WCRC - the ongoing battle with ORR.

[nightstar.train]

1 hour ago, newbryford said:

 

It is not clear what part of the derogation - or lack of compliance by WCRC to it - has caused the prohibition.

 

Hence - speculation.

 

 

From the ORR Prohibition notice:

 

Quote

You are failing to ensure the health and safety of your passengers and crew, thus putting them at risk of serious personal injury, as you are not implementing the controls identified in your risk assessment for rolling stock fitted with secondary door locking, in that:

1) Passengers are being told by train crew to operate the secondary door locks;

2) Stewards are not preventing passengers from operating the secondary door locks;

3) Stewards are not preventing passengers from leaning on train doors or from leaning out of the open droplight windows in train doors of moving trains; and

4) Secondary door locks are not in the ‘locked’ position or are being opened by train crew before the train is stationary; Therefore, creating a risk of persons falling from a train or being struck by infrastructure being passed by the moving train. 

 

I think I'm right in saying that the secondary door locks on these trains are just bolts, like you'd fit to a bathroom door. They are not locking or indeed centrally locked. It seems that WCRC need to fit locks that are at the very least locked with a key by the stewards, and ideally centrally locked by the guard. They've had years and years to do this. LSL have fitted all their tour tock with CDL, so it is possible and doable. 

[SR71]

It's being reported now. Currently most read on BBC website;

 

BBC News - Hogwarts Express steam train cancelled over safety issues
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66271357

[phil-b259]

55 minutes ago, SR71 said:

It's being reported now. Currently most read on BBC website;

 

BBC News - Hogwarts Express steam train cancelled over safety issues
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-66271357

 

Yup - but as ever WCR seem to not be appreciating the seriousness of it.

 

This is not a minor mistake - they have been DELIBERATELY flouting ORR requirements!

[Legend]

All these years I had to lean out the window of a class 126  to open the carriage door from the outside , little realising I was dicing with death . 
 

I thought mk1 doors had to be opened from the outside , by sticking your arm out the window  and that there is no lock on the inside , or am I missing something ? 

[phil-b259]

23 minutes ago, Legend said:

All these years I had to lean out the window of a class 126  to open the carriage door from the outside , little realising I was dicing with death . 
 

I thought mk1 doors had to be opened from the outside , by sticking your arm out the window  and that there is no lock on the inside , or am I missing something ? 

 

I believe that initial batches of Mk1s did have a door opening mechanism fitted inside (just as pre-grouping practice). However a number of safety incidents promoted a rethink and they tended to be removed in later years from main line stock (suburban and some MK1 based EMUS retained them I think as reaching out extended dwell times and this was seen as undesirable).

Edited July 21, 2023 by phil-b259

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, Legend said:

All these years I had to lean out the window of a class 126  to open the carriage door from the outside , little realising I was dicing with death . 
 

I thought mk1 doors had to be opened from the outside , by sticking your arm out the window  and that there is no lock on the inside , or am I missing something ? 

I'm sure no-one has an issue with people doing that when the train's stationary at the platform.

[nightstar.train]

All Jacobite services until the end of July now cancelled.

 

https://westcoastrailways.co.uk/news/important-travel-information-the-jacobite-1

 

That's at least two weeks of twice daily trains cancelled, which will all be fully booked this time of year. Big blow to WCRC. 

[Legend]

10 hours ago, nightstar.train said:

All Jacobite services until the end of July now cancelled.

 

https://westcoastrailways.co.uk/news/important-travel-information-the-jacobite-1

 

That's at least two weeks of twice daily trains cancelled, which will all be fully booked this time of year. Big blow to WCRC. 

Big blow to Lochaber . 

[LNER4479]

14 hours ago, Legend said:

 

I thought mk1 doors had to be opened from the outside , by sticking your arm out the window  and that there is no lock on the inside , or am I missing something ? 

About 30 yrs ago, most outward opening slam doors (mainly Mk2s and Mk3s) were fitted with secondary door locking, as a result of a series of fatalities caused by doors flying open at speed. RSR99 subsequently prohibited use of slam door stock without some form of central door locking being fitted (Reg.5); continued use of Mk1s on the mainline without such systems being fitted has been subject of exemptions from that time. ORR have effectively 'called time' on this approach in terms of new exemptions from 2023 onwards.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

It's easy to forget how common incidents with doors used to be.

 

A 1993 report (https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=393) says that falls from doors were "responsible for more fatalities to its passengers than any other single cause". The report identified no fewer than 1488 "incidents involving open slam doors" in 1991, and the authors estimated that unreported incidents might make the true total as high as 2400. In the eight-year period 1984 - 1991, 270 incidents of people falling from slam doors were recorded, from which there were 155 fatalities. These figures are truly shocking in the context of today's railway, but they were pretty much just accepted as normal at the time, as I recall.

[Wheatley]

As others have pointed out, this is not the first time, or even the second and possibly not the third that WCRC have decided that rules don't apply to them. 

 

The concept of a derogation and a prohibition notice is blindingly simple - you ask permission to be exempted from certain statutory conditions, like fitting CDL, and the regulator (ORR) says "OK but you must have an alternative safe system in place, viz:

 

1. You must have manual bolts on the doors.

2. You must manually bolt the manual bolts on the doors whenever the train is moving.

3. You must ensure that passengers  don't manually unbolt the doors while the train is moving".

 

They're even written on the derogation so you dont forget. So if you agree you get your derogation and carry on playing trains. 

 

If the regulator rocks up and finds out you are not taking any notice of the conditions on the derogation they give you a Prohibition Notice to stop you playing until you agree to behave and follow the conditions you agreed to. 

 

If they turn up again and find you're still not following the conditions on the derogation they take it off you.

 

Its a very similar system to the one used with toddlers where you take the toys away if they can't play nicely with them. 

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, nightstar.train said:

All Jacobite services until the end of July now cancelled.

 

https://westcoastrailways.co.uk/news/important-travel-information-the-jacobite-1

 

That's at least two weeks of twice daily trains cancelled, which will all be fully booked this time of year. Big blow to WCRC. 

Big self inflicted blow.  All they had to do was do what they had said they would do  They were caught out for not doing it - maybe somebody complained, maybe somebody noticed and dropped a message in the Inspectorate's in-tray,  or whatever, but that changes nothing and regrettably it fits into WCRC's  )lack of safety) history as 'Wheatley' has already pointed out,

[Northmoor]

On 21/07/2023 at 14:54, The Stationmaster said:

But it sn't just about passengers falling or not falling out of trains.  It is about a company - on teh surface of things - failing to comply with things it had previously agreed to comply with.

 

I don't know anything about WERC's current management but a similar attitude in theh past in that company led to the very narrow avoidance of a major disaster at Wootton Bassett because they couldn't even be bothered to apply very simple management procedures which even some of the very smallest leisure/preserved railways manage to apply with no problems and, little if anything, in he way of added costs.  Back then the attitude of their then management was a mixture of 'why should we?', 'it's never going to happen to us',  and 'it's a load of bureaucratic nonsense'.  Does that attitude still emanate from someone at theh top I wonder or someone with a major financial interest in the company?  I don't know and I might be wrong but WCRC do seem to make a habit of it hence my opinion of them.

 

and what else would the Inspectorate find if they really went to town on the company.  Years back I carried outa safety audit ona leisure railway after it had receicved a f rather poor report following an inspection by the Inspectorate.  My report filled nearly 3 pages of A4 and didn't mention anything the Inspectorate's report had covered - I found all sorts of things - none of them dangerous but not wholly compliant with legislation - which the Inspectorate had missed.  That's what can happen when you really delve into the detail in what was actually a quite well run company with good record keeping and some sound procedures already in place.     They were top notch by teh time my pal had finished with them and i even shot down the ORR Inspector on one thing he had found fault with where the records were actually more detailed than it was required to be and was clearly properly maintained and updated regularly.

Well put.  Companies found in breach of regulations on one count are NEVER whiter-than-white on all others.  There are always many other aspects where they are sailing close to the wind.  If WCRC have received the notice they have, it's because the ORR has no confidence that without issuing such a notice, anything will be done about the breach.

 

To those who say this is an over-reaction because there hasn't been an accident on the Jacobite (yet), ask yourself two  questions:

1. How many people killed/injured is an acceptable number?

2. Does the above number vary if those affected are relatives or friends of yours?

Edited July 22, 2023 by Northmoor
Extra paragraph

[08221]

Having been sitting in a coach of a class 310 unit going through Linslade tunnel when a door blew open as it wasn’t properly shut, that was enough to convince me of the importance of door locks being correctly secured for life!

[maq1988]

No sympathy for WCRC on this, but my parents were caught out this week by the cancellation. A trip they'd been looking forward to for months.

 

I'm sure now they've been shut down it'll be resolved as it's a money maker.

[DY444]

On 21/07/2023 at 14:54, The Stationmaster said:

But it sn't just about passengers falling or not falling out of trains.  It is about a company - on teh surface of things - failing to comply with things it had previously agreed to comply with.

 

I'm sure that's true but this does have a feeling again to me of the ORR failing to react in a way that is proportionate to the risk of the specific issue, something for which it has plenty of previous.

 

Then there's the issue of consistency.  The RAIB report into the Lumo incident at Peterborough had, to me anyway, even if seemingly not to anyone else, disturbing similarities to Ladbroke Grove in respect of a new driver being ill prepared by palpably sub-standard training to deal with the signalling of a complex layout.   There can't be that many signals on the ECML with 5 feathers so why anyone thought that the identification of route hazards should gloss over P468 is a mystery not explained.  The training's sole focus on not accepting wrong routes at P468 smacks of avoiding cost, inconvenience and embarrassment to the operator rather than ensuring safe operation.  If the cookie had crumbled only fractionally differently then this could have been a major high speed derailment with significant casualties.

 

Every new driver at Lumo will have received this inadequate training which, as it subsequently transpired, had overlooked other high risk locations too.  ORR would have been entirely within their rights to suspend the Lumo operation until the driver training programme had been audited, brought up to standard and retrospectively applied to every driver.  But they didn't, for a very serious incident that actually happened, which was just as bad as Wootton Basset in its potential for catastrophe and in respect of having a systemic failure as its underlying cause.  Yet, for the Jacobite, they suspend the operation because of a theoretical risk, which to my knowledge, has never happened on that particular service.  You can bet your bottom dollar that if WCRC had been involved in Peterborough then all hell would have broken loose.  First Group not so much, despite them having previous too with the collision at Plymouth exposing the fact that the GWR driver training had failed to impart a proper understanding to a new driver of their responsibilities when being admitted to a section under a permissive signal aspect.  

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending WCRC here.  I'm criticising the ORR for not treating everyone the same.  I also can't help the nagging suspicion that their enthusiasm for ECML OAOs might have played a part in them not taking action against Lumo.

Edited July 23, 2023 by DY444

[david.hill64]

1 hour ago, DY444 said:

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending WCRC here.  I'm criticising the ORR for not treating everyone the same.  I also can't help the nagging suspicion that their enthusiasm for ECML OAOs might have played a part in them not taking action against Lumo.

Perhaps ORR are treating Lumo the same as WCRC: make a mistake and you get a second* chance. If Lumo has a repeat incident, then we will know.

* actually for WCRC it may be more......

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

I'm sure that's true but this does have a feeling again to me of the ORR failing to react in a way that is proportionate to the risk of the specific issue, something for which it has plenty of previous.

 

Then there's the issue of consistency.  The RAIB report into the Lumo incident at Peterborough had, to me anyway, even if seemingly not to anyone else, disturbing similarities to Ladbroke Grove in respect of a new driver being ill prepared by palpably sub-standard training to deal with the signalling of a complex layout.   There can't be that many signals on the ECML with 5 feathers so why anyone thought that the identification of route hazards should gloss over P468 is a mystery not explained.  The training's sole focus on not accepting wrong routes at P468 smacks of avoiding cost, inconvenience and embarrassment to the operator rather than ensuring safe operation.  If the cookie had crumbled only fractionally differently then this could have been a major high speed derailment with significant casualties.

 

Every new driver at Lumo will have received this inadequate training which, as it subsequently transpired, had overlooked other high risk locations too.  ORR would have been entirely within their rights to suspend the Lumo operation until the driver training programme had been audited, brought up to standard and retrospectively applied to every driver.  But they didn't, for a very serious incident that actually happened, which was just as bad as Wootton Basset in its potential for catastrophe and in respect of having a systemic failure as its underlying cause.  Yet, for the Jacobite, they suspend the operation because of a theoretical risk, which to my knowledge, has never happened on that particular service.  You can bet your bottom dollar that if WCRC had been involved in Peterborough then all hell would have broken loose.  First Group not so much, despite them having previous too with the collision at Plymouth exposing the fact that the GWR driver training had failed to impart a proper understanding to a new driver of their responsibilities when being admitted to a section under a permissive signal aspect.  

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending WCRC here.  I'm criticising the ORR for not treating everyone the same.  I also can't help the nagging suspicion that their enthusiasm for ECML OAOs might have played a part in them not taking action against Lumo.

A good comparison and thanks for, in effect, repeating some of my views on Driver training and management.

 

However WCRC is in a rather different position because while you and I will share a similar opinion of Lumo Driver training (and no doubt its management of its Drivers because that is where such problems begin).   WCRC came to this particular party with a history of very serious breaches and, in the past, a management who ignored even the most basic safety compliance requirements.  The management now is probably different from the past cowboy attitude (I certainly hope it is) but again they are taking the whatsit out of the conditions they were required, and in this case had agreed, to comply with.

 

And now the fact that they have closed down their operation on the West Highland Extension until the end of this month confirms that they haven't even got the very simple means to comply in place or quickly able to be put in place.  Definitely, fortunately, nothing like the atrocious state of affairs in the company which led to the very serious SPAD at Wootton Bassett.  Although interestingly, and very worryingly in the light of the Lumo incident, Wootton Bassett too was a direct consequence of a total failure to have even the most basic of systems in place for Driver and operational safety management.  And such things would have been picked up in minutes during any even halfway thorough safety audit.

 

So I wouldn't be surprised if the Inspectorate could hardly be blamed for having concern about WCRC's attitude.  And - in view of the company's history - they could hardly be criticised for going in hard.  WCRC have a cowboy reputation among those involved in various aspects of rail safety and certain people steer clear of getting involved with theh company because the don't wish to tarnish their own reputation.  

 

Personally I would like to see all the minor mainline operators (and ideally all operators) subject to regular safety audits by experienced people who understand what they are looking for and what they are looking at.  The inspectorate can't really be expected to encompass all of that task and I don't think they should but should simply continue with what they already do.  But I think we have t accept that they might never be able to get right down to testing all they see on the paperwork they are shown or that they understand all the ways in which things can, bluntly, be fiddled or ignored in the way that WCRC were doing at the time of the Wootton Bassett SPAD.   BTW. if you haven't guessed, if it had been me I would have banned WCRC permanently from any involvement in mainline operations in the light of Wootton Bassett because their failings were so basic and betrayed a complete lack of interest in doing the job properly. 

[APOLLO]

Fat Controller says "NO GO" !!

 

 

Brit15

[TheSignalEngineer]

On 21/07/2023 at 14:46, phil-b259 said:

We know full well what can happen if a person ends up striking a lineside object due to an incident which occurred in Balham a few years ago and they do not wish a repeat to occur

An old school friend of mine suffered a fatal head injury window hanging on a spotting trip. It was believed that he came into contact with a signal box corner post between Bristol and Gloucester.

[adb968008]

The high point of the trip is the viaduct.

Many on this trip will try for the shot, but may not know where enroute it is.

You wont stop them trying for the shot.

 

so embrace it.

Stop the train on the viaduct for a few minutes and indicate this is the only time it is safe to do so.
if people know they arent gojng to miss “that shot” they arent going to be hanging by the window.

This would make stewarding easier and removes pressure all round.

 

failing that mk2d’s and seal the doors.
But I suspect that will kill the operation.

I cannot ignore the possibility that this maybe part of the agenda.
 

The poor relation between WCRC and the ORR I would be expecting for actual proof (rather than hearsay) that WCRC were not following protocol, as many hold a grudge about wcrc and could say anything to rock the boat and damaging WCRC would support the ORRs case in any upcoming litigation… so video evidence etc.

We are coming up on vacation season too, so lets hope everyone in this dispute doesn't suddenly go on holiday and drags their feet.

 

That said why WCRC hasnt gone for CDL seems strange, this is an easy target they left themselves open to, and its implementation is hardly ground breaking at this stage.

 

I hope we are not watching the end game here on WHL operations, or indeed WCRCs, as that will be a hole no one else will fill.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by adb968008

[StuAllen]

Speaking from experience there will be a lot of disappointed families missing out on the trip, we planned cream tea on the Jacobite last year but it was cancelled last minute due to a strike. Yes we were refunded but our holiday was based around going to Fort William for the the trip on the Jacobite, rebooking isn’t/wasn’t possible so missed out, I don’t know whether we’ll head that way again.
 

But what is the answer? WCR clearly cannot continue breaking their agreement on how to use Mk1 stock, but do the general public see it as an issue, or do they see the regulator just enforcing the ‘nanny state’  health and safety rules. (Personally I think the ORR has to do something and if WCR haven’t listened so far this is the natural next step). 

 

Is there something preventing WCR from doing what they are supposed to? Are they able to get enough staff on the train to police the secondary door locks and stop people leaning out? 

 

We were able to go to Glenfinnan viaduct and see the Jacobite the day after our planned trip and what I saw worried me more - made my blood run cold - people were actually walking across the viaduct. They clearly weren’t from the UK (guessing from the other side of the pond) but I guess that’s a problem for Network Rail. I suspect it wasn’t a one off. There were hundreds of people there all using the car park, maybe the coffee van near Glenfinnan station so it isn’t just WCR that is losing revenue by this.
 

 

[Vecchio]

Even I am not that old I have grown up in a town with trams which had at the time open platforms, where people where jumping off at low speed and jumping on at crossings, also railway coaches, well those for local trains, had open platforms. Of course, they are all gone now, but in my first 10 or 15 years of my life they were present. I do not remember that there were excessive death rates because people were jumping off while the train was running between stations. Have we all mentally degraded in the last 60 years or so that we are jumping out now, even when there is written not to open while the train is running? I know I will get a few negative comments now, but have we thrown all common sense over board? 

[beast66606]

At Lime Street in the 1970s through to the 1980s passengers used to open the doors as trains arrived and would often jump off as the train was still moving, I did it a lot, especially when arriving late in the evening and needing to "get down to the Mersey" to catch the last one of them home, it was quicker as you could jump off and then outrun the train to the stops meaning you were ahead of the queue which would form at the entrance to the Merseys when a trainload of people disgorged onto the platforn. I also hung out of door windows for years photographing signals, used to duck back in when lineside vegetation encroached of course but I would never hang out with my back to traffic except where I knew the lineside was clear and/or could be sure there were no trains on the other side if I was hanging out on the 6' side. I think (perhaps wrongly) that some of the unfortunate accidents when people hit structures were caused by items being foul to gauge, either in error or because relaying effectively moved the railway nearer to them.

 

As an aside there were definitely official ways of opening Mk 1s from the inside but it was quite difficult as the catch was very tough.

 

As has been said I think people are far, very far, less aware of risks these days which means the good old days should probably stay there - good but old

Edited July 23, 2023 by beast66606

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, StuAllen said:

We were able to go to Glenfinnan viaduct and see the Jacobite the day after our planned trip and what I saw worried me more - made my blood run cold - people were actually walking across the viaduct. They clearly weren’t from the UK (guessing from the other side of the pond) but I guess that’s a problem for Network Rail. I suspect it wasn’t a one off. There were hundreds of people there all using the car park, maybe the coffee van near Glenfinnan station so it isn’t just WCR that is losing revenue by this.

 

To be fair to WCRC, people parking at the viaduct and walking it is nothing to do with them, that's tourists who don't appreciate they might be placing themselves in danger.

 

This won't have had any direct bearing on cancelling Jacobite services, but it might be an indication that the ORR is concerned about the types of people attracted to that viaduct be it on a train or on foot and the risk of something happening to them.