Evacuation in emergency - escape routes blocked

DelW · 25 Feb 2024

3141 said:
There is a solution to the issue raised by the OP, which is seat regulation so that no-one travels without a seat reservation. But does the possible danger from luggage blocking the exit justify such a change in rail travel arrangements? It reminds me of the calls for seat belts on trains after the Ufton Nervet accident.

That's the only way I could think of to eliminate (or nearly) the issue raised by the OP, and I'd be very much against it. One of the advantages rail has over alternatives (coach or air*) is the flexibility to make or vary travel arrangements at short notice. I'm travelling today on a flexible walk-up ticket, even though cheaper advances were available, for exactly that reason.

IIRC various train operators tried all-reservation services during Covid (indeed I think some still make a pretence of it) and it was unpopular with many passengers. It would be an overreaction to the situation described, which may be annoying but is a low risk of actual harm to anyone.

(*I know there are flexible air tickets, but prices for those are prohibitive for most travellers.)

RailUK Forums

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

It's not really any different than people being in the way though is it? On the Voyager train pictured, the routes these work generally run with large numbers of standees every day of the week so realistically a rapid, uncontrolled evacuation would never be a possibility if it came down to it. People would be stampeding over one another.

3141 said:
There is a solution to the issue raised by the OP, which is seat regulation so that no-one travels without a seat reservation. But does the possible danger from luggage blocking the exit justify such a change in rail travel arrangements? It reminds me of the calls for seat belts on trains after the Ufton Nervet accident.

Even if such crazy policy applied on CrossCountry, there'd still be baggage in the way. There's not much room in the overhead racks, these can fit only smaller rucksacks and handbags etc. and there's only minimal space in coach D and at some coach ends for larger bags and cases.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

43066 said:
People shouldn’t place baggage in front of doors, but if the train is too busy for the TM to walk through there’s little that can be done. If doors are defective and need to be locked out of use, there are rules around when the entire carriage also then needs to be locked out (particularly where it’s an end carriage with no corridor).

It isn’t really a safety issue; in almost all cases you’ll be safer staying on the train, if necessary passing through to another carriage, than you will be opening the doors.

"It isnt really a safety issue"... the railway industry crows about safety is our number 1, priority. How can stopping people exit a train in the case of a fire or other emergency be anything other than a safety issue?

Having seen a family including burnt to death forgive me if I object to such complacency.
What the industry appears to be saying is that accidents are so unlikely that we are prepared to take the risk.

No doubt if such a tragedy did happen the industry will respond with shock and horror , have a massive investigation to estabish lesson learnt.

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
"It isnt really a safety issue"... the railway industry crows about safety is our number 1, priority. How can stopping people exit a train in the case of a fire or other emergency be anything other than a safety issue?

The industry position is that an uncontrolled evacuation is usually more dangerous than whatever hazard is on the train, because of the risk of being given an electric shock or hit by another train.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

DelW said:
That's the only way I could think of to eliminate (or nearly) the issue raised by the OP, and I'd be very much against it. One of the advantages rail has over alternatives (coach or air*) is the flexibility to make or vary travel arrangements at short notice. I'm travelling today on a flexible walk-up ticket, even though cheaper advances were available, for exactly that reason.

IIRC various train operators tried all-reservation services during Covid (indeed I think some still make a pretence of it) and it was unpopular with many passengers. It would be an overreaction to the situation described, which may be annoying but is a low risk of actual harm to anyone.

(*I know there are flexible air tickets, but prices for those are prohibitive for most travellers.)

dk1 said:
It’s a big fat NO to both from me.

The problem is luggage not passenger standing. Compulsory seat reservations are not the answer.
The overhead racks are not big enough to accomodate bigger cases. The installation of airline overhead bins would solve a lot of issues. However this would cost money
Sadly the railway does not will to enforce baggage restrictions like the airlines.

ivorytoast28 · 25 Feb 2024

357 said:
Various stations can be just as bad for deliberately blocking fire exits.

Picture shows an emergency exit at Romford with fire exit signage and green light, blocked with a poster saying "no exit" and a large yellow barrier in an effort to stop fare evasion.

I like how they have a contactless reader there, so if it wasn't closed and there was a fire, you have no excuse to not tap out while running for your life. Priorities!

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
The industry position is that an uncontrolled evacuation is usually more dangerous than whatever hazard is on the train, because of the risk of being given an electric shock or hit by another train.

Who said anything about uncontrolled.
Lovely, you have a choice of dying by smoke , fire on the train or dying by electricution or being hit by a train.
Safety is our number 1 priority....

ivorytoast28 · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
It's not really any different than people being in the way though is it?

People can reasonbly be expected to move to clear space, a bag cannot

MotCO · 25 Feb 2024

In an accident, if the train topples over, then the luggage could travel everywhere, maybe hitting passengers. Surely that is a bigger considertion? The answer must be to have sufficient luggage racks.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
It's not really any different than people being in the way though is it? On the Voyager train pictured, the routes these work generally run with large numbers of standees every day of the week so realistically a rapid, uncontrolled evacuation would never be a possibility if it came down to it. People would be stampeding over one another.

Even if such crazy policy applied on CrossCountry, there'd still be baggage in the way. There's not much room in the overhead racks, these can fit only smaller rucksacks and handbags etc. and there's only minimal space in coach D and at some coach ends for larger bags and cases.

If we cannot evacuate people safely , then we should admit train travel is not safe and people travel at their own risk

ivorytoast28 · 25 Feb 2024

MotCO said:
In an accident, if the train topples over, then the luggage could travel everywhere, maybe hitting passengers. Surely that is a bigger considertion? The answer must be to have sufficient luggage racks.

To be fair, if a train topples over, luggage on the ground is less likely to fall on people that luggage in the luggage racks, unless we introduce a way of securing them

DelW · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
The problem is luggage not passenger standing. Compulsory seat reservations are not the answer.
The overhead racks are not big enough to accomodate bigger cases. The installation of airline overhead bins would solve a lot of issues. However this would cost money
Sadly the railway does not will to enforce baggage restrictions like the airlines.

More luggage space would help, but it wouldn't eliminate the issue unless you also control the numbers of passengers on each train.

All forms of transport involve a tradeoff between safety and speed/convenience, and have done since our ancestors learned to ride horses. We could eliminate x000 deaths and injuries every year by enforcing a 10mph limit on roads, but doing so would currently be considered unacceptable.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

ivorytoast28 said:
People can reasonbly be expected to move to clear space, a bag cannot

Have you been on a train? Baggage blocking ailsles and doorways. A lot of passengers or elderly and what about families with small children?

DarloRich · 25 Feb 2024

In an emergency surely you just kick/chuck the luggage out of the way.

I don't think we need a polite announcement asking the owner of th Samsonite suitcase to return to the vestibule of coach d to remove Thier luggage

ivorytoast28 · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
Have you been on a train? Baggage blocking ailsles and doorways. A lot of passengers or elderly and what about families with small children?

It's not either or. These things aren't ideal either of course, but they can move of their own accord, a bag cannot

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
If we cannot evacuate people safely , then we should admit train travel is not safe and people travel at their own risk

We can evacuate passengers safely though. It's just it wouldn't happen in an uncontrolled way, therefore it would take time.

You're correct an immediate, uncontrolled evacuation can't happen safely, no matter what.

ivorytoast28 said:
People can reasonbly be expected to move to clear space, a bag cannot

They can't on most of the CrossCountry trains in question where people are standing. There's nowhere to move to.

Planman said:
Who said anything about uncontrolled.

Unless there's a member of staff evacuating people onto the track it's uncontrolled.

Planman said:
Lovely, you have a choice of dying by smoke , fire on the train or dying by electricution or being hit by a train.
Safety is our number 1 priority....

Complete hyperbole. The chance of a fire serious enough to produce suffocating smoke inside the saloon is extremely slim.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

DelW said:
More luggage space would help, but it wouldn't eliminate the issue unless you also control the numbers of passengers on each train.

All forms of transport involve a tradeoff between safety and speed/convenience, and have done since our ancestors learned to ride horses. We could eliminate x000 deaths and injuries every year by enforcing a 10mph limit on roads, but doing so would currently be considered unacceptable.

Sorry do not agree .i hate travelling on cattle trucks but that is the reality of travelling by train on many occasions.
I find the attitude to safety mind blowing as the industry is alway crowing about it, hold a handrail, do not slip. Maybe what is required is a fire on a train where people are killed or injured to make people wake up.
People can move,maybe with difficulty. If luggage is blocking the aisles you cannot that is the difference.
Regarding car travel the mass introduction of 10mph speed limits is not so far away with the mass intoduction of 20mph across all of Wales , London and elsewhere . Next you wil have to have a person walking with a red flag in front of the vehicles

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
Maybe what is required is a fire on a train where people are killed or injured to make people wake up.

Serious fires on trains are extremely rare. This shouldn't be surprising given the safety management system which goes into inspecting and maintaining the motors, and the fire suppression systems in the engine bays of modern diesel-powered units. The engine bays are also well-sealed from the train saloon above, and the alarm system will alert the driver to stop the train if necessary. The risk is actively controlled for.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
We can evacuate passengers safely though. It's just it wouldn't happen in an uncontrolled way, therefore it would take time.

You're correct an immediate, uncontrolled evacuation can't happen safely, no matter what.

They can't on most of the CrossCountry trains in question where people are standing. There's nowhere to move to.

Unless there's a member of staff evacuating people onto the track it's uncontrolled.

Complete hyperbole. The chance of a fire serious enough to produce suffocating smoke inside the saloon is extremely slim.

That is fine , you are a fire expert and you have carried out modelling to establish that fact. Those who built Grenfield Tower and the LFB were very confident too until loads of people got killed. This seems to be amount money, cram as many people in trains as possible

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
That is fine , you are a fire expert and you have carried out modelling to establish that fact. Those who built Grenfield Tower and the LFB were very confident too until loads of people got killed. This seems to be amount money, cram as many people in trains as possible

Sorry, what are you talking about? The Grenfell Tower disaster was caused primarily by serial non-compliance with the building standard. What standards on Voyager trains are you claiming aren't being met?

Bantamzen · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
Sorry do not agree .i hate travelling on cattle trucks but that is the reality of travelling by train on many occasions.
I find the attitude to safety mind blowing as the industry is alway crowing about it, hold a handrail, do not slip. Maybe what is required is a fire on a train where people are killed or injured to make people wake up.
People can move,maybe with difficulty. If luggage is blocking the aisles you cannot that is the difference.
Regarding car travel the mass introduction of 10mph speed limits is not so far away with the mass intoduction of 20mph across all of Wales , London and elsewhere . Next you wil have to have a person walking with a red flag in front of the vehicles

As others have said, it is extremely rare that an immediate evac is ever needed, indeed the safety advice is not to leave the carriage until advised to or the situation becomes so extreme you have no other choice. And in the ultra rare situations where this might be needed and there's luggage in the way, as @DarloRich says kick it out of the way, unless of course the even less likely scenario exists that only elderly people and toddlers are onboard...

Methinks this thread is in danger of vastly overstating the risk.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
Serious fires on trains are extremely rare. This shouldn't be surprising given the safety management system which goes into inspecting and maintaining the motors, and the fire suppression systems in the engine bays of modern diesel-powered units. The engine bays are also well-sealed from the train saloon above, and the alarm system will alert the driver to stop the train if necessary. The risk is actively controlled for.

You are assuming the fire is being caused by the train? Are passenger not capa le of starting fires. If you stop the train, who will put the fire out.

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
Regarding car travel the mass introduction of 10mph speed limits is not so far away with the mass intoduction of 20mph across all of Wales , London and elsewhere .

It's absolutely nothing like that at all.

Planman said:
You are assuming the fire is being caused by the train? Are passenger not capa le of starting fires. If you stop the train, who will put the fire out.

You're assuming a passenger is going to start a fire in the saloon of the train? And the fire bridgade obviously. In general risk assessments don't work on the basis of anyone else putting them out, unless you have a specific fire warden on duty maybe.

Planman · 25 Feb 2024

Starmill said:
It's absolutely nothing like that at all.

You're assuming a passenger is going to start a fire in the saloon of the train? And the fire bridgade obviously. In general risk assessments don't work on the basis of anyone else putting them out, unless you have a specific fire warden on duty maybe.

That is why you should have an evacuation plan?

Bow Fell · 25 Feb 2024

Bizarre thread.

We could go down the road of traincrew saying that unless people move their bags and cases then the train goes nowhere, if passengers refuse to comply, then empty out at the next station. Train cancelled.

See how daft that sounds?!

It’s not ideal in the slightest what the OP mentions, but there are trains like that, that travel round without incident, 363/364 days a year and unfortunately I fail to see what the crew can do other than ask nicely.

And before the inevitable comparison with European countries, I’ve been on many ICE services in similar conditions.

It doesn’t warrant the hyperbole on this thread.

Starmill · 25 Feb 2024

Planman said:
That is why you should have an evacuation plan?

There's no evacuation plan for a passenger threatening people with a knife or shooting a gun inside a train either. Why aren't you demanding one for those? What about terrorism - maybe you should stay at home at all times because otherwise there's a risk of someone setting off a bomb near you?

Adam Williams · 25 Feb 2024

357 said:
Various stations can be just as bad for deliberately blocking fire exits.

Picture shows an emergency exit at Romford with fire exit signage and green light, blocked with a poster saying "no exit" and a large yellow barrier in an effort to stop fare evasion.

Surely this is a breach of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order? This should go to London Fire Brigade if it's still a problem.

185 · 25 Feb 2024

With wider doors (ie 1/3 & 2/3), one suitcase to the side of the door is less of a problem. Multiple suitcases across the doors are the problem. Narrow doors at bodyends (ie Voyagers, Pendos, Hitachis) are a no-no and really do need adequate (end of car) luggage racks.

Voyagers have a lot of redundant space including multiple accessible toilets which removes opportunities for luggage racks. There should be a single accessible toilet maximum per any unit under seven cars, accessible from both first class and standard class wheelchair spaces either side of it.

The biggest obstacle to evacuation is hesitant people unhappy about having to climb down. Devils advocate, but any luggage could be easily kicked out and used as a handy soft landing platform reducing the height people have to climb down from.

IMO the (usually 4-car) Manchester electric route should be reduced to hourly and replace the removed service with eg an 8-car 350s or a similar electric operator running Manchester - Bhm - Coventry only. Voyagers should all be reformed to 7-car with some cabs removed. Dwell times of 4 to 6 minutes blocking the line due to overcrowding should slowly become a thing of the past on the busy via (Stoke-Macclesfield) route.

Taunton · 25 Feb 2024

The railway has of course progressively removed provision for luggage, starting a while ago with taking out the "luggage van", and onwards through each generation of rolling stock removing more and more.

The 1973 Piccadilly Line Underground stock provided a nice setback area by the doors for baggage, and those concerned about its security could sit next to it and keep a hand on it if they wanted to. An engineer apparently thought about this. This seemingly got lost on the Elizabeth Line, not only because space there in not as good for this, but also because the same adjacent seats were those placarded for the disabled, and thus not to be chosen by mainstream passengers.

It does often seem to be a mystery to rail management that if they provide services to airports, the ungrateful passengers will want to bring their luggage with them. This has been a transport issue for a long time, bus companies used to provide services to shopping centres and then find it extraordinary that such passengers would want to bring their shopping home with them, for which no accommodation was provided.

A requirement for ECML trains to have at least 400 seats was an initiative against open access operators wasting capacity running minimalist formations. 400 seats long distance should require at least 6 cars. Here comes Lumo, dump it seems all luggage provision, seat every square inch of floorspace, and we can get away with avoiding the cost of one car and buy 5 car trains.

A principal cause in the Taunton sleeper fire was an internal railway Turf War between sleepers and mails (even before sectorisation) over paying for the van in the service, so sleepers started piling used bedding (that which caught fire) in the vestibule, even though immediately through the gangway from it was a full BG van, just half-filled with mails. Strangely, van provision for the bedding was in place from the following night.

Bletchleyite · 25 Feb 2024

Taunton said:
The railway has of course progressively removed provision for luggage

It has and it hasn't. The nadir was probably the late 90s/early 2000s - newer stock has much bigger overheads which happily take cabin sized bags unless people are too bone idle to put them up.

Evacuation in emergency - escape routes blocked

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member