Good day,
For example, if a person faints on a train and needs to be resuscitated, are you theoretically allowed to pull the emergency brake or in what situation is it not a criminal offense?
(1 votes)
Loading...Hello, I keep seeing train drivers having… is that even allowed? Does anyone know? LG
How expensive is a dedicated railway line through Germany? So like the London-Hogwarts railway line, beautiful through the countryside and mountains Is this actually possible as a private individual?
I was recently checked, but my phone was dead, so I couldn't show a ticket. Then he took my information, but he wrote something completely different for my last name, something that had nothing to do with my last name. Will that cause problems?
We took a train to Rostock about ten years ago. From Hamburg to Rostock, we traveled on a train where the seats in the compartment could be folded down completely, so you could lie down. And the seats were really thick and padded. And besides, you couldn't see into the compartment from the outside. In…
Many airports have multiple modes of transport, offering a variety of travel options. Do you use the cheapest or fastest connection?
Why? If you live in Heilbronn and want to travel by long-distance train, you always have to go to Stuttgart, Mannheim, or Karlsruhe. Wouldn't it be worth it to have ICE and IC trains stop at Heilbronn Central Station? At least IC trains could stop there, like they do at Pforzheim Central Station. Heilbronn has…
The most ultimative example
Eschede.
At the latest when the wheel tire came up through the ground. 101 dead might still live.
Other similar technical problem where absolutely no time is to inform the train attendant about the call button.
With fainting or one of my epics, that makes absolutely no sense. The rescue agent should be converted into a Sauteur helicopter that cannot land in the middle of the forest.
An impotence is not an action film.
In the event of a medical incident, it would make more sense to tell the train driver what’s going on by the intercom, so that he can decide if it makes more sense to stop or continue to the next station and call an emergency doctor to that station (which in most cases is probably the fastest and safest option).
The emergency brake makes sense especially in the case of technical problems, for example in the case of smoke or fire, or when the train seems to be relieved (if you still have the time to pull the emergency brake).
situations where passengers should leave the train immediately.
Even if there is a risk of injury when the train is approached (e.g. someone crashed between train and platform) it makes sense to pull the emergency brake.
More information:
https://www.s-bahn-muenchen-magazin.de/artikel/Not Bremse
The question can be answered simply, whenever it is unavoidable on an open track.
If the train is burning you are enclosed, you can only escape to the free, so emergency brake.
In such situations.
No, definitely not.
The train driver is to be contacted, which then coordinates the rescue measures if necessary.
Because the staff knows where they are, what lies ahead of them and what possibilities exist at present.
If you pull the emergency brake, the train will stop, in case of doubt, in the middle of the forest. A further journey is only possible if the cause of the braking is known and this can cost valuable minutes it should be a real emergency, minutes where the train could have approached the next point where a handover of the person to the rescue would have been possible.
Regardless of whether it is not impossible, you should always contact the train staff, then you are always on the safe side.
In emergencies, such as a fire
If someone gets unconscious on the train or the like, I wouldn’t pull the emergency brake because it delays the time until the train reaches the next station where rescue personnel can help the person easily and quickly. I would rather inform the train staff as soon as possible, or if no sheepman is in sight, and there is no emergency mailing station on the train directly 112, they will then in doubt contact with the train from the control station.
In the case of fire on board, when people are trapped in a door (or driving outside on the treadboard because they still wanted to get into the outgoing train), serious technical problems (if you can estimate it as a layman), such things, where there is an acute danger that can only be turned away by holding the train as soon as possible
In 1998 at the Eschede disaster, it would have been very good if someone had pulled the emergency brake in time. The traveler in the affected car with the loose wheel tire must have noticed something. But even I don’t know if I had the courage….
He noticed something, the wheel tire almost staggered through his armrest. But he thought it would be more appropriate to look for the train attendant, who in turn was only allowed to do it if he first convinced himself of the problem…
Thanks for the info, I didn’t know. I just hope I acted.
Pulling the emergency brake makes sense only if the train really has to stop immediately. So, for example, if it burns or if a car has escaped.
If another emergency is medical probable or terrorist attack, you should not pull the emergency brake but press the emergency call. You can talk to the driver. If he sees it as sensible, he will pull the emergency brake himself. As a rule, it is better if the train can continue, because in a train station you can call the rescue service much easier than on the track and it is simply much better to have an emergency in the train station than on the free track.
In case of emergency – but with a injured person, that doesn’t make sense. There’s got to be the staff. The next station can be better helped than on a free route, consider this. Pulling emergency brake would be counterproductive.
This is for example for fires in the train, defects, emergencies (open door etc.).
This makes very little sense in this case, the train comes to stand on a free track, it takes a while before he gets a release to continue. Ambulances could not reach the train. Completely illogical procedure.
The train attendant/customer will inform the emergency doctor to the nearest station.
For example, yes.
Or if, for example, what burns….
Exactly this example fits for “does not pull the emergency brake”.
The example of the questioner fits.
In the event of a fire, the emergency brake is sensible, because there is an acute danger for passengers on the train, which can only be turned off by the fastest possible evacuation. Moreover, it is also ensured that a train does not remain in the tunnel or at other points which pose an additional danger, there is the so-called emergency brake bridging by which the driver can turn an emergency brake until he has left the corresponding danger zone.
How to get out of the burning train at a time? And not all trains have a direct intercom or staff on board to determine when the train stops. In cities, for example, the train often goes to the next station.
Why not pull the emergency brake in case of fire?
But the example of the FS was the faint passenger.
I was more about reviving. that was connected with it. Yeah, right.
You had answered “for example yes” and was therefore referred to the impotent person. There is no need to pull the emergency brake, but to inform the Schaffner, who informs the next (also unplanned) station where the doctor is already standing.
Then say it like this:D
You thought you were referring to the last written “if something burns”.
My above statement refers to “for example yes” with which reference was made to the impotent person.
“Brandfall” is a good example of “unconditionally pull the emergency brake”.
And what is the use of poor impotent people when the train stops on a free route, where badly an ambulance arrives, and takes about a quarter of an hour to get back on the road?