|
Post by Mr Stabby on Nov 16, 2016 19:02:35 GMT
Itv have just reported that the ccrv on thr tram wasn't working. Well I'm sorry to have to say it but I just don't buy that.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Nov 16, 2016 19:04:40 GMT
And what about the driver's phone records? RAIB seems to have forgotten about those!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2016 19:08:37 GMT
Itv have just reported that the ccrv on thr tram wasn't working. Well I'm sorry to have to say it but I just don't buy that. How many people would like no train or tram to enter service if the CCTV was not working? Stop the conspiracy theories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2016 19:11:18 GMT
And what about the driver's phone records? RAIB seems to have forgotten about those! If the phone records showed up anything defininitive the driver would have been charged by now. The RAIB are not idiots and are not the Governments sock puppets. Edited to make sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2016 19:18:10 GMT
It is sad really that a modern tram system could not be fitted with some sort of over speed control.
I'm not an expert on this but it does not appear to be rocket science. Perhaps this thing was built to a tight budget ?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Nov 16, 2016 19:43:34 GMT
Well I'm sorry to have to say it but I just don't buy that. How many people would like no train or tram to enter service if the CCTV was not working? Stop the conspiracy theories. Given that the accident investigation is being hampered by the CCTV "not working" then no, the tram shouldn't have entered service. I don't imagine an aeroplane would be allowed to take off if its black box flight recorder wasn't working.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2016 19:50:43 GMT
Given that the accident investigation is being hampered by the CCTV "not working" then no, the tram shouldn't have entered service. I don't imagine an aeroplane would be allowed to take off if its black box flight recorder wasn't working. Quite happy with your comment (can't comment on planes though), only question that I have is 'How much are you prepared to pay for improving one of the safest transport modes this country has?'
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Nov 16, 2016 19:58:39 GMT
Given that the accident investigation is being hampered by the CCTV "not working" then no, the tram shouldn't have entered service. I don't imagine an aeroplane would be allowed to take off if its black box flight recorder wasn't working. Quite happy with your comment (can't comment on planes though), only question that I have is 'How much are you prepared to pay for improving one of the safest transport modes this country has?' A forward facing video camera with gps speed recording costs around £100, most trucks are fitted with them, and I have never heard of one going wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2016 20:08:53 GMT
Quite happy with your comment (can't comment on planes though), only question that I have is 'How much are you prepared to pay for improving one of the safest transport modes this country has?' A forward facing video camera with gps speed recording costs around £100, most trucks are fitted with them, and I have never heard of one going wrong. So please tell me where you would place this camera within a tram, wire it in, make sure it covered the whole tram and not just be forward facing. How do you protect it from vandals? If you have some really good ideas I'll be happy to put you in touch with people who would like to hear your ideas - you will be up against global experts though.
|
|
|
Post by patty on Nov 17, 2016 6:13:48 GMT
The good thing about this forum is all views and theories are aired..
Press will always speculate..seize on some juicy snippet and escalate and are apt at playing on peoples emotions. ATM mobile usage whilst driving in the news and so it's a tasty treat the throw in the mix.. Speed has been seen to be a factor.
However its as well there is time for full investigation..one would hope all factors taken into consideration..not just the obvious but also the expectations on drivers to keep to a tight schedule. On a route travelled regularly in a vehicle deemed safe it may be easy to become perhaps complacent and feel that the guidelines are overly cautious...this is of course speculation with no facts as yet to come to informed opinion.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Nov 17, 2016 7:58:46 GMT
1. The broken CCTV, let's have an investigation into that shall we? Who is responsible for it? Who was responsible for the tram leaving the depot with it being out of order? I know it's not an essential part of the running equipment, it's only for the passengers' "safety" (who comes to help if passengers are attacked on trams late in the evening? no-one is my bet!) but someone is responsible for it and the buck stops at their door. Can we have a name please? I'm just pointing this out to show that 'looking through fingers' goes on all the time in most industries/businesses (Theresa May certainly looks through her fingers at her husband not paying taxes properly, so if the Prime Minister can do it, why not everyone else?!)
2. Phone records. Let's see them for ourselves, can we? WHO made the claim that the driver had been halfway through writing a text message? SOMEONE said it! Let's have a name please. And how about the driver's phone record history - calls and texts made during his working/driving hours in the past also? Was it a habit of his?
3. As long as it's all "shrouded in mystery" I retain my right to be as cynical and suspicious as I like. Seeing for myself is believing.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Nov 19, 2016 21:51:50 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2016 22:09:00 GMT
Possibly the tram operator is not structuring the work pattern in a safe manner? Possibly, although I would be surprised if they were not following regulations. Beginning to start to think this may be a more 'institutionalised' failure - takes me back to Ladbrooke Grove if I'm honest.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Nov 19, 2016 22:27:59 GMT
Possibly the tram operator is not structuring the work pattern in a safe manner? Possibly, although I would be surprised if they were not following regulations. Beginning to start to think this may be a more 'institutionalised' failure - takes me back to Ladbrooke Grove if I'm honest. They may well be following regulations, but if they are following the same regulations which apply to HGV drivers, then their drivers are legally able to work 15 hour days with 9 hours off on three consecutive days every week. It's legal, but can a driver be held to be at fault if they end up falling asleep because of it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2016 22:45:09 GMT
They may well be following regulations, but if they are following the same regulations which apply to HGV drivers, then their drivers are legally able to work 15 hour days with 9 hours off on three consecutive days every week. It's legal, but can a driver be held to be at fault if they end up falling asleep because of it? The regulations for Heavy Rail (and I believe for Light Rail as well) are far tougher than which apply to HGV drivers. I spent years applying and explaining the regulations and working with others to ensure that fatigue wasn't a major issue in scheduling staff - I will be very unhappy (to put it politely) if all our combined work has gone to waste in pursuit of profit.
|
|