rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Sept 3, 2018 15:23:36 GMT
"At about 16:00 hrs on Wednesday 31 January 2018, a passenger became trapped in the doors of a London Underground train as she attempted to board a westbound Central line service at Notting Hill Gate station while the doors were closing. The train departed and reached a maximum speed of 35 km/h before the emergency brakes were applied and the train stopped. The passenger was dragged for approximately 75 metres along the platform, and about 15 metres further into the tunnel. She suffered serious injuries and was taken to hospital, where she was treated for about a month. She has since been steadily recovering. The accident occurred because the passenger’s bag became trapped in the doors as she attempted to board the train, the train’s door control system did not detect the presence of the bag trapped in the doors, and the train operator was not aware of the trapped passenger before initiating the train’s departure. It is likely that the train operator did not perceive the passenger because of a number of interacting factors associated with the nature of his task which caused him to not consciously process the available information. The view on the in-cab CCTV monitor did not adequately assist him to detect that a passenger was trapped in the doors and he relied on other cues to depart rather than making a thorough check of the in-cab CCTV monitor. The investigation identified a probable underlying factor associated with training programmes for train operators, concerning scanning techniques for in-cab CCTV monitors and awareness of the limitations of door-traction interlocks." www.gov.uk/government/news/report-142018-passenger-trapped-and-dragged-at-notting-hill-gate-station |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 3, 2018 18:40:22 GMT
On page 19 it says...
and
On the same page there's an image from the CCTV. The bag didn't swing that high by accident, she was trying to obstruct into the doors. No different to Hayes & Harlington or Bushey. |
|
|
|
Post by banana99 on Sept 3, 2018 20:06:40 GMT
The bag didn't swing that high by accident, she was trying to obstruct into the doors. And? |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 3, 2018 20:20:40 GMT
The bag didn't swing that high by accident, she was trying to obstruct into the doors. And? I assume he is trying to make the point that obstructing the doors is dangerous and may have been a causal factor leading to the accident. |
|
|
|
Post by banana99 on Sept 3, 2018 20:42:05 GMT
I assume he is trying to make the point that obstructing the doors is dangerous and may have been a causal factor leading to the accident. I just read the RAIB report and it didn't mention it being a causal factor. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 3, 2018 20:53:49 GMT
I assume he is trying to make the point that obstructing the doors is dangerous and may have been a causal factor leading to the accident. I just read the RAIB report and it didn't mention it being a causal factor. I agree there was no mention of it. I believe that aslefshrugged was curious as to how the bag was trapped so high up in the door, when a bag is normally held hanging from one's hand. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 3, 2018 20:56:46 GMT
Regardless of why someone gets trapped in the doors, and what they were attempting to do when they did, the train should not move until the person is no longer trapped. If the combination of technology, procedures and training is not sufficient to prevent it (as it wasn't on this occasion) then it can happen whether the obstruction was deliberate or accidental.
You can never eliminate the possibility of passengers doing something they shouldn't (deliberately or otherwise), but you can significantly reduce the likelihood of them being injured (or worse) when they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 3, 2018 21:03:59 GMT
Regardless of why someone gets trapped in the doors, and what they were attempting to do when they did, the train should not move until the person is no longer trapped. If the combination of technology, procedures and training is not sufficient to prevent it (as it wasn't on this occasion) then it can happen whether the obstruction was deliberate or accidental. You can never eliminate the possibility of passengers doing something they shouldn't (deliberately or otherwise), but you can significantly reduce the likelihood of them being injured (or worse) when they do. Agreed. We can discuss the behaviour of passengers until we are blue in the face, and have done many times on this forum. We all know that passengers should not obstruct doors. But the system should not allow the train to move. Interesting that the story about the Jubilee line train moving with its doors fully open should coincide with the release of the RAIB report. |
|
|
|
Post by banana99 on Sept 3, 2018 21:26:23 GMT
I just read the RAIB report and it didn't mention it being a causal factor. I agree there was no mention of it. I believe that aslefshrugged was curious as to how the bag was trapped so high up in the door, when a bag is normally held hanging from one's hand. I inferred that he was attributing blame to the elderly passenger. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 3, 2018 23:15:43 GMT
I've now seen the footage from the station CCTV (apparently the in-cab CCTV is not recorded). The passenger didn't swing the bag as suggested in the report, they were holding in front of them and shoved in in the doors as they were closing. The image on the report shows her after she'd stepped away from the train and was trying to pull her bag free. On page 13 the report does mention...
On page 23 the report notes that...
From the CCTV footage it certainly appears that the TOp's view was blocked by one of the people around her.
As the report states the driver had joined LUL in 1998, qualified as a TOp on the Northern line in 1999 and transferred to the Central line in October 2004. This was his first incident and he had received five commendations. He was a Hainault driver, I was there for my meal break this evening so I asked around and he took early retirement.
What amazes me is that at that time of day we're running 26 trains per hour, you only have to wait a couple of minutes and there's another train but still punters dive at the doors like its the last train ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 3, 2018 23:26:31 GMT
I agree there was no mention of it. I believe that aslefshrugged was curious as to how the bag was trapped so high up in the door, when a bag is normally held hanging from one's hand. I inferred that he was attributing blame to the elderly passenger. You are absolutely right, I am inferring that the passenger was partly to blame, just as the passenger at Bushey and at Hayes & Harlington were also partly to blame, The doors were closing and she obstructed them despite numerous warnings that obstructing the doors is dangerous. As the report says when the passenger arrived on the platform the train was already entering the station. The entrance to the platform at Notting Hill Gate WB is by the rear (8th) car, she could have boarded there but because the exit at Shepherd's Bush is by the front (1st) car she moved along the platform and had reached the 5th car when the doors were closing. As I've seen from the CCTV she wasn't so elderly that she could move up three cars in what was a quite short space of time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 6:46:07 GMT
So to summerise then a passenger thought they would be clever by putting a bag in to the closing doors and then got pulled along the platform in to a wall....
I am pretty sure my common sense tells me never to do silly things like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 4, 2018 7:54:08 GMT
So to summerise then a passenger thought they would be clever by putting a bag in to the closing doors and then got pulled along the platform in to a wall.... I am pretty sure my common sense tells me never to do silly things like that. She was not dragged into a wall, as the report clearly states... |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 4, 2018 8:19:47 GMT
At what point of passenger stupidity do we draw the line of responsibility?
Ultimately, trains will only be deemed safe if they don't move at all!
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Sept 4, 2018 8:21:11 GMT
What amazes me is that at that time of day we're running 26 trains per hour, you only have to wait a couple of minutes and there's another train but still punters dive at the doors like its the last train ever. That sentence should have a 'theoretically', in bold, at the front. I've noticed on more than one occasion that there will be three trains extremely close together and then a very long gap before the next. Very annoying when the previous day you've been delayed for no other reason than 'to even out the service'. I'd suggest that that's one of the reasons why, even passengers who know the supposed line frequency, tend to want to get on a train if they can. A bird in the hand ... |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Sept 4, 2018 8:48:13 GMT
As the report states the driver had joined LUL in 1998, qualified as a TOp on the Northern line in 1999 and transferred to the Central line in October 2004. This was his first incident and he had received five commendations. He was a Hainault driver, I was there for my meal break this evening so I asked around and he took early retirement. Can you confirm that he took early retirement as a direct result of this incident? |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 4, 2018 9:02:03 GMT
I cannot confirm that he took early retirement because of the incident, I didn't know him or even that the driver involved was from Hainault until I was on my meal break yesterday which conveniently happened to be at Hainault.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Sept 4, 2018 9:08:35 GMT
I cannot confirm that he took early retirement because of the incident, I didn't know him or even that the driver involved was from Hainault until I was on my meal break yesterday which conveniently happened to be at Hainault. It would be sad to think that someone felt they had to cut their career short as a result of such an incident. Particularly since the failure seems to have been systemic - at one level or another - rather than the fault of a specific individual. |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 4, 2018 9:46:07 GMT
I inferred that he was attributing blame to the elderly passenger. You are absolutely right, I am inferring that the passenger was partly to blame, just as the passenger at Bushey and at Hayes & Harlington were also partly to blame, The doors were closing and she obstructed them despite numerous warnings that obstructing the doors is dangerous. As the report says when the passenger arrived on the platform the train was already entering the station. The entrance to the platform at Notting Hill Gate WB is by the rear (8th) car, she could have boarded there but because the exit at Shepherd's Bush is by the front (1st) car she moved along the platform and had reached the 5th car when the doors were closing. As I've seen from the CCTV she wasn't so elderly that she could move up three cars in what was a quite short space of time. Fair comment, but I also observe that the research quoted by RAIB states that a majority (58%) of people believe that if they obstruct a train door, it will open. It also states that the lady in question more usually used the Circle and H&C, which are fitted with sensitive edge equipment on the doors. In that context, blaming the passenger may be strictly accurate, but it will do little to prevent a recurrence given that most people believe it is low risk. My interest is in what is being done to prevent a recurrence given the issues the report highlights about inattentional blindness and the weaknesses in driver training that, between them, contributed to this incident. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 4, 2018 11:40:05 GMT
I think that sensitive edge / automatic door re-opening technology has a lot to answer for in terms of giving passengers the belief that train doors will open if they are obstructed. It totally infuriates me when I see people doing that just so that they can board the train that they have missed.
I am all for making our railways as safe as possible, but in this day and age there is a culture where people think that accidents are never their fault, no matter foolish their own actions may have been.
However, the main concern of the RAIB is to ensure that procedures and policies are in place to mitigate risk as far as possible, and there is a clear failure in this case, regardless of the actions of the passenger in question.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickf on Sept 4, 2018 11:45:28 GMT
I think that sensitive edge / automatic door re-opening technology has a lot to answer for in terms of giving passengers the belief that train doors will open if they are obstructed. It totally infuriates me when I see people doing that just so that they can board the train that they have missed. I am all for making our railways as safe as possible, but in this day and age there is a culture where people think that accidents are never their fault, no matter foolish their own actions may have been. However, the main concern of the RAIB is to ensure that procedures and policies are in place to mitigate risk as far as possible, and there is a clear failure in this case, regardless of the actions of the passenger in question. I quite agree. While initially my thought was that whatever happened to the passenger was well deserved payment for their arrogance and stupidity, at the same time you have to consider legal consequences and TfL (or whoever carries the can) must do everything to avoid being found wanting in court. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Sept 4, 2018 11:50:12 GMT
Part of the problem, I suppose, is that lifts have worked this way for well over half a century and no one has ever said that you shouldn't use the sensitive edge to cause a lift to reopen its doors.
Thus people see a door that they believe will open if its closure is inhibited and, from past experience, assume that this means that they can reopen it by blocking its progress.
Even if you tell them not to, I suspect that the 'OMG I'm going to miss the train - lurch' reaction takes place much more quickly than the engagement of a proper assessment of the situation.
|
|
cso
Posts: 1,043
|
Post by cso on Sept 4, 2018 12:15:08 GMT
Part of the problem, I suppose, is that lifts have worked this way for well over half a century and no one has ever said that you shouldn't use the sensitive edge to cause a lift to reopen its doors. I think you've hit the nail on the head for me with this statement... if one thing does it, people naturally assume everything like that will do the same. |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 4, 2018 12:20:29 GMT
Part of the problem, I suppose, is that lifts have worked this way for well over half a century and no one has ever said that you shouldn't use the sensitive edge to cause a lift to reopen its doors. I think you've hit the nail on the head for me with this statement... if one thing does it, people naturally assume everything like that will do the same. And that implies that other organisations using those things - power doors in this case - must adapt to what people expect based on their experiences elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by trt on Sept 4, 2018 12:41:37 GMT
I think you've hit the nail on the head for me with this statement... if one thing does it, people naturally assume everything like that will do the same. And that implies that other organisations using those things - power doors in this case - must adapt to what people expect based on their experiences elsewhere. Whereas if the doors were, say, edge hardened, polished and ground steel blades intended to pop out at the moment of closure, severing any bag straps that might have been caught... well, I think there would be a healthier respect of the dangers all round.  |
|
|
|
Post by greggygreggygreg on Sept 4, 2018 13:06:17 GMT
At what point of passenger stupidity do we draw the line of responsibility? Ultimately, trains will only be deemed safe if they don't move at all! Trouble is, a duty of care is owed to those unable to take responsibility for their actions. Whether that is due to stupidly, absent-mindedness, disability or whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 4, 2018 13:14:13 GMT
At what point of passenger stupidity do we draw the line of responsibility? Ultimately, trains will only be deemed safe if they don't move at all! Trouble is, a duty of care is owed to those unable to take responsibility for their actions. Whether that is due to stupidly, absent-mindedness, disability or whatever. In this day and age, and whether we agree with it or not, that is certainly the case. The thread is now drifting into a general discussion about passenger behaviour. Can we all get back to talking about the RAIB report, as per the thread title. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
Post by banana99 on Sept 4, 2018 19:50:22 GMT
At what point of passenger stupidity do we draw the line of responsibility? Ultimately, trains will only be deemed safe if they don't move at all! There's an Einstein quote about infinity you should probably refer to. Reading the RAIB the "driver" has to check the PTI at least 3 times before starting. So at what point of drivers' stupidity do we draw the line of responsibility*. *N.B. I am merely reflecting the point to you. Humans make errors of judgement, are not always predictable, and are well know to engage in irrational behaviour. So please stop blaming the passenger (a human) in an attempt to absolve another human. |
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Sept 4, 2018 22:08:40 GMT
It’s just occurred to me that some of the the Tube (Deep level) lines that don’t have rolling stock fitted with sensitive edge (Bakerloo, Central, W’loo & City and Picc) don’t employ “tiger teeth” style stickers by the doors even though they would arguably benefit from this phycological safeguard as they lack the technological one. I know the report talks of more periods of manual driving, CCTV quality, driver competence and future rolling stock bets but I do think those teeth stand a chance of filtering out the poor time keepers from the utterly deranged.
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 5, 2018 7:40:11 GMT
My mistake. I hadn't grasped the fact that, no matter how asinine the behaviour, it's never the passenger to blame.
|
|
