious pileup) would be easy. It isn't monitored by guard posts or CCTV, so it's more to keep out people or animals, or in, if you think of illegals.

We tend to carry on and not worry too much about security, until something happens then for a few weeks/months we go into panic mode. Then we let down our guard again and then.. the cycle continues. We don't even check passports on people leaving the country until something happens and we're hunting someone that may flee.

There's not that much else you can do, except stay at home and hope a terrorist doesn't hijack a plane and crash it into your roof.

 

[jopsuk]

As said, I don't see what high speed or not has to do with it- this wasn't a "high speed" train at all, rather a loco-hauled "express" service. New High Speed lines would be no more vulnerable to a similar attack than the current mainlines.

 

[ukrob]

As you've probably heard this morning they suspect a Russian train crash was caused by a bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8383960.stm. Although this will be proved or disproved in time.

What, if any, implications could this have on the UK's planned High Speed rail network and what realistic measures can be taken to prevent situations here?

Does security fencing provide enough protection? What about bridges etc?

Why do you think there would be any implications for HSR?

More people would be killed if the same device had gone off on a wedged pacer at 30mph, so I don't really see your point?

 

[mumrar]

As most are probably aware, I don't think this has any specific bearings on a high speed line. I do hope the person who mentioned boundary CCTV and guard posts was just joking, that wouldn't cost too much and achieve little would it? I think the wider question is what implications does this type of incident have for global distribution of land, wealth and resources, and of course religion. Take away there few things and terrorists have got very little to get upset about. Most conflicts are avoidable, but the motives in most are questionable. Take Afghanistan - there we have the American nation at 200 odd years old, trying to tell a thousands of years old country how to live. It's like me taking orders off my 2 and a half year old son.

 

[jon0844]

You did read my post properly? I said that a fence around HS1 wasn't hard to get through if you wanted to, as it wasn't monitored.

I am not sure why you got the idea that I was either suggesting it was, or should be. You simply could not monitor every stretch of railway line even if you wanted to.

 

[jas_sl]

Why do you think there would be any implications for HSR?

More people would be killed if the same device had gone off on a wedged pacer at 30mph, so I don't really see your point?

To be clear, I don't think there should be any implication for a UK HSR network - we've got to get on a do it. And it seems everyone here is wearing their rational hats.

But the reason I raised the question was when I put on my "irrational hat" I could quite easily see some group of people/lobby groups etc perhaps using this as ammunition against a HS network. I can see that happening very easily indeed which is why I asked the question so we collectively have answers to counter them.

And lastly, surely a train invovled in a crash at 200mph is going to be worse off than one going at 125mph or less? That seems like one of the basic assumptions we would need to explain.

 

[90019]

And lastly, surely a train invovled in a crash at 200mph is going to be worse off than one going at 125mph or less? That seems like one of the basic assumptions we would need to explain.

But by that argument you could say that a train involved in a crash at 125mph will be worse than one in a crash at 25mph, so no trains should be allowed over 25mph.

 

[ukrob]

And lastly, surely a train invovled in a crash at 200mph is going to be worse off than one going at 125mph or less? That seems like one of the basic assumptions we would need to explain.

To clarify, I was talking about an actual bomb explosion, where the density of people would be a major factor in the number of fatalities