The Eurostar shambles - what is the truth?

Vedder2008

My daughter in law was trapped in the tunnel yesterday for 12 hours, she should have arrived in France at 1.30 yesterday but I have just had a phone call to say she arrived home safely 24 hours later than expected. They've had lots of snow in Le Mann and she said they are having a big thaw at the moment.
So scary, I would have been terrified as I am a little clastrophobic aswell.

sweetstudent

I feel sorry for the staff onboard, i wonder if they get any compensation.....

pendulum

Money_Grabber13579 wrote: »

There would have been plans in place to rescue 1 train, or possibly 2 if they became stuck. But I don't see how anyone could have foreseen 5 trains all failing at the same time.

A power cut would cause all the trains to stop. Are you seriously suggesting that couldn't have been envisaged? In fact there are many things that could cause many or all trains to stop. Fire, crash...

robt_2

pendulum wrote: »

A power cut would cause all the trains to stop. Are you seriously suggesting that couldn't have been envisaged? In fact there are many things that could cause many or all trains to stop. Fire, crash...

There are plenty of backup systems for the electric supply.

As of yet we don't know which systems actually failed. There would be no point sending in a locomotive to drag out a stranded Eurostar if the brake systems had failed resulting in the brakes (correctly) being unable to be released.

What actually happened is all just speculation at the moment, nobody can say one way or the other.

As with most things like this, it will be a series of small events which build up to produce a one off freak event.

My main question at the moment would be why were more trains allowed to enter the tunnel with a stranded train inside.

Money_Grabber13579

pendulum wrote: »

A power cut would cause all the trains to stop. Are you seriously suggesting that couldn't have been envisaged? In fact there are many things that could cause many or all trains to stop. Fire, crash...

But I'm sure there would be backup plans for a power cut, which wouldn't involve hauling the trains out with a rescue locomotive. And it's unlikely that a power failure would knock out the entire tunnel. It would be in seperate phases, so at worst, would possible only affect 1 or 2 trains.

pendulum

And in the case of fire, or a crash as in my other examples? Fact is there are loads of events that could happen, that would necessitate them evacuating many trains. So for you to say they couldn't have planned for it is stupid.

robt_2

pendulum wrote: »

And in the case of fire, or a crash as in my other examples? Fact is there are loads of events that could happen, that would necessitate them evacuating many trains. So for you to say they couldn't have planned for it is stupid.

Neither of those examples would require evacuating many trains unless multiple trains spontaneously combust. In which case the procedures for a fire would be followed.

Money_Grabber13579

robt wrote: »

Neither of those examples would require evacuating many trains unless multiple trains spontaneously combust. In which case the procedures for a fire would be followed.

Exactly. It's the scale of the break downs which caused all the problems. How likely is it that 5 trains would all crash at once? And if they went on fire, well, then they would have been evacuated into the safety tunnel. But in this case, I imagine it would probably have been safer to stay on the train until help was available.

KeithP

sweetstudent wrote: »

I feel sorry for the staff onboard, i wonder if they get any compensation.....

I'm sure they got paid overtime for the extra hours.

Wig

What I don't understand about this, is why did they allow a further 4 trains into the tunnels after 1 or 2 of them had got stuck down there?