Re: Independent Review of Rail Safety Arrangements in Australia

["John Kerley" <deaftech@ozemail.com.au>]

Exnarc <gwrly@netspace.net.au> wrote in message
news:84bcl2$bqp$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
>
> <snip>
> Every System required someone to protect in the rear during failures, not
> just TS&T. When 2 man crewing was introduced the rules were changed to
make
> provision for this, DOO is just an extension of that.

Not exactly.   When travelling on train staff i.e. not on ticket, or on
electric staff on a single line, rear end protection was not required.
> <snip>
>
> For example: DOO in limited applications is safe (such as V/Line Pass, the
> Met apply it etc), in the form that NRC propose (IMO) it isn't.
>
I certainly do not agree that DOO as used on the Met is safe.  My son was
nearly killed shortly after guards were removed when a train took off when
there were still half a dozen people boarding.  These incidents are still
happening.  Even in the last month there was a press report of lady caught
in the doors and dragged along the platform and only saved by a young bloke
pulling her free.  I wrote to both the Minister and the Union over the
incident with my son.  The Minister replied saying "It was all the driver's
fault".  The Union did not even have the courtesy to reply.  No wonder,
given the way they betrayed their members at the back so that those at the
front could gain  their "thirty pieces of silver"!

> We can dwell on the past, be it travelling by steam hauled train, (an
> admirable interest), memoirs, photography etc. but we also have to move
with
> the times for rail to remain viable, its a real world out there
(unfortunate
> phrase) and the competition is cutting costs to try to put us out of
> business, so rail must adapt to survive. (But not cut corners on safety).
> The removal of Guards was not a retrograde step, infact it has improved
> operations in Victoria,

For drivers pay!

(I am not speaking for other states). The abolition
> of all non track circuited systems would be great, CTC EVERYTHING, however
> its all got to be financed, on a line that has 1 or 2 train movements a
day
> it would be economical suicide to CTC where TS&T or TO will do the job. On
> the Melbourne - Pyrenees section, ASW is not enough, it should IMO be
CTC'd
> as a matter of urgency.
>
> Bob.
>
With rail accidents occuring at the rate they are at the moment, and which
are quite clearly related to the reduction in spending, it could well be
even in financial terms, the cost cutting could be counter productive.

Cheers,

John Kerley