Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 01:09:01 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On 14 Apr 2021 22:18:29 GMT, Marland
wrote:

James Heaton wrote:

"Anna Noyd-Dryver" wrote in message
...
MB wrote:
On 11/04/2021 11:56, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.


Health and Safety at Work Act, isn't it?


I would not have expected the H&S at Work Act to go into detail like
that.


About having exposed electro conductors at floor level?

Apparently it's something specific in electrical regulations too.

Either way, the point is that it's about staff safety not about
trespassers, as often claimed.

Electricity at Work Regulations 1989

It is mainly focused on staff safety.

Realistically the only way we're ever going to get more 3rd rail, is with
fully protected contact like the DLR - which is incompatible with existing
installations on the southern/mersey.

James



There must be some mechanism to give dispensation in some circumstances

Other wise laying down the conductor rails on the Old Dalby test track to
test the LU S Stock
could not have occurred . A lot of it on there is protected by side
protection boards but quite a lot of pictures show a lot is not,

Regulation 7 gives you the choice of insulating or taking other
precautions "so far is reasonably practicable". Old Dalby doesn't have
passengers to worry about so precautions probably rely more on
suitable fencing and appropriate training of onsite staff. There is
minimal shielding of conductor rails on LU anyway, even on new work.
snip


The reasonably practical measure taken at Old Dalby is presumably not
having staff walking at track level without an isolation.

Looking at e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9k7XvFH3pE there
isn't a lot of DC track out in the open away from the fenced off
"depot" and there is about 200y of shielding at the far end of the DC
track (about 5:12) which is rather more than usually seen at
transition points.


Given the necessity for short sections with regular feeds, couldn’t you
arrange with modern power electronics to keep the power switched off unless
there was a train in section?

A more practical question though - what is the incidence of electrocution
on the third rail network vs the overhead system?