http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3704101.stm

juvenal wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3704101.stm


http://tinyurl.com/293r4
http://tinyurl.com/293r4

Brad

In message , juvenal
writes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3704101.stm

It said the White City train derailed at a set of points
undergoing routine maintenance where a 20 mile-an-hour speed
restriction was in place.

But we don't get a headline of: "Huge success: Safety Precaution works
as it was designed to".
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , juvenal
writes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3704101.stm

It said the White City train derailed at a set of points
undergoing routine maintenance where a 20 mile-an-hour speed
restriction was in place.

But we don't get a headline of: "Huge success: Safety Precaution works
as it was designed to".

Of course we don't. In the same way a report on a pile up on the M1 doesn't
have the headline "Airbags deploy and prevent more serious injuries". The
train shouldn't have derailed and the fact that there was a speed
restriction is a negative thing because it shows that it happened despite
the knowledge that there was a fault in the area.

Dave

In message , Dave Liney
writes
The train shouldn't have derailed and the fact that there was a speed
restriction is a negative thing because it shows that it happened
despite the knowledge that there was a fault in the area.

The only alternative (apart from fixing all the track faults overnight)
is to close the line. Surely a speed restricted line is only restricted
*because* you want the rather-more-likely-than-normal effect of tripping
the fault to be less serious. Isn't that why you drive a car slower in
fog?
--
Roland Perry