Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

If there is a fire then the gates will open automatically and a bloody
annoying voice tells you where to go!

Chris! wrote:
General Von Clinkerhoffen wrote:

Can someone explain why the gates being closed for exit when the side


gate was open is a breach of safety?




At a guess the amount of people specified in the 'fire capacity'
cannont be evacuated quickly enough through only the side gate. Also,
if the gate is unlocked but closed, how does one know to try it?

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

General Von Clinkerhoffen wrote:
If there is a fire then the gates will open automatically and a
bloody
annoying voice tells you where to go!

If theres a fire? Or if the fire alarm is activated

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

The display indicated no exit, the display could have been incorrect
though I guess.

Kevin

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

Where would one find the fire alarm, just incase the next time I can't
get out. I looked around but couldn't see any obvious emergency release
buttons.

Kevin

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

Only assuming that the alarm has been given. As I stated in a previous
posting, one day last week the gates were in operation but the booking
office not open, the staff were busy putting money in the ticket
machine and therefore not available to respond to a fire. I have not
seen any obvious alarms available for public use.
It is this sort of cavalier attitude towards safety that resulted in
the Kings Cross fire.

Kevin

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
The display indicated no exit, the display could have been incorrect
though I guess.


And you assume that the public at large is too stupid to find the gate and
pass through it safely?

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

So the public should ignore any warning signs or advisory signs on the
basis that they might be wrong. Should they also ignore announcements
over the pa on they basis that they may also be wrong.

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

wrote:
So the public should ignore any warning signs or advisory signs on
the
basis that they might be wrong. Should they also ignore announcements
over the pa on they basis that they may also be wrong.

yes. Especialy automatic announcements that seem to contradict
everything else. e.g. person on platform appologising for train being
diverted somewhere else at Earls Court and appologising for the
inconvenience being interupted by "District line services are oprating
normally".

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
So the public should ignore any warning signs or advisory signs on the
basis that they might be wrong. Should they also ignore announcements
over the pa on they basis that they may also be wrong.


I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt, but now you've
confirmed my first impression.

Breach of Safety by LUL, Again
 

Surely, Chris, the example you've given proves the announcements WERE
correct... A train being diverted at Earl's Court, signal failures on
the Wimbledon branch etc etc: These ARE (unfortunately) a normal
service on the District line... However much we hate them.