idiots on the line (photters and filmers)

[ralphchadkirk]

And the point of saying it time and time again is?

That perhaps the people who do it will sometime listen and take heed of it.

 

[Greenback]

I don't think the people who do this are compeltely unaware of the possible dangers. I just think they will never listen to either common sense or anyone else.

 

[90019]

That perhaps the people who do it will sometime listen and take heed of it.

Unfortunately, I think it's going to take one of them being hit and killed before some of them take any notice, and even then, some will just say the person hit wasn't paying attention and they do so they'll be fine.

 

[Greenback]

Quite. They believe they have the sense and reactions not to be hit. 'It won't happen to me' syndrome!

 

[networkrail1]

It astonishes me how some parents let their children do this. I take it this was on the ECML? If so, there are 4+ 125mph trains in each direction hourly. Though not the case with HSTs, some IC trains are silent until within spitting distance of you, and if the worst case wcanerio occured and anyone got hit, you can be sure of two things: 1) the person hit would be at fault (i.e. trepassing on railway lines) and 2) the driver would get blamed. Honestly, people so idiotic to do this.

Hi Matt.

The linespeed at this crossing is 125mph , however about 500yards to the north it lowers to 100mph due to Newark flat crossing.

So at the point where the crossing is trains will be slowing down (on the down main) and speeding up (on the up main ), also there is a 3rd line which is a relief for freights and diverts towards Lincoln linespeed it 25mph.

However when this pic was taken trains would of been doing no more than 75mph passed this crossing as all trains were terminating in Newark north gate then reversing back to go via Lincoln, due to the line being shut between Newark and Peterborough.

I hope this info gives you a better idea of the location and the risk these people put on themselves and others.

All the best.

Simon

 

[scotsman]

Know your facts before posting.

Exhibit A - Chester025 admits trespassing:

Exactly. I remember once at Kingussie on a 40145 tour coming back from Wick us being allowed to wander over the dissused sidings to get the phots, in the peeing rain too if I remember!. Of course we were only a few feet away from the opposite line where at one point a 170 came past at speed. But did anyone die? No, because people had awareness and didn't wander to places they shouldn't.

Exhibit B - Chester025 tries to blame the Stewards:

To give an idea of the 'danger' the stewards allowed to put us in: http://40145tours.fotopic.net/p42612678.html

Exhibit C - Chester025 when challenged over the Stewards 'letting' him go on the line:

A steward stopping us would have called us back? Can anyone see any danger we were in by where we were stood?

Exhibit D - Chester025 tries to excuse himself:

Any injury occured would have been MY responsibility, I wouldn't of expected compensation.

[Maybe that's what they thought]


For the record, I was actively encouraged by my Deputy Train Manager to call the BTP when I saw three photters at Silecroft on 'the wrong side of the fence'.

 

[TomBoyRacer]

The last time I was at Newark about 3 years ago I saw from the platform a 91 set at Linespeed narrowly miss a group of youths who had apparently gone to mess about on the derelict building to the west of the crossing. They didn't appear to take any notice of the oncoming train and only ran across at the last moment when the driver sounded the horn. I wonder if there are often issues with that crossing. I did find that the pallisade fencing made photography difficult which I suppose could tempt people onto the crossing itself.
I think that crossing is one of the worse ones when it comes to people not using common sense due to the different train speeds that can be potentially witnessed on any line - but safe as long as the rules are stuck to.
As has already been said this is the kind of thing that can jeopardise our hobby, not to mention safety...

 

[MidnightFlyer]

You've also gotta think about the driver in this: if you're driving your car, at the speed limit, but a bunch of people were messing about, and you hit and killed one of them, because of their actions, how would you feel? It's exactly the same for a train driver: you can't do anything, and it'll live with you for the rest of your life.

It will take somebody, like somebody has said before, to be splattered for anyone to care.

I don't have a problem with people wanting to see the train standing on bridges, stations, LC barriers etc doing so, but when they do this they are being sso, so stupid.

 

[networkrail1]

I wonder if there are often issues with that crossing.

I don't know the facts for this year however last year there were 4 suicide attempts on this crossing 1 succeeded the other 3 failed.

All the best.

Simon

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I don't know the facts for this year however last year there were 4 suicide attempts on this crossing 1 succeeded the other 3 failed.

All the best.

Simon

Trouble is is that you can remove this crossing, but they will just go elsewhere, either to top themselves, attempt to, or look out for the train scarily close to the trackside.

 

[yorkie]

Exhibit A - Chester025 admits trespassing.

How is it trespass if he was "allowed" to go there? (Or are you accusing him of lying?)

It's only in the UK where people get so wound up by such things, mainland Europe has a more sensible view.

It won't be jusst steam tours, it'll be everything: everything that is not a passenger or freight train (i.e. Charters and Specials) will be banned because of these idiots

Under what legislation would this happen? Oh, and can the same happen on the roads please? Emergency vehicles and buses only please, i.e. no cars. Thanks!

 

[GB]

It's only in the UK where people get so wound up by such things, mainland Europe has a more sensible view.

And what would your view be if one of them was wiped out?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Under what legislation would this happen? Oh, and can the same happen on the roads please? Emergency vehicles and buses only please, i.e. no cars. Thanks!

If NR want something, they'll get it.

Roads aren't the same thing as rail yorkie, you know that, and if it was to come about it would be buses banned, Christ, bus lanes etc cause enough delays etc to people as it is.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

How is it trespass if he was "allowed" to go there? (Or are you accusing him of lying?)

It's only in the UK where people get so wound up by such things, mainland Europe has a more sensible view.


Under what legislation would this happen? Oh, and can the same happen on the roads please? Emergency vehicles and buses only please, i.e. no cars. Thanks!

There will be no legislation to cover it Yorkie. Network Rail will just stop allowing and pathing charters and specials.

As far as I understand from what Chester025 said, nobody said he could go there, but nobody stopped him. Therefore it is trespass.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

And what would your view be if one of them was wiped out?

Thank you, GB, and yorkie, how would you feel if you were doing your job, and you killed a child through no fault of your own?

 

[ainsworth74]

Under what legislation would this happen?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Network Rail would be well within its rights to simply not grant access to charters, should it decide to. After all they do own the network.

I suppose I could flip the question on its head and say where is the legislation that provides for uninhibited access for charters to the mainline?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Network Rail would be well within its rights to simply not grant access to charters, should it decide to. After all they do own the network.

I suppose I could flip the question on its head and say where is the legislation that provides for uninhibited access for charters to the mainline?

Good post Ainsworth, exactly what I was getting at, except you put it more eloquently!

 

[scotsman]

How is it trespass if he was "allowed" to go there? (Or are you accusing him of lying?)

See the piece below, he claimed that if he wasn't allowed - a Steward would have called him back. I can assure you that Stewards are not asked to look out for trespassers, and so don't stand Guard by the platform ends.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Surely NR could just say that they didn't want Charters on their line, a lot like companies who own freight terminals etc (though that is usaully doe to them then having to staff it etc)?

 

[networkrail1]

Trouble is is that you can remove this crossing, but they will just go elsewhere, either to top themselves, attempt to, or look out for the train scarily close to the trackside.

Unfortunately we have tried to remove this crossing in the past and failed at every attempt, it is a public right of way.

I don't know the exact law it is under but i know we have tried to remove it on several occasions but when we couldn't we put the palisade fencing up instead.

It used to be a small brick wall with a couple of steps either side, i will see if i can't find a pic of the way it used to be.

All the best.

Simon

 

[yorkie]

And what would your view be if one of them was wiped out?

There's more chance of being wiped out crossing a road than standing at a siding.

If NR want something, they'll get it.

Ah, OK, I'll bear that in mind!

Roads aren't the same thing as rail yorkie, you know that,

No, I never knew that!

Serious question: Who is in more danger? a) Chester025 taking the photo he took at Kingussie, or b) someone crossing a main road?

(I bet you ignore this question)

and if it was to come about it would be buses banned

Oh right, when is that likely to come about then?

Christ, bus lanes etc cause enough delays etc to people as it is.

They don't cause delay to me. Do they delay you? If so, how?

There will be no legislation to cover it Yorkie. Network Rail will just stop allowing and pathing charters and specials.

Are you sure there is no legislation requiring NR to allow the use of its infrastructure? What's this then? I don't claim to be an expert, I am just asking the question, and I want some evidence for you and Matt to back up your claims - can you provide it?

If only people standing by a road would get certain traffic off the roads

As far as I understand from what Chester025 said, nobody said he could go there, but nobody stopped him. Therefore it is trespass.

The quote said he was "allowed" to go there.

I remember once at Kingussie on a 40145 tour coming back from Wick us being allowed to wander over the dissused sidings to get the phots, in the peeing rain too if I remember

​

Thank you, GB, and yorkie, how would you feel if you were doing your job, and you killed a child through no fault of your own?

How do you think anyone would feel? And what is the purpose of the question? If you propose eliminating all deaths due to collisions with people and vehicles then I suggest you look at the figures and consider whether roads may be a better target to launch a safety campaign?

 

[90019]

Serious question: Who is in more danger? a) Chester025 taking the photo he took at Kingussie, or b) someone crossing a main road?

(I bet you ignore this question)

Simple question: Which is trespassing and which isn't?
a) Chester025 taking the photo he took at Kingussie
b) someone crossing a main road?

Also, which is more likely to be able to stop when the driver sees someone in the way; a car or a train?
Which one can take evasive action?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Are you sure there is no legislation requiring NR to allow the use of its infrastructure? What's this then? I don't claim to be an expert, I am just asking the question, and I want some evidence for you and Matt to back up your claims - can you provide it?

Point out to me in that where it requires that enthusiasts railtours are allowed to run?

The quote said he was "allowed" to go there.

Which then turned into "well, no one stopped us" (not a direct quote, will find it and edit this post).
In fact, from reviewing this thread, Scotsman has already answered it, but you have ignored it.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Serious question: Who is in more danger? a) Chester025 taking the photo he took at Kingussie, or b) someone crossing a main road?

(I bet you ignore this question)


They don't cause delay to me. Do they delay you? If so, how?

Chester 025. Simple.

They delay me by taking out one lane of the main road Preston-Blackburn for 2 bueses an hour, adding about 10 mins to me getting to school in the morning!

 

[GB]

There's more chance of being wiped out crossing a road than standing at a siding.

We are not talking just about sidings though are we:roll:

How do you think anyone would feel? And what is the purpose of the question? If you propose eliminating all deaths due to collisions with people and vehicles then I suggest you look at the figures and consider whether roads may be a better target to launch a safety campaign?

What sort of point are you trying to make? We should all ignore rail safety becuase road safety is s***? I think you will also find there is a hell of alot more road safety campaigns then there are for rail safety.

 

[E&W Lucas]

Such antics seem to be common any time that there is a special, or out of course working.

There simply seems to be no reasoning with the people responsible. I doubt they will even take any notice when someone is killed. One of the steam mags has recently reported on a photter getting knocked off a ladder by a passing train. Now that is about as close as you can get to a fatality, without actually killing someone.

The only reason that the driver stopped, is that the signalman will have brought him to a stand at the previous signal, and cautioned him over the crossing. I can assure you that there is no way that you could stop at that location otherwise.

Suicides are a different issue, and I doubt that they can ever be prevented totally. However, idiots following specials, etc. about can be prevented. You simply don't run the specials. The delays they cause cost NR serious money. They're not obliged to allow heritage specials to operate, and if it's messing up the core operators, they will not do so.

 

[yorkie]

Simple question: Which is trespassing and which isn't?
a) Chester025 taking the photo he took at Kingussie
b) someone crossing a main road?

Also, which is more likely to be able to stop when the driver sees someone in the way; a car or a train?

Which one can take evasive action?

That's avoiding the question! You know the answer.

The problem in this country is that we don't look at H&S logically, instead railways are singled out.

Railways are many times safer than roads, and unfortunately the bias of safety rules and measures required on railways compared to roads is going to lead to closures of lines in the next few years. This will, overall, cause more deaths and injuries, but the bigger picture is ignored and rail remains victimised.

Point out to me in that where it requires that enthusiasts railtours are allowed to run?

Where does it require that enthusiasts railtours are treated differently?

And how do you define if it is "for enthusiasts"? Also surely the purpose of running a train has nothing to do with the actions of trespassers who are not on the train?

And what of the 67 drags by EC? Are they OK because the trains are not for enthusiasts? But if people are going to trespass on crossings to get photos of 67s, then why allow EC to run 67s but not allow a charter to run 67s?

There is no logic in this at all.

If the trespassers are acting incorrectly, they should be dealt with appropriately. To punish people on board a train that is being photographed is absurd. This wouldn't be tolerated on the roads so why should we tolerate it on rails? (and don't give me a "roads are different" response)

Which then turned into "well, no one stopped us" (not a direct quote, will find it and edit this post).
In fact, from reviewing this thread, Scotsman has already answered it, but you have ignored it.

I have not ignored it. Chester025 is quoted as saying he was "allowed" to be there. Either he was, or he wasn't. I don't know, I wasn't there, and neither were you, so you don't either. So until such time as Chester025 can explain further I suggest that you refrain from passing judgement.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

That's avoiding the question! You know the answer.

The problem in this country is that we don't look at H&S logically, instead railways are singled out.

Railways are many times safer than roads

Yeah, but its idiots like these who will change this!

 

[90019]

That's avoiding the question! You know the answer.

Answer my questions please.

The original question was directed at MattE2010, and he has already answered.

 

[ainsworth74]

That's avoiding the question!

As are you ignoring 90019's question. Which is trespass?