Re: Track Possession (was SRA Detonators)

["The Railway Rasputin II." <bob@fastlink.com.au>]

Every time the railways has an accident, they want Royal commissions, 
etc. Just imagine if we had to do this for every din on the roads.

rgds

Ronald BESDANSKY wrote:
> 
> stephen <stephen@turboweb.splat.spam.net.au> wrote in message
> xDK2NluHBVGg-pn2-kjh7TJRFXmdC@localhost">news:xDK2NluHBVGg-pn2-kjh7TJRFXmdC@localhost...
> > On Sun, 1 Feb 2000 18:33:27, "Robert Parnell"
> > <rparnell@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > > The protection of a work site these
> > > days is slightly different to that in the past - a track possession is
> > > preferred, rather than to keep trains running and slowing them down.
> >
> > This preference is yet another reason people prefer road over rail.
> > "Road possession" is restricted to very major work. The road
> > preference is to slow traffic, at times combined with some stop/go
> > lolly pop men or temporary traffic lights.
> >
> > To cause the amount of disruption to road traffic by "road possession"
> > that is caused to rail traffic by track possession would be simply
> > unacceptable to the public.
> >
> How many times do you hear on the radio that such-and-such a road or freeway
> is completely blocked in both directions by an accident??!! (these accidents
> usually due to the unregulated operation of roads vs the regimentation which
> applies (or used to) on railways
> 
> --
> Rgds
> 
> Ron BESDANSKY