Seatbelts on trains

[Phillvr6]

Well, the fella whos daughter died in the train crash where the car was parked on the crossing is going to Downing Street today.

He is taking with him a list of 4000 signitures of people in favour of installing seat belts on trains.

Now I can only imagine how terribe an experiance this bloke has been through.....but, seatbelts on trains, what an uttely stupid and impractical idea. On regular occasions you can't even get a seat, and can you imagine everyone being bothered to put a seat belt on.

As I say I epathise with the man, but this really isn't the best way forward.

Phill

[jacobyte]

los angeles said:

If they are imposed it's tantamount to the government admitting today's trains are unsafe as transport.

More to the point: If they are imposed, it's tantamount to admitting that a self-important government bureaucrat will bow to every whim of the minority, as long as appears to be protecting the safety of citizens; and also that the nanny state is completely out of kilter with reality.

[JagLover]

They wouldn't work on busy commuter trains no, but I can see them being a useful safety feature on high speed inter city trains.

The consequences of a high speed rail crash can be just as devestating as a high speed road crash.

[pdV6]

Much sympathy for the bloke, but wouldn't he have been better to campaign for the scrapping of unmanned level crossings? Better to prevent the accident than to (slightly, possibly) mitigate the injuries that result from it...

[yertis]

Come on people get real - I thought we were immune to media hype? Rail travel is by far and away safer than road travel. FFS Jesus H etc - seat belts on trains - it's beyond stupid.

No sympathy for views like that, whoever holds them.

[Phillvr6]

yertis said:

Come on people get real - I thought we were immune to media hype? Rail travel is by far and away safer than road travel. FFS Jesus H etc - seat belts on trains - it's beyond stupid. No sympathy for views like that, whoever holds them.

Well, thats pretty much what I was trying to say with a bit more tact.

[cotty]

My line has just taken out half the seats in order to cram more standing passengers in. Seatbelts on thrains will be unenforceable as guards cant walk through trains in the rush hour as there is no room, all the space being taken by standing passengers

[jimothy]

Wouldn't it make more sense to put those old fashioned cow scoop things back onto trains.

Surely one for pushing cars out the way would be a much better invesment than seatbelts.

And if you had seatbelts, how would you retrieve yours from under the thigh of a lady sitting next to you without getting a slap or arrested for sexual assult?

[rude girl]

Many of the deaths in train crashes are the result of people sitting at tables being thrown forward at impact, and dying as a result of the internal injuries (just as people did in cars years ago hitting the steering wheel and rupturing spleen). Seat belts would I suppose reduce this, but very difficult to enforce especially on a heaving train where you have to nurse your bags because there's limited space. Perhaps a more practical solution would be to replace tables with collapsible airline-style tables as and when trains go in for their periodic refit.

[nonegreen]

Whats a train?

[yertis]

nonegreen said:

Whats a train?

A device for removing freight and numpties from the roads, so the likes of you and I can go out and enjoy the roads more. You should learn to love them...

[MilnerR]

nonegreen said:

Whats a train?

Its a form of public transport linking two points that are miles away from where you live and miles away from where you want to go.

[Roy C]

nonegreen said:

Whats a train?

It's like walking, only slower.

Oh, and you don't usually get to where you wanted to go.

[yertis]

I can't belive so many of you are anti-rail. Surely anything that frees up the roads is a good thing.

[rude girl]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It could be even worse than that if you think it through. If the seatbelts went in to RGS as a Safety Critical system, then the first time some scrote took a stanley knife to a seatbelt for a giggle, you'd either have to take the seat out of use, or take the train off.

[pdV6]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

This is the main reason I never get trains, except to travel into London and even then only when the company's paying.

[john75]

I have no problem with seatbelts on trains as I sometimes travel on National Express and their coaches have seatbelts

[yertis]

Isn't there some issue where newer trains result in slower journey times because the sliding doors are slower to operate than the old slam doors? If I had to wear a seatbelt I think I'd be more inclined to take the car instead.

[JonRB]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yep - that's my seat of preference too. Has to be the most survivable place to be in the event of an accident.

[yertis]

I must admit the tables in 125s seem ideally placed to chop you in half in a crash.

When are they going to replace those things - they must be about 30 years old now. Though I do prefer them to those new Italian efforts, which seem a bit fragile to me.