Yet another "police incident" in an isolated sense which has caused chaos on the network this morning.  These delays are becoming more and more common. Why do these morons want to keep causing public chaos?

City loop trains disrupted due to police operation

Better ban all Buskers then.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-28/flagstaff-train-station-evacuated-melbourne/10947304

Yet another "police incident" in an isolated sense which has caused chaos on the network this morning.  These delays are becoming more and more common. Why do these morons want to keep causing public chaos?

City loop trains disrupted due to police operation

Just curious, which "morons"?  

The poor guy just getting ready for his day?
the guy who decided to call in the cavalry?
or
the police who had to respond because how would they know until they get there?

The person who over reacted.  Caused a massive delay to me getting to work.

and the plot thickens

Next thing you know people will be mistaking didgeridoos for rocket launchers/bazookas....

People have been traumatised over these reports of a gun man, two of which work in my office and have now gone home in a state.  Totally unacceptable,

Good grief, it was a Didgeridoo.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/police-responding-to-incident-at-flagstaff-station/news-story/3a310f767c1915dad171e12b8755dc4a

Why is there such a huge over-reaction to such incidents by police? Incident controllers seem to have only one goal in mind, which is to manage the incident before them, but without balancing the risks of the use of their powers such as post-traumatic stress through shutting down all 4 tracks of the City Loop. Until the risk (eg gunman) is more clearly identified through CCTV, could the incident have been managed better by maintaining services on the other 3 City Loop lines, with the services not stopping at Flagstaff? If a gunman becomes visible on CCTV in a group other than the affected Clifton Hill group, then trains in that tunnel could be held at previous station.

We saw the same thing only a few weeks ago at Footscray, when a relatively small package was left unattended on the Werribee-bound platforms, yet the Vline and Sunbury line trains were also stopped. Because of the distance between the package and Sunbury line trains, it is unlikely a bomb in the package would have been large enough to cause injury to passengers in trains on the Sunbury line. This could have been confirmed through a Skype call to an explosives expert. If this were confirmed, the station itself could be closed to pedestrians but Vline and Sunbury line trains allowed to pass through without stopping.

It would be worthwhile learning how such incidents are handled in other jurisdictions such as Japan and Europe.

Why is there such a huge over-reaction to such incidents by police? Incident controllers seem to have only one goal in mind, which is to manage the incident before them, but without balancing the risks of the use of their powers.......

It would be worthwhile learning how such incidents are handled in other jurisdictions such as Japan and Europe.

Could't agree more, especially the last line. Unfortunately it is all part of the risk averse culture that has developed here.

The Footscray incident which I was caught up in is a classic example. Tens of thousands of people inconvenienced just in case there was a bomb in the little bag. I have experienced the same thing before at Southern Cross with the station evacuated, trains cancelled etc etc. Same with trespassers near / on rail lines (mostly just some idiot short cutting across the ROW), stopping all trains due to a single signal failure when you have full radio contact with every train on the line etc etc etc.

Yes, if anything did happen it would be bad. A bomb on a platform at Footscray could hurt / kill many. But there has to be a better way than the 'stop everything' mentality that has been allowed to dictate our way of doing things in Victoria.

BG

No doubt the Government will soon receive an "Unsolicited Proposal" for Airport type security to be installed at all passenger stations. The passengers will of course foot the bill with a "Security Tax" added to the cost of each ticket.


Seriously though, its a no-win situation for all - yes most are false alarms thankfully, but the big fan will really be turning if one gets ignored with catastrophic results.

Seriously though, its a no-win situation for all - yes most are false alarms thankfully, but the big fan will really be turning if one gets ignored with catastrophic results.

Agreed Mike, I am not advocating for ignoring anything but for looking at word's best practice to see if we can do better.

BG

Why is there such a huge over-reaction to such incidents by police? Incident controllers seem to have only one goal in mind, which is to manage the incident before them, but without balancing the risks of the use of their powers such as post-traumatic stress through shutting down all 4 tracks of the City Loop. Until the risk (eg gunman) is more clearly identified through CCTV, could the incident have been managed better by maintaining services on the other 3 City Loop lines, with the services not stopping at Flagstaff? If a gunman becomes visible on CCTV in a group other than the affected Clifton Hill group, then trains in that tunnel could be held at previous station.

Eeeerrr, no, it doesn't work like that in reality. How long does it take for someone to walk/run from one platform to another? A matter of seconds? Put yourself in the incident controller and train controllers shoes for a moment, a report comes in of a gunman on the platform, you have no idea if they're armed with a toy cap gun or a semi automatic assault rifle. Your first priority is the safety of passengers and staff and a part of the harm minimization is not to send more people to the area until it has been giving the all clear from the police.

Also imagine this conversation between train control and the driver:

TC: Drive, although you're scheduled to stop at Flagstaff we want you to go express through it.

Driver: Ok, what is the reason for the change?

TC: We have a potentially active gunman at the station and don't want you to stop there.

Driver: Roger, have they been detained or do we know their location or what they're armed with?

TC: Not yet, police are still on there way. Last sighing he was on platform 3.

Driver: So we don't know what they're armed with or exactly where they are and the police have not declared the area safe yet?

TC: Thats correct drive.


What would you do? I can guarantee you that i'm not moving my train into the area and putting myself or my passengers at any unnecessary risk, i'm staying put until the police have given the all clear to the train controller. Who knows if they're going to put a few rounds into the side of the train as you pass through.

Same applies to a potential explosive. Can you imagine the repercussions if train control & drivers took a 'nah mate she'll be right, its probably nothing' attitude and something did happen?  

Trespassers are a bit different, when advised by train control that someone is on or near the track drivers are instructed to proceed cautiously into the section. Some drivers will do this, some won't and will wait for the police to say the line is clear. The contentious issue with the term 'cautiously' is that there is no exact definition for it. Your interpretation and judgement of proceeding cautiously is probably different to mine. A train could be traveling at 5km/h but if someone jumps out from behind a structure and manages to still get run over etc, the driver is deemed to be at fault and has to front up at the coroners court and try and explain why they were not driving more cautiously after being warned someone was in the vicinity.

Why is there such a huge over-reaction to such incidents by police? Incident controllers seem to have only one goal in mind, which is to manage the incident before them, but without balancing the risks of the use of their powers such as post-traumatic stress through shutting down all 4 tracks of the City Loop. Until the risk (eg gunman) is more clearly identified through CCTV, could the incident have been managed better by maintaining services on the other 3 City Loop lines, with the services not stopping at Flagstaff? If a gunman becomes visible on CCTV in a group other than the affected Clifton Hill group, then trains in that tunnel could be held at previous station.

Eeeerrr, no, it doesn't work like that in reality. How long does it take for someone to walk/run from one platform to another? A matter of seconds? Put yourself in the incident controller and train controllers shoes for a moment, a report comes in of a gunman on the platform, you have no idea if they're armed with a toy cap gun or a semi automatic assault rifle. Your first priority is the safety of passengers and staff and a part of the harm minimization is not to send more people to the area until it has been giving the all clear from the police.

Also imagine this conversation between train control and the driver:

TC: Drive, although you're scheduled to stop at Flagstaff we want you to go express through it.

Driver: Ok, what is the reason for the change?

TC: We have a potentially active gunman at the station and don't want you to stop there.

Driver: Roger, have they been detained or do we know their location or what they're armed with?

TC: Not yet, police are still on there way. Last sighing he was on platform 3.

Driver: So we don't know what they're armed with or exactly where they are and the police have not declared the area safe yet?

TC: Thats correct drive.


What would you do? I can guarantee you that i'm not moving my train into the area and putting myself or my passengers at any unnecessary risk, i'm staying put until the police have given the all clear to the train controller. Who knows if they're going to put a few rounds into the side of the train as you pass through.

Same applies to a potential explosive. Can you imagine the repercussions if train control & drivers took a 'nah mate she'll be right, its probably nothing' attitude and something did happen?  

Trespassers are a bit different, when advised by train control that someone is on or near the track drivers are instructed to proceed cautiously into the section. Some drivers will do this, some won't and will wait for the police to say the line is clear. The contentious issue with the term 'cautiously' is that there is no exact definition for it. Your interpretation and judgement of proceeding cautiously is probably different to mine. A train could be traveling at 5km/h but if someone jumps out from behind a structure and manages to still get run over etc, the driver is deemed to be at fault and has to front up at the coroners court and try and explain why they were not driving more cautiously after being warned someone was in the vicinity.

Well said, jakar. If you overreact, a number of people are late to work or school or appointments or wherever they were going. If you underreact, and people die as a result, questions will rightly be asked about why the reaction wasn't swifter/bigger/better.

Moreover, it's silly to pull out the old "that's not how they do it it Europe/Japan" line here, because they do. Even a cursory google search shows dozens of examples of central stations being evacuated because of abandoned bags or unsubstantiated threats.

Trespassers are a bit different, when advised by train control that someone is on or near the track drivers are instructed to proceed cautiously into the section. Some drivers will do this, some won't and will wait for the police to say the line is clear. The contentious issue with the term 'cautiously' is that there is no exact definition for it. Your interpretation and judgement of proceeding cautiously is probably different to mine. A train could be traveling at 5km/h but if someone jumps out from behind a structure and manages to still get run over etc, the driver is deemed to be at fault and has to front up at the coroners court and try and explain why they were not driving more cautiously after being warned someone was in the vicinity.

That's a great example of what I am talking about right there. Trespassers in the rail corridor are a fairly common occurrence however from the sound of is not even a proper procedure in place to deal with it leaving Drivers and possibly other open to being hauled before the courts for doing their jobs.

So make a firm policy for trespassers on all heavy rail lines in Victoria. 5km/h, 10km/h whatever it is and stick to it. Then if the worst does happen then the operator / department or whatever goes to the hearing and says yes, driver so and so was following the procedure as laid out in blah blah.

I saw one of the trespassers who caused mayhem on the Sunbury/RRL lines a few years back I think it was. It was a tradie who got off a spark at West Footscray and couldn't be bothered using the bridge to get home so jumped off the platform at the Down end and sauntered across the yard and ARTC lines. Judging from his relaxed demeanor it was not the first time he had pulled that move either. He was gone in 2 minutes but the damage lasted for ages with services backing up.

BG

If the police are prepared to stop trains for tens of thousands of people on a person stating they saw a gun puta the economy at risk.

Yep!

If the police are prepared to stop trains for tens of thousands of people on a person stating they saw a gun puta the economy at risk.

The economy?

Stuff the economy.

Lives are more important.

It's easy for us to sit here now and say "It was just some busker with a trumpet or a didgeridoo why overact?" after the fact. But in the moment, when reports are coming in of someone with a gun on a packed train, or in a packed train station, all I want to know is that the Police are going to handle the situation as quickly as they can.

So some people got a bit frightened. They will get over it.

So some people were late for important meetings. They can be re-scheduled.

Big deal, at least we know our authorities act on any perceived threat with exactly the sort of vigour we would expect.


I bet nobody in Christchurch was complaining that they were late for a meeting when the roads were closed a few Friday's ago.

How's about a psychological report on the person that made the complaint, they made a report to police on what they were thinking they were seeing.which it turned out was wrong .

The police responded to the complaint made , even if the complainter was a nutter .

To much TV for some people.

How's about a psychological report on the person that made the complaint, they made a report to police on what they were thinking they were seeing.which it turned out was wrong . The police responded to the complaint made , even if the complainter was a nutter . To much TV for some people.

Spot on Dick (), and you can add a healthy dose of media fear mongering to that as well.

No doubt the Government will soon receive an "Unsolicited Proposal" for Airport type security to be installed at all passenger stations. The passengers will of course foot the bill with a "Security Tax" added to the cost of each ticket.


Seriously though, its a no-win situation for all - yes most are false alarms thankfully, but the big fan will really be turning if one gets ignored with catastrophic results.

You don't know how close to the sun you're flying...

So make a firm policy for trespassers on all heavy rail lines in Victoria. 5km/h, 10km/h whatever it is and stick to it.

If it was as simple as that it would have been implemented already. The 'company' would never introduce a policy where it accepts any liability for injury or death of a trespasser, what you would end up with is a policy that states that all trains must come to a stop until police advise that the line is clear and safe, which would cause more delays than what currently occurs.

BG

No, put it back on the person doing the wrong thing. Trespassing or committing a criminal act? You lose all your rights to compensation or litigation.