From Newsgroup: aus.rail

As part of a response to an enquiry I made regarding the technical
standards for emergency door release mechanisms, I received the
following from the NSW Transport Asset Standards Authority:

"Our current fleet that have been designed with IEDR (Internal Emergency
Door Release) are able to be opened by a ratchet mechanism and so can be opened under loss of power.

Fleet that have not been, and will not be due to impending retirement,
fitted with IEDR have processes in place to evacuate passengers during
an emergency."

Huh? It's fourteen years after the Waterfall Commission reported. The commission recommended the installation of emergency door release
mechanisms, and the NSW government agreed.

The Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator is tasked with
monitoring compliance, and its most recent report on the matter says
that the recommendation is closed and verified.

Yet apparently we still have trains operating without such a release mechanism.

Sylvia.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 1/09/2019 10:51 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

Yet apparently we still have trains operating without such a release mechanism.

I'm still pursuing this. The ONRSR has drawn my attention to a document:

<https://www.onrsr.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/24549/Waterfall-Rail-Accident-Recommendations-Closed-Subject-to-Implementation-of-an-Approved-Program-or-Plan-2019.pdf>

Paragraph 5.2.2 details how RailCorp have managed to drag out
modifications to the H-Set trains over nine years, with the task still
not complete.

There is no mention of K-Set trains, which I understand are still in
service. Perhaps those are the ones that will not be modified on the
basis that they are to be removed from service, one day.

In 5.2.1, these is this observation

"Following an incident on the Harbour Bridge in 2007, RailCorp revised
its position on the internal emergency door release mechanism and
decided to fit a crew override facility as per recommendation 93,"

In other words, because Railcorp couldn't be sure that it would deal
with a stranded train in anything remotely resembling a reasonable time,
and being concerned that passengers would engage in self-help, they
decided to deprive passengers of that option.

Sylvia.



--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Thursday, 5 September 2019 05:55:53 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 1/09/2019 10:51 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:

Yet apparently we still have trains operating without such a release mechanism.

I'm still pursuing this. The ONRSR has drawn my attention to a document:

<https://www.onrsr.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/24549/Waterfall-Rail-Accident-Recommendations-Closed-Subject-to-Implementation-of-an-Approved-Program-or-Plan-2019.pdf>

Paragraph 5.2.2 details how RailCorp have managed to drag out
modifications to the H-Set trains over nine years, with the task still
not complete.

There is no mention of K-Set trains, which I understand are still in service. Perhaps those are the ones that will not be modified on the
basis that they are to be removed from service, one day.

In 5.2.1, these is this observation

"Following an incident on the Harbour Bridge in 2007, RailCorp revised
its position on the internal emergency door release mechanism and
decided to fit a crew override facility as per recommendation 93,"

In other words, because Railcorp couldn't be sure that it would deal
with a stranded train in anything remotely resembling a reasonable time,
and being concerned that passengers would engage in self-help, they
decided to deprive passengers of that option.

Sylvia.

I still think that an emergency door release should be retrofitted ASAP. Look at the introduction of Class 755 trains over here on the Greater Anglia network in the UK. They were supposed to be introduced in May 2019, but they weren't introduced for months after that due date. Couldn't something like that happen down under? I'd imagine yes.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

I'm all in favor of crew/control room overrides of the EDR.
The moment a door is opened, the train is stranded. There is now no option to move the train to a location where the 'incident' could be easier dealt with. The train could be stopped in a tunnel, on a bridge, high embankment, etc. Far better that the driver/control room gets the train to the next station THEN deal with the problem there if at all possible.
The moment members of the public take 'detraining' into their own hands, ALL other traffic in the area has to be immediately halted, turning what might have been a minor incident into a major one, and trains can not be restarted until ALL members of the public have been escorted off the tracks - which could take hours.
What was an inconvenience to those that suffer from a captivity phobia turns into a major incident involving exposing members of the public to all sorts of extra additional risks.
Removing the EDRs completely like they did on the Tangara fleet I don't agree with, but crew/control overrides - YES. Required.
Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would result in the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on the train.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Wednesday, 23 October 2019 03:44:54 UTC+1, Matthew Geier wrote:

I'm all in favor of crew/control room overrides of the EDR.
The moment a door is opened, the train is stranded. There is now no option to move the train to a location where the 'incident' could be easier dealt with. The train could be stopped in a tunnel, on a bridge, high embankment, etc. Far better that the driver/control room gets the train to the next station THEN deal with the problem there if at all possible.

The moment members of the public take 'detraining' into their own hands, ALL other traffic in the area has to be immediately halted, turning what might have been a minor incident into a major one, and trains can not be restarted until ALL members of the public have been escorted off the tracks - which could take hours.

What was an inconvenience to those that suffer from a captivity phobia turns into a major incident involving exposing members of the public to all sorts of extra additional risks.

Removing the EDRs completely like they did on the Tangara fleet I don't agree with, but crew/control overrides - YES. Required.

Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would result in the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on the train.

Crew overrides are fair enough but how does control know whether or not an emergency is occuring on the train?
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 23/10/2019 1:44 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would result in
the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on the train.

There's no reason to think they'll release automatically in such a
situation. The best one can hope for is that the override mechanism
won't be damaged in a way that prevents the release if a passenger
operates the release handle.

Sylvia.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Saturday, 26 October 2019 02:03:56 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 23/10/2019 1:44 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would result in
the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on the train.

There's no reason to think they'll release automatically in such a situation. The best one can hope for is that the override mechanism
won't be damaged in a way that prevents the release if a passenger
operates the release handle.

Sylvia.

Yeah exactly, on 2nd thoughts a crew operated override doesn't look like that much of a good idea but how about a control operated override? The only problem is that they might not know about the problem.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Saturday, 26 October 2019 23:43:20 UTC+11, Marcus Potter wrote:

Sylvia.

Yeah exactly, on 2nd thoughts a crew operated override doesn't look like that much of a good idea but how about a control operated override? The only problem is that they might not know about the problem.

In the 1930s they could design control systems for trams that the event of the drivers emergency pedal activated (or catastrophic damage to the front of the vehicle) the door locking mechs released.

The door motors were held in the closed position by an 'active' signal from the leading cab. Without that signal, the doors 'idled' and could be pushed open by hand.

Having heard the radio chatter and the utter panic in control that 'people on the line' causes, I very well see why the emergency releases are no longer unconditional releases.

99% of the time 'self-evacuation' makes the incident far-far worse and exposes people to significantly more risk and if they stayed put.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 26/10/2019 11:43 pm, Marcus Potter wrote:

On Saturday, 26 October 2019 02:03:56 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 23/10/2019 1:44 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would
result in the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on
the train.

There's no reason to think they'll release automatically in such a
situation. The best one can hope for is that the override
mechanism won't be damaged in a way that prevents the release if a
passenger operates the release handle.

Sylvia.

Yeah exactly, on 2nd thoughts a crew operated override doesn't look
like that much of a good idea but how about a control operated
override? The only problem is that they might not know about the
problem.

The same issue arises, because regardless of how it's operated, the
existence of an override implies extra hardware on the train that may
behave inappropriately when damaged.

Sylvia.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 12:24:31 -0700, Matthew Geier wrote:

On Saturday, 26 October 2019 23:43:20 UTC+11, Marcus Potter wrote:

Sylvia.

Yeah exactly, on 2nd thoughts a crew operated override doesn't look
like that much of a good idea but how about a control operated
override? The only problem is that they might not know about the
problem.

In the 1930s they could design control systems for trams that the event
of the drivers emergency pedal activated (or catastrophic damage to the
front of the vehicle) the door locking mechs released.

The door motors were held in the closed position by an 'active' signal
from the leading cab. Without that signal, the doors 'idled' and could
be pushed open by hand.

Having heard the radio chatter and the utter panic in control that
'people on the line' causes, I very well see why the emergency releases
are no longer unconditional releases.

99% of the time 'self-evacuation' makes the incident far-far worse and exposes people to significantly more risk and if they stayed put.

Just getting down and attempting to walk along the track was dangerous
when you are young and fit.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

In <fee9359c-ddb2-45d0-9267-9abc8c9a0ba9@googlegroups.com>, Marcus Potter <marcuspotter02@gmail.com> writes:

On Saturday, 26 October 2019 02:03:56 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 23/10/2019 1:44 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

Unless the train is crashed or on fire, both of which would result in
the door locks releasing anyway, the best place is on the train.

There's no reason to think they'll release automatically in such a
situation. The best one can hope for is that the override mechanism
won't be damaged in a way that prevents the release if a passenger
operates the release handle.

Sylvia.

Yeah exactly, on 2nd thoughts a crew operated override doesn't look like that much of a good idea but how about a control operated override? The only problem is that they might not know about the problem.

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in Australia does not
have an automatic control system anyway?


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:09:42 UTC+11, john...@nospam.com.au wrote:

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in Australia does not
have an automatic control system anyway?

This started because the Sydney Metro does not have easily accessible passenger door releases. The 'passenger communication alarm' calls the control centre. They get to decide if the train will be stopped and the doors released.
In most cases, they will run the train to the next station and stop there where an evacuation is easier to perform and a whole lot less risky to the evacuees.

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location if they decide they want to get off and get off right now, no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be.


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 6/11/2019 12:10 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:09:42 UTC+11, john...@nospam.com.au
wrote:

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in
Australia does not have an automatic control system anyway?

This started because the Sydney Metro does not have easily accessible passenger door releases. The 'passenger communication alarm' calls
the control centre. They get to decide if the train will be stopped
and the doors released. In most cases, they will run the train to the
next station and stop there where an evacuation is easier to perform
and a whole lot less risky to the evacuees.

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at
any location if they decide they want to get off and get off right
now, no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that
location will be.

Certain people want the choice, so that they can make their own
decisions about preserving their lives, rather than relying on some
unknown person to make that decision from their safety of their office
chairs.

Sylvia.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 6/11/2019 12:10 pm, Matthew Geier wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:09:42 UTC+11, john...@nospam.com.au wrote:

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in Australia does not
have an automatic control system anyway?

This started because the Sydney Metro does not have easily accessible passenger door releases. The 'passenger communication alarm' calls the control centre. They get to decide if the train will be stopped and the doors released.
In most cases, they will run the train to the next station and stop there where an evacuation is easier to perform and a whole lot less risky to the evacuees.

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location if they decide they want to get off and get off right now, no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be.

<http://apmstandards.org/Linked%20Documents/TrainDoorEgress_Ingress%5B1%5D.pdf>

6.3 Findings from Rail Emergency Exercises

Train Disaster Field Exercise "Blue Rattler"

...

"It was the unanimous view of all the combat agencies who attended the exercise that had the situation been a real event it is most probable
that all the passengers would have died from fire or smoke either on the
train or in the tunnel."

"The major issues identified at this exercise included:

...

The fact that passengers were unable to open doors themselves and self evacuate;"


... In the opinion of the responding emergency services they all
expressed concern regarding... the total reliance by the passengers on
the train crew to open the doors..."

Sylvia.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:10:51 -0800 (PST), Matthew Geier <matthew@sleeper.apana.org.au> wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:09:42 UTC+11, john...@nospam.com.au wrote:

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in Australia does not
have an automatic control system anyway?

This started because the Sydney Metro does not have easily accessible passenger door releases.
The 'passenger communication alarm' calls the control centre.
They get to decide if the train will be stopped and the doors released.
In most cases, they will run the train to the next station and stop there where
an evacuation is easier to perform and a whole lot less risky to the evacuees.

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location
if they decide they want to get off and get off right now,
no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be.

If one survives walking on the track to the metro station they will
find the platfom has closed shatterproof glass doors

Seems "stay put" advice can go wrong as well https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/stay-put-the-emergency-advice-that-failed-victims-of-grenfell-tower-blaze/news-story/6ae5ca2f21e5bd3392e4cafe378b1141
https://is.gd/88e8qs
aStay putA:The emergency advice that failed victims of Grenfell Tower
blaze
--
Petzl
Good lawyers know the law
Great lawyers know the judge
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 20:13:03 UTC, Petzl wrote:

On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:10:51 -0800 (PST), Matthew Geier <matthew@sleeper.apana.org.au> wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:09:42 UTC+11, john...@nospam.com.au wrote:

How would Control send a signal to a damaged train, which in Australia does not
have an automatic control system anyway?

This started because the Sydney Metro does not have easily accessible passenger door releases.
The 'passenger communication alarm' calls the control centre.
They get to decide if the train will be stopped and the doors released.
In most cases, they will run the train to the next station and stop there where
an evacuation is easier to perform and a whole lot less risky to the evacuees.

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location
if they decide they want to get off and get off right now,
no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be.

If one survives walking on the track to the metro station they will
find the platfom has closed shatterproof glass doors

Seems "stay put" advice can go wrong as well https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/stay-put-the-emergency-advice-that-failed-victims-of-grenfell-tower-blaze/news-story/6ae5ca2f21e5bd3392e4cafe378b1141
https://is.gd/88e8qs
rCyStay putrCO:The emergency advice that failed victims of Grenfell Tower blaze
--
Petzl
Good lawyers know the law
Great lawyers know the judge

Could they not go on a bit further and find somewhere safe?
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 15:55:38 -0800 (PST), Marcus Potter <marcuspotter02@gmail.com> wrote:

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location
if they decide they want to get off and get off right now,
no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be. >> >

If one survives walking on the track to the metro station they will
find the platfom has closed shatterproof glass doors

Seems "stay put" advice can go wrong as well
https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/stay-put-the-emergency-advice-that-failed-victims-of-grenfell-tower-blaze/news-story/6ae5ca2f21e5bd3392e4cafe378b1141
https://is.gd/88e8qs
aStay putA:The emergency advice that failed victims of Grenfell Tower
blaze

Could they not go on a bit further and find somewhere safe?

Never looked. I believe the whole platform has a wall of glass with
doors aligned to the train doors, Only open when the train stops.

Stops jumpers, prams, drunks, whatever falling on track?
--
Petzl
Good lawyers know the law
Great lawyers know the judge
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

In <3baase9he6iagmg4npq9lo0bsug0loc2kt@4ax.com>, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> writes:

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 15:55:38 -0800 (PST), Marcus Potter ><marcuspotter02@gmail.com> wrote:

Certain people here want the ability to cause the train to halt at any location
if they decide they want to get off and get off right now,
no matter how difficult organisating an evacation at that location will be.

If one survives walking on the track to the metro station they will
find the platfom has closed shatterproof glass doors

Seems "stay put" advice can go wrong as well
https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/stay-put-the-emergency-advice-that-failed-victims-of-grenfell-tower-blaze/news-story/6ae5ca2f21e5bd3392e4cafe378b1141
https://is.gd/88e8qs
aStay putA:The emergency advice that failed victims of Grenfell Tower
blaze

Could they not go on a bit further and find somewhere safe?

Never looked. I believe the whole platform has a wall of glass with
doors aligned to the train doors, Only open when the train stops.

Stops jumpers, prams, drunks, whatever falling on track?

Not that the rail authorities are worried about the welfare of jumpers, babies and drunks, it is the schedule and their political masters they worry
about.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2