On 04.08.2017 11:05 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
08:35:43 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, Robin remarked:

Will the final report include their cost-benefit assessments to
support the recommendations or will they - like most coroners - take
the view that it's not their job to consider resources, and so
encourage the "no price is too high to save the life of ..." approach
common after any "disaster" on rails?

Having something to ensure nothing bad happens if your drivers fall
asleep [sorry - lose awareness] at the wheel seems pretty fundamental.

Why "pretty fundamental" for trams but not for buses or coaches - often
travelling at the same or greater speeds?

Such devices may offer value for money on trams but not on the road (eg
because the current technology means they are easier to make work on
rail than on road).

There's more to do when driving a bus, therefore drivers don't fall
asleep as often. There are also very few instances of buses toppling
over because they took a bend too fast.

Are there a lot of instances of trams doing so, then? I must say that when
walking around L'viv, Istanbul, Bucharest, Moscow or Amsterdam - all with
larger tram networks than London (hell, than the UK I'd wager in most
cases), and in the case of L'viv at least extraordinarily low standards of
rail maintenance to boot - trams toppling like dominos at every corner do
not appear to be common...

In fact, I'm gonna bet that worldwide more buses have toppled over in the
last 12 months than trams in the last ten years...