South Devon Railway - unsafe toilet

[PhilH]

 

 

Railways 101 - passengers are as thick as pig sheet

 

 

That's something you should think, not say out loud! But you're not wrong...having been around preserved railways for 30+ years and a few years on mainline steam operations I could write a book. However you can't get way from the fact that this was something that should never had happened. The coach should not have been in service, end of.

Edited July 11, 2017 by PhilH

[decauville1126]

 

This was an epic fail by the South Devon Railway, not a general malaise affecting the whole heritage railway movement.

Apparently so, but the RAIB is correctly making a very quick learning point announcement to all of us who undertake work on rolling stock and locomotives - and I am one - to make sure the item is fit for service. And preferably with a second pair of eyes to sign off the acceptance.

 

The Safety Management System (SMS) of the organisation should cover vehicle management and acceptance anyway.

[Liam]

And apparently expect everyone else to protect them from their own stupidity, rather than having any sense of self-responsibility whatsoever. Maybe the railway should be in trouble, but so should the mother if she ignored a sign and forced a locked door.

I was doing a shift on the Severn Valley a while ago when this man was letting his two kids stand up on the seats. I politely asked him if he could make sure they didn't stand on the seats as not only was it damaging the upholstery but if the train suddenly halted they would fall back on to the table and could potentially break a bone. He just looked at me blankly as if to say "I don't care".

 

Whilst the South Devon are partly to blame, if there was a notice that clearly said 'Out of Use' then the railway can't really be blamed for a passenger ignoring the sign.

[Reorte]

I was doing a shift on the Severn Valley a while ago when this man was letting his two kids stand up on the seats. I politely asked him if he could make sure they didn't stand on the seats as not only was it damaging the upholstery but if the train suddenly halted they would fall back on to the table and could potentially break a bone. He just looked at me blankly as if to say "I don't care".

 

Whilst the South Devon are partly to blame, if there was a notice that clearly said 'Out of Use' then the railway can't really be blamed for a passenger ignoring the sign.

Well just the sign isn't enough I think, if you're in a hurry and know where the toilet is I think most people will just rush there and only notice the sign after the door doesn't open, and that isn't them being stupid. So I suppose despite my general scepticism of the human race which usually leaves my initial thoughts as "someone unable to cope without being wrapped in cotton wool" it's also possible that being in a rush resulted in a shove of the door before looking which made the lock give - that IMO isn't an entirely implausible scenario and doesn't require the mother being a complete numpty, although I hope the locks would be a bit sturdier than that. Well it's the job of investigations to work out that sort of thing.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Reorte

[Jol Wilkinson]

And apparently expect everyone else to protect them from their own stupidity, rather than having any sense of self-responsibility whatsoever. Maybe the railway should be in trouble, but so should the mother if she ignored a sign and forced a locked door.

Agree entirely. We live in a society that increasingly believes "it's someone else's responsibility".

[PatB]

It wasn't necessarily the mother who disabled whatever securing mechanism the door may have had. It could easily have been a preceeding idiot.

['CHARD]

not a general malaise affecting the whole heritage railway movement.

 

Had it been me opening the door, I think I may have suffered an involuntary railway movement...

[Ken.W]

I suspect "grabbed and suffering bruising" is an exaggeration and lawyer speak for "more cash needed". It is a very dangerous incident which could've been much worse, but that statement screams compensation culture.

No, this is stated as occurring in both the BBC and RAIB reports linked in first two posts, nothing to do with a quote from someone's lawyer

[Jol Wilkinson]

No, this is stated as occurring in both the BBC and RAIB reports linked in first two posts, nothing to do with a quote from someone's lawyer

Ken,

 

a good point. Unfortunately though there is a increasing tendency for people to dramatise whatever happens to them. The concept of the stiff upper lip has been replaced by the violently trembling lower one, preferably shared on social media.

 

That's not to deny that the mother and child had a very frightening experience and that this potentially very dangerous scenario should't have happened.

 

Jol

[The Stationmaster]

What's the typical inspection-regime on a preserved railway? Do the working teams self-assess their work for safety, or is there a designated officer to certify the work?

 

It should be covered by the railway's SMS and workshop procedures - which is an area the RAIB investigation is going to target (as it should).

 

It might also be the case that the train preparation should cover the issue as well but it all depends where the SMS puts the responsibility for ensuring that a passenger carrying vehicle is in a fit and safe condition when released off maintenance or any other sort of attention.

 

Depending on which version of lock the door has it can be relatively simple to lock it from the outside but in this situation it would obviously have made sense to also remove the door handle and to have put some very clear notices on the door.  But, especially bearing in mind Boris' remarks about the idiot public undoubtedly the safest course would have been to take the coach out of service.

[brianusa]

If I can remember all those years ago and being of an age if I found such a situation, it would have caused intense excitement; a WOW moment!  Railfans are notorious risk takers; even now its difficult to keep them off the tracks.  While perhaps not a railfan now, this kid might become one, if his mother lets him.

 

Brian.

[avonside1563]

I would be interested to know the reason for putting this coach back into service in this condition, and the risk assessment made prior to releasing it. However we will have to wait for the RAIB investigation and report to learn more. What it does show is the need for constant vigilance from all operational and maintenance staff whether it's national network or a heritage railway. How many involved in railway operation are thinking "There but for the grace of God go I"

[tamperman36]

no matter what the situation, surely if there is such a lack of coaching stock and the coach was so badly needed it should have at least had the floor replaced even if they didn't replace the toilet fittings.

Edited July 13, 2017 by tamperman36

[11B]

An out of order sign is irrelevant in this case. The coach was not safe to use. Not everyone that travels on our preserved line can read English, then there is the passengers that have vision problems be that something in your eye or some degree of blindness.

 

As for the people that say it was busy and they don't have many coaches... Tuff, if it is not safe to use then take it out of traffic. Or in the case of this one don't let it into traffic!

 

Ian

[caradoc]

Bearing mind that (as mentioned above) some preserved railways do not provide toilets on their trains at all, putting a coach with a defective toilet into service is perfectly acceptable, but only if whatever defect exists does not and cannot affect passenger safety, which doesn't appear to have been the case here.

[BlackRat]

Without getting hysterical someone cocked up big style.

 

Public safety is paramount, wether it's a heritage line or the west coast main line.

 

It hardly instills confidence does it?

[Roy Langridge]

An out of order sign is irrelevant in this case. The coach was not safe to use. Not everyone that travels on our preserved line can read English, then there is the passengers that have vision problems be that something in your eye or some degree of blindness.

 

As for the people that say it was busy and they don't have many coaches... Tuff, if it is not safe to use then take it out of traffic. Or in the case of this one don't let it into traffic!

 

Ian

Don't forget that in addition to your list, children don't read signs at the top of doors either as the one in this case was.

 

Roy

[PatB]

Don't forget that in addition to your list, children don't read signs at the top of doors either as the one in this case was.

 

Roy

TBH nor do parents if they've got a child in need of the toilet in tow. It can be quite a high stress situation. From my memories of a few years ago, there were frequent circumstances when I'd have noticed a locked door but probably not a sign.

[Squirrel]

Bloody hell, sorry, but someone wants to be prosecuted for that, idiiots that do things like that give the rest of the preservation scene a bad name. That is ludicrous and should never have happened

Unfortunately that type of response is not helpful. The RAIB are interested in the facts of the incident and to work out recommendations for improved working methods. Nobody wants to be prosecuted, and we don't know all the circumstances. There are many things that happen which shouldn't, and there will be more in future. A scapegoat hunting culture scares most people away, what's needed is an openness and honesty culture.

Edited July 14, 2017 by Squirrel

[Squirrel]

RAIB statement

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dangerous-occurrence-on-the-south-devon-railway

Thanks for the link, I am now signed up for all the RAIB reports as they arise.

[brianusa]

A lot of conflicting remarks to this thread. Some take it in their stride while others are determined to dig deeper until it grows out of all proportion. Such are the problems of social media.

 

Brian.

[tamperman36]

as has been said already this needs to be used as an event from which all other railway operators, mainline and preserved can learn and develop new maintenance and inspection programs. Ultimately it would not be productive for the preservation groups which are growing around the country to add loads more red tape to there operations and there shouldn't be any witch hunt for who was ultimately responsible, just retraining and education to prevent it happening again.

[Boris]

as has been said already this needs to be used as an event from which all other railway operators, mainline and preserved can learn and develop new maintenance and inspection programs. Ultimately it would not be productive for the preservation groups which are growing around the country to add loads more red tape to there operations and there shouldn't be any witch hunt for who was ultimately responsible, just retraining and education to prevent it happening again.

I agree, the mainline regime is as, I understand it, when one person signs a job off as complete another person effectively goes back to check and countersign.  Preserved railways may or may not have adopted this system depending on their SMS, regardless, someone screwed the pooch big time here.

[modfather]

I agree, the mainline regime is as, I understand it, when one person signs a job off as complete another person effectively goes back to check and countersign. Preserved railways may or may not have adopted this system depending on their SMS, regardless, someone screwed the pooch big time here.

Nope, you get on and do the job. When you're done and you sign your work off the closing summary is "all clips/panels/locks/switches/isolations returned to their correct state. It is likely someone will wander through a set to hand it over.

 

It seems that a lot of people are getting carried away. Lock and tag it out of service for repair asap. It's what the mainline companies do (I've done similar). It's not a safety critical defect providing it is not planned to staynlike that for an extended period.

 

I would look to make sure that the out of service locks are checked and tested more importantly.

[jjb1970]

If a child almost drops through a hole in the floor with consequences likely to be fatal then this was a safety critical defect IMO. I've no idea what happened or what systems were in place but the very fact that this incident happened in itself tells me that either those systems were inadequate or that they weren't properly applied.