In message <tdlaj8$11b9r$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:16:40 on Thu, 18 Aug
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 18/08/2022 11:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <tdksta$u026$4@dont-email.me>, at 09:23:04 on Thu, 18 Aug
>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 18/08/2022 07:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <tdjub1$175v$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 00:41:21 on Thu, 18
>>>>Aug 2022, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 18/08/2022 00:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>>>>>>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>>>>>>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks
>>>>>>>or  pick
>>>>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and
>>>>>>>explained  the
>>>>>>> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>>>>>>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>>>
>>>>>>  It's slightly odd that they chose the local MP as their
>>>>>>emergency service.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I would have just gone with the police as my first point of contact.
>>
>>>>  The public is notorious for not doing the "right" thing,
>>>>especially when  clutching at online straws. Plenty of anecdotes
>>>>within the responder  community, such as a youth Tweeting that he'd
>>>>found a dead body in a  park on his way to school and expecting the
>>>>police to be monitoring for  such messages; and someone reporting
>>>>blood seeping out from under a  hotel door to the equivalent of
>>>>Trading Standards (out of normal office  hours, naturally).
>>>
>>> An extreme case was the unfortunate illegal immigrants who died in
>>>the lorry in Essex. Many of them had mobile phones and phoned their
>>>relatives back in <wherever>, not one tried to phone the emergency
>>>services.
>> Maybe they didn't know the number (having missed the memo which said
>>that due to EU rules, foisted on the public by unelected bureaucrats,
>> in the UK 112 works in addition to 999).
>
>You are dying, don't you at least try any emergency number you know?
>
>Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>location.

Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...

>>Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise emergency
>>numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the location.
>
> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?

I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911 as
an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US mobile
companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most Americans,
the world ends at the US borders.

I can vouch for the fact that 999 operators can patch calls to an ambulance
service that is not local to where the call is being answered. In the days
before mobile phones, when my grandma had a stroke and rang me for help, I
had to go next door to phone 999 (she left her phone off the hook which
blocked my line from making an outgoing call) and when I was put through to
my local ambulance 999 call centre they were able to pass it on to the
corresponding one for her area.

I had more problem getting in touch with my parents to let them know,
because I knew that they were at a friend's house who was ex-directory
because they were a social worker. And all that friend's neighbours were at
the same party that my parents were at, so they weren't answering their
phones either. I eventually got a supervisor at the 100 operator service to
agree to phone the social worker (without revealing the number to me) to
pass on a message, but it took a lot of persistence. If it hadn't worked,
I'd have tried phoning the local police station and getting them to use
their extra powers of persuasion to get BT/GPO to phone.

I wonder if BT still have the distinction between calls-offered (ie BT will
phone the ex-directory number and ask whether they will accept the call) and
no-calls-whatsoever (or whatever the GPO/BT term was).

On 18/08/2022 14:35, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <tdlaj8$11b9r$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:16:40 on Thu, 18 Aug
> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 18/08/2022 11:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <tdksta$u026$4@dont-email.me>, at 09:23:04 on Thu, 18 Aug
>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 18/08/2022 07:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <tdjub1$175v$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 00:41:21 on Thu, 18
>>>>> Aug  2022, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 18/08/2022 00:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio
>>>>>>>> Cumbria
>>>>>>>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>>>>>>>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks
>>>>>>>> or  pick
>>>>>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and
>>>>>>>> explained  the
>>>>>>>> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>>>>>>>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  It's slightly odd that they chose the local MP as their
>>>>>>> emergency  service.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would have just gone with the police as my first point of contact.
>>>
>>>>>  The public is notorious for not doing the "right" thing,
>>>>> especially  when  clutching at online straws. Plenty of anecdotes
>>>>> within the  responder  community, such as a youth Tweeting that
>>>>> he'd found a dead  body in a  park on his way to school and
>>>>> expecting the police to be  monitoring for  such messages; and
>>>>> someone reporting blood seeping  out from under a  hotel door to
>>>>> the equivalent of Trading Standards  (out of normal office  hours,
>>>>> naturally).
>>>>
>>>> An extreme case was the unfortunate illegal immigrants who died in
>>>> the  lorry in Essex. Many of them had mobile phones and phoned their
>>>> relatives back in <wherever>, not one tried to phone the emergency
>>>> services.
>>>  Maybe they didn't know the number (having missed the memo which said
>>> that due to EU rules, foisted on the public by unelected bureaucrats,
>>> in the UK 112 works in addition to 999).
>>
>> You are dying, don't you at least try any emergency number you know?
>>
>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>> location.
>
> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?

Apparently. Not actually has occasion to test it.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 18/08/2022 01:34, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:11:02 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 18/08/2022 00:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>>>>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>>>>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>>>>
>>>>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or pick
>>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>>>>
>>>>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and explained the
>>>>> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>>>>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>>>
>>>> It's slightly odd that they chose the local MP as their emergency service.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would have just gone with the police as my first point of contact.
>>
>> Yes, that seems much the more obvious choice.
>>
> Don't most stations have multiple posters with the BTP 'phone number
> on them ?

Even better.

On 18/08/2022 01:11, Recliner wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 18/08/2022 00:12, Recliner wrote:
>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>
>>>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>>>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>>>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>>>
>>>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or pick
>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>>>
>>>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and explained the
>>>> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>>>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>>
>>> It's slightly odd that they chose the local MP as their emergency service.
>>>
>>
>> I would have just gone with the police as my first point of contact.
>
> Yes, that seems much the more obvious choice.
>

Calling one's MP seems ... I dunno ... like seeking attention.

On 18/08/2022 09:20, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 18/08/2022 08:27, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>> On 18/08/2022 01:34, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:11:02 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 18/08/2022 00:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>>>>>>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>>>>>>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks
>>>>>>> or pick
>>>>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and
>>>>>>> explained the
>>>>>>> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>>>>>>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's slightly odd that they chose the local MP as their emergency
>>>>>> service.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would have just gone with the police as my first point of contact.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that seems much the more obvious choice.
>>>>
>>> Don't most stations have multiple posters with the BTP 'phone number
>>> on them ?
>> If you're worrying about being stranded in a dangerous situation the
>> last thing on your mind will be to read posters hidden amongst the
>> advertising.
>
> Who needs a poster to dial 999?

Fair point.

On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>
>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>> location.
>>
>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>
> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.

Is not 112 universal now?

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100
"hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>
>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>> location.
>>>
>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>
>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>
>Is not 112 universal now?

Universal where? In europe maybe, not outside it. Its also pointless, at least
in the UK. Might have made sense with rotary phones being quicker to dial but
ironically on any type of touch phone its slower. Can't help thinking
smartphones should just have an emergency dial button so you don't even need
to know the local emergency number, the network has already informed the phone
which just dials it when required.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>
>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise emergency
>>> numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the location.
>>
>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>
> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911 as
> an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US mobile
> companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most Americans,
> the world ends at the US borders.
>
> I can vouch for the fact that 999 operators can patch calls to an ambulance
> service that is not local to where the call is being answered. In the days
> before mobile phones, when my grandma had a stroke and rang me for help, I
> had to go next door to phone 999 (she left her phone off the hook which
> blocked my line from making an outgoing call) and when I was put through to
> my local ambulance 999 call centre they were able to pass it on to the
> corresponding one for her area.
>
> I had more problem getting in touch with my parents to let them know,
> because I knew that they were at a friend's house who was ex-directory
> because they were a social worker. And all that friend's neighbours were at
> the same party that my parents were at, so they weren't answering their
> phones either. I eventually got a supervisor at the 100 operator service to
> agree to phone the social worker (without revealing the number to me) to
> pass on a message, but it took a lot of persistence. If it hadn't worked,
> I'd have tried phoning the local police station and getting them to use
> their extra powers of persuasion to get BT/GPO to phone.
>
> I wonder if BT still have the distinction between calls-offered (ie BT will
> phone the ex-directory number and ask whether they will accept the call) and
> no-calls-whatsoever (or whatever the GPO/BT term was).
>
>

It is a common misconception that your mobile phone dials 999 or 112 or
whatever. What actually happens is the handset in conjunction with the sim
identifies that you have entered one of the common emergency numbers on
your keypad and initiates a special emergency call connection. The full
details are here:

https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/wp-content/uploads//NG.119-v1.0-3.pdf

I found it via Google in case anyone queries the status of the document at
the top.

So taking your UK handset to the USA is likely to connect you to the
emergency services even if you dial 999.

On 18/08/2022 16:00, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100
> "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>>
>>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>>> location.
>>>>
>>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>>
>>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>>
>> Is not 112 universal now?
>
> Universal where? In europe maybe, not outside it. Its also pointless, at least
> in the UK. Might have made sense with rotary phones being quicker to dial but
> ironically on any type of touch phone its slower. Can't help thinking
> smartphones should just have an emergency dial button so you don't even need
> to know the local emergency number, the network has already informed the phone
> which just dials it when required.
>

Many smartphones already have that feature.

On 18/08/2022 16:00, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100
> "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk" <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>>
>>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>>> location.
>>>>
>>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>>
>>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>>
>> Is not 112 universal now?
>
> Universal where? In europe maybe, not outside it. Its also pointless, at least
> in the UK. Might have made sense with rotary phones being quicker to dial but
> ironically on any type of touch phone its slower. Can't help thinking
> smartphones should just have an emergency dial button so you don't even need
> to know the local emergency number, the network has already informed the phone
> which just dials it when required.
>

iPhones can do that, press the power button 5 times[1] in rapid
succession and it calls the emergency services and gives them your
location and texts a preselected contact number as well.

[1] There are alternative ways of doing it but they involve pressing the
pwer button and a volume control at the same time which, on my phone at
least, is too easy to do accidentally.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>
>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>> location.
>>>
>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>
>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>
>Is not 112 universal now?

Not in Canaduh nor the Excited States. 911 and 411 (directory
assistance, though who knew we still had *operators*?) have been
joined by several other -11's.

On 18/08/2022 17:44, Nobody wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>>
>>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>>> location.
>>>>
>>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>>
>>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>>
>> Is not 112 universal now?
>
> Not in Canaduh nor the Excited States. 911 and 411 (directory
> assistance, though who knew we still had *operators*?) have been
> joined by several other -11's.

311 in New York City for non-emergency calls.

On 18/08/2022 17:44, Nobody wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>>
>>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>>> location.
>>>>
>>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>>
>>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>>
>> Is not 112 universal now?
>
> Not in Canaduh nor the Excited States. 911 and 411 (directory
> assistance, though who knew we still had *operators*?) have been
> joined by several other -11's.

211 for credit on misdialled calls.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 08:27:39 +0100,
martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

> If you're worrying about being stranded in a dangerous situation the
> last thing on your mind will be to read posters hidden amongst the
> advertising.

Maybe the lights were turned off when the station was locked up?

On 17/08/2022 21:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 19:49:23 +0100, Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>
>> 'They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or "pick
>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".'
>>
>> Would crossing the line have helped? I can't see any nearby level crossings
>> and it seems most likely that it would just leave you with a different gate
>> or fence to climb. If I had thought it would give a good chance of being
>> able to get out I would have considered it, although I might have been put
>> off by the apparently very poor visibility along the line at Oxenholme.
>>
>> Train was probably this one:
>> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:S50326/2022-08-16/detailed
>
> At Oxenholme, platforms 2 and 3 are on an island, as shown here:
>
> https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations-and-destinations/stations-made-easy/oxenholme-lake-district-station-plan
> Assuming the train is the one mentioned above, they arrived on platform 2.
> They would have been able to get to platform 1 via the subway without
> crossing any lines, but would then have needed to exit via the side gate at
> the bottom of the map, which was, presumably, one of the locked gates. The
> other would have been this one directly from the subway onto Oxenholme Road,
> here:
> https://goo.gl/maps/mxAmjL6QaR6U5ZHq8
>
> It's possible that crossing the line which serves platform 3 might have
> given them access to a more easily scalable fence. But it's difficult to
> tell from street view as the angles aren't helpful.
>
> Mark

I think that, in common with much of the railway, the whole area is
surrounded by high metal fencing.

On 17/08/2022 23:55, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>
> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>
> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or pick
> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>
> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and explained the
> situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>

You would probably have to wait much of the night if you called BTP from
Oxenholme after midnight - where are the nearest stations with BTP staff
on duty at that time ? Preston, perhaps, or Carlisle ??

On 17/08/2022 23:02, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 21:26:18 +0100, Scott
> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 21:15:45 +0100, Mark Goodge
>> <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 19:49:23 +0100, Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>>>
>>>> 'They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or "pick
>>>> somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".'
>>>>
>>>> Would crossing the line have helped? I can't see any nearby level crossings
>>>> and it seems most likely that it would just leave you with a different gate
>>>> or fence to climb. If I had thought it would give a good chance of being
>>>> able to get out I would have considered it, although I might have been put
>>>> off by the apparently very poor visibility along the line at Oxenholme.
>>>>
>>>> Train was probably this one:
>>>> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:S50326/2022-08-16/detailed
>>>
>>> At Oxenholme, platforms 2 and 3 are on an island, as shown here:
>>>
>>> https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations-and-destinations/stations-made-easy/oxenholme-lake-district-station-plan
>>> Assuming the train is the one mentioned above, they arrived on platform 2.
>>> They would have been able to get to platform 1 via the subway without
>>> crossing any lines, but would then have needed to exit via the side gate at
>>> the bottom of the map, which was, presumably, one of the locked gates. The
>>> other would have been this one directly from the subway onto Oxenholme Road,
>>> here:
>>> https://goo.gl/maps/mxAmjL6QaR6U5ZHq8
>>>
>>> It's possible that crossing the line which serves platform 3 might have
>>> given them access to a more easily scalable fence. But it's difficult to
>>> tell from street view as the angles aren't helpful.
>>>
>> Is there a defence of necessity for trespassing on railway lines?
>>
> "Lawful excuse" due to the negligent action of the railway?

Could a member of Avanti staff have inadvertently committed an offence
by "illegally detaining" passengers on the station?

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:51:13 +0100, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> Calling one's MP seems ... I dunno ... like seeking attention.

Often the only way to get things done.

On 18/08/2022 19:06, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 17/08/2022 23:55, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>
>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>
>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or
>> pick somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>
>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and explained
>> the situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>
>
> You would probably have to wait much of the night if you called BTP from
> Oxenholme after midnight - where are the nearest stations with BTP staff
> on duty at that time ? Preston, perhaps, or Carlisle ??

I don't suppose BTP would actually attend but they would know who to
contact to arrange for the gate to be opened.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 18:14:04 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 18/08/2022 17:44, Nobody wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:54:12 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>>>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>>>
>>>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>>>> location.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>>>
>>>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>>>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>>>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>>>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>>>
>>> Is not 112 universal now?
>>
>> Not in Canaduh nor the Excited States. 911 and 411 (directory
>> assistance, though who knew we still had *operators*?) have been
>> joined by several other -11's.
>
>211 for credit on misdialled calls.

Not specifically:

<https://www.networkworld.com/article/3134324/beyond-911-other-n-1-1-codes-you-should-know.html>

311 can also be Very Locally Focussed, i.e it's used by the City of
Vancouver for services' information and reporting problems, and AFAIK
it's the only one of 23 entities in the Metro region to do so.

However, if the system is phishing in any way to weed out invalid
calls from within other municipalities, it runs immediately into a
problem with the major landline exchange (let alone mobiles) in the
southeast neighbourhoods. 43- is split probably 50-50 with the
southwest neighbourhoods in Burnaby, where the City doesn't support
it.

On 18/08/2022 19:06, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 17/08/2022 23:55, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 17/08/2022 18:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62583595>
>>
>> "Mr Gilmore, who had paid £80 for his ticket, told BBC Radio Cumbria
>> passengers faced three options when they got off the train, which
>> arrived at Oxenholme at about midnight.
>>
>> "They could scale the 8ft high gate, walk across the live tracks or
>> pick somewhere to try and sleep on a pavement until the morning".
>>
>> Or they could have rung either the local police or BTP and explained
>> the situation. It'd probably would be more effective, rather than
>> dramatising the whole situation for the Beeb.
>>
>
> You would probably have to wait much of the night if you called BTP from
> Oxenholme after midnight - where are the nearest stations with BTP staff
> on duty at that time ? Preston, perhaps, or Carlisle ??
>
>
Call the local police, in that case.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote in message
news:tdlk5s$ueh$1@gioia.aioe.org...
>>Is not 112 universal now?
>
> Universal where? In europe maybe, not outside it. Its also pointless, at
> least
> in the UK. Might have made sense with rotary phones being quicker to dial
> but
> ironically on any type of touch phone its slower.

Why is it slower to key 112 than 999? Is it the time to change fingers from
the one pressing the 1 to the one pressing the 2? I suppose if you use just
one finger it's fractionally slower, but I tend to use index, middle and
ring fingers for all buttons in the first, second and third columns
(respectively) on the keypad.

I suppose 112 is more prone to being "misdialled" by an intermittent DC
fault on a landline than 999 (which I believe is why 999 was chosen in the
first place). In the UK, all lines (currently) accept pulse dialling as an
alternative to tone dialling, for backwards compatibility with rotary dial
phones and as a fall-back if DTMF fails. I had recourse to use it to report
a line or exchange fault which allowed some DTMF digits to be dialled but
immediately produced number-unobtainable when other digits were dialled.
Luckily I have an old corded phone which I keep in reserve for power cuts,
and this can be switched to pulse dialling. Sod's law: one of the digits in
the fault-reporting number was one which produced NU tone. :-(

Do any/many other countries still support pulse dialling on their landlines,
or have they gone over to DTMF only?

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> I *think* I'd probably have phoned 999, though I might have wondered whether
> it would be regarded as a frivolous use of the number. Phoning your MP is a
> strange one: how many people know who their MP is, never mind what his phone
> number is? Phoning him after the event to get the problem publicised is a
> different matter, but in an emergency I'd try 999.

There was a tweet:
https://twitter.com/di_gilmore/status/1559675571050872832

Presumably Mr Farron was paying attention to Twitter at the time, got a
notification he was tagged (23:56), and was able to do something about it.

According to the thread, he replied in 13 minutes (00:09), tried to get 'them'
(Avanti?) on the phone (00:19), failed, and then called the emergency services
(00:23). By 00:32 he reported:

"I’ve just spoken to Cumbria police who were helpful and are now seeking a
resolution… I’m not quite sure what that will look like, but they are on to
it. Please keep me posted."

Apparently a member of NR staff turned up after about 45 minutes.

Quite a way beyond the call of duty on the part of their MP, I think.

Theo

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 18/08/2022 14:57, NY wrote:
>> "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hF+93hVUAk$iFA$e@perry.uk...
>>
>>>> Regardless of EU rules, I believe most smartphones can recognise
>>>> emergency numbers and redirect the calls to the correct one for the
>>>> location.
>>>
>>> Even 911 when you are playing tourist in the USA?
>>
>> I've wondered that: whether UK/Europe mobile phone companies accept 911
>> as an alternative to 999/112. I bet the converse isn't true - that US
>> mobile companies accept 112/999 - because "eny fule no" that for most
>> Americans, the world ends at the US borders.
>
> Is not 112 universal now?
>
>

I learned an interesting thing in Poland this year. 112 works for all the
emergency services; but you can also use 999 for Ambulance, 998 for Fire
Brigade, 997 for Police.

Anna Noyd-Dryver