Thursday, September 18, 2008
Fanning flames in the Channel Tunnel
Is the Channel Tunnel the victim of unwise cost cutting as far as fire safety is concerned? Yes, says an interesting post on Eurotrib.
Basically a train fire in a very long tunnel poses big problems for fire-fighters, as it takes a long time to get to the blaze. So the car transporter shuttles are designed as closed compartments, which means that if a fire breaks out the train can be driven out of the tunnel and the incident dealt with in the open air. But the HGV transporters are open-sided so in the event of a fire the train must stop. That maximises chances of damaging the tunnel fabric and generates far higher costs (think closure of one of the tubes for a month) than would providing closed carriages for HGVs in the first place.
And should it be permissible to transport highly volatile or poisonous products through the tunnel?
See the pictures – what do you think?
Basically a train fire in a very long tunnel poses big problems for fire-fighters, as it takes a long time to get to the blaze. So the car transporter shuttles are designed as closed compartments, which means that if a fire breaks out the train can be driven out of the tunnel and the incident dealt with in the open air. But the HGV transporters are open-sided so in the event of a fire the train must stop. That maximises chances of damaging the tunnel fabric and generates far higher costs (think closure of one of the tubes for a month) than would providing closed carriages for HGVs in the first place.
And should it be permissible to transport highly volatile or poisonous products through the tunnel?
See the pictures – what do you think?
Labels: Channel Tunnel, fire, HGVs, safety
Comments:
Post a Comment
