Re: Curious Statistics

["nobody" <dweebken@NOSPAM.yahoo.com>]

I dont touch that terrorgraph. I once used it to line my budgie's cage and
it traumatised the bird for life.

the stats came from a television show after the lismore crash, maybe not the
most reputable source (i too would like the figures) but in any case its
there. They were the average fatalities per year adjusted to numbers (ie:
per 1000 passengers). I am aware of suicides etc, but some of those would
have come from crossing accidents and also workers getting killed (both of
which are very rarely mentioned in the media). I am also aware that the
"famous railway accidents" thing I added had few fatalities but the capacity
is there for them. A lot of them could have been fatal and were lucky they
werent mainly because of the time. Concorde west could easily have been a
packed commuter train - it was dumb luck that the de-rusting train was empty
(and the crew I might add are very lucky to live through it). Then there was
the hornsby derailment. That caused injury which should not be trated
lightly, and the driver was lucky the train stopped where it did - the
stauntion in from of the train would have crushed him. Had power lines
fallen on the train, people could have been electrecuted. All of them were
potentially life threatening situations and just dumb luck prevented lives
being lost.
   No matter how accurate the statistics are, my point still stands: When a
rail signal system fails or is not obeyed, the risk goes right up.

Brendan

"Bill McNiven" <wmcniven@gunzel.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
zPvd4.2649$oF2.7710@ozemail.com.au">news:zPvd4.2649$oF2.7710@ozemail.com.au...
>
> nobody wrote in message <3875615b@pink.one.net.au>...
> >Some staistics for safety of transport in 1997 (by no. of fatalities)
> >Australia
>
>
> >lowest fatalities: Air
> >2nd lowest: bus
> >3rd: rail
> >4th: car
> >5th: pedestrian
> >6th: taxi
>
> It would be interesting to know the source and some of the details behind
> these "statistics".  If we're comparing rail with road and separating
buses
> from trucks, then we should separate passenger rail from freight rail too!
>
> I'm having great difficulty recalling any deaths of rail passengers in
1997!
> There were fatalities at Hines Hill (WA) in 1996 but, as it was a
collision
> between freights, no comparison with buses.
>
> Do trams have a better or worse record than buses?  What about monorails?
>
> >>THAT is what signals are for - to prevent that. With accidents at
> Waterfall,
> >Concord Westover the last couple of years,and 2 at hornsby, the olympic
> >line, possibly at waverton if this ng is correct, glenbrook and near
misses
> >down south between two freights, up north with a 300 passenger XPT and a
> >freight etc all due to signal related problems over the last year or so
>
> And with the unfortunate exception of Glenbrook, there were no deaths.
This
> reads like a "famous railway accidents" filler from the Daily Terrorgraph.
>
>