NR suspend WCRC from tonight

[The Stationmaster]

The ban seems a bit harsh to me. So a driver / crew / team made a serious mistake. Yes, suspend those involved pending an investigation, but ban the whole operation ?.

 

What if a Virgin Pendolino driver did similar - completely ground the Virgin fleet - for over a Month ?

 

Brit15

Read the NR letter carefully - it would appear that WCRC were already in Network Rail's sights.  I could say more but it would not be fair on either party if I were to do so although I have to say that I am greatly reassured that NR have decided to act in the way they have and I trust their action in respect of West Coast will not be lost on some other operators.

 

As far as the exact course of events leading to the Wootton Bassett SPAD is concerned at the moment we are basically in ignorance of exactly what happened and what took place on the footplate - we will only reliably (I trust) know about that when the RAIB's Report is published and going on their past form that might not be for some time - especially as in this instance they will need to obtain specialist advice.

 

Edit to correct typos

[The Stationmaster]

The wider issue is if this had gone catastrophically wrong it would not be unreasonable to assume that one consequence would be all railtours and non-timetabled special services would be stopped indefinitely.

Why?  The issues referred to in the NR letter clearly relate to structural managerial matters and are basically nothing to do with whether the trains are long term timetabled or short term planned specials.  Effectively there is no such thing as a 'non-timetabled special service' nowadays as even movements arranged under very short term planning have some sort of schedule entered onto various computer systems - otherwise they would not be able to operate over various parts of the network without manual intervention to set routes and that would mean that Signalmen (signallers if you prefer) would still need some sort of timetable information.

 

If such moves were banned quite a lot of freight operations simply wouldn't happen as they are short term, and sometimes very short term planned, equally emergency ecs moves to cover failures or rebalance stock after problems would also not be allowed to happen.  So don't confuse timetabling issues with what appear to be remarkably basic structural managerial deficiencies in a particular operator's organisation.

[Reorte]

I would.

Then again it would seem I'm one of the ever reducing number of blokes these days who isn't afraid of monsters under the bed, the dark or spiders.

I agree with the sentiment but then again another problem with the jumping at every shadow attitude is the crying wolf effect - the incident being discussed sounds like something that would've drawn a lot of flack at any time and not an over-reaction to something minor. I'd still probably tavel though.

[The Stationmaster]

It is our railway and if you are not prepared to play our way you won't play on it .Seems to me perfectly straight forward the company has a different attitude to NR but NR has the power not the company. They could make the company install a safety team they believe in before addressing the issues arising, if only to demonstrate to their insurers that they have done everything possible to reduce risk. The notice sets out what has to be done and is explicit on what has to be done before the ban is lifted, it also sets out what actions need to be progressing. I think if the company try for legal review rather than compliance NR will bankrupt them rather than accept them as they are.

Sorry Mick but I think the best thing for the company to do would be to comply with the law of the land - the requirements of ROGS and particularly in regard to Safety Management Systems are perfectly straightforward as are any requirements in terms of managerial systems for operating on the national rail network.  If an operator is failing to comply they should - as happens with railways in the heritage and leisure sector - be given time to carry out the necessary managerial and structural changes.

 

However if there is a history - as there seems to be in this instance - of shortcomings and, even worse, there happens to be serious incident which might be seen to to be related to those shortcomings and early investigations confirm that to be the case then stronger action has to be taken.  What we should not overlook is the fact that Network Rail will have already conducted an inquiry into this incident as an internal matter; we do not know what that inquiry revealed but the fact that this suspension has been imposed on West Coast several weeks after the incident might, or might not, give us some clues, as does the NR letter.

[Reorte]

...and the world is a slightly better, safer place.

The two don't always go together. Personally speaking I'd be much happier in a slightly riskier world that didn't feel so officious, constraining, unpleasant and unwelcoming in the name of safety. However please don't take that to mean that I think every single rule is wrong, and every rule violation should be ignored, it's not a one extreme or the other position.

[woodenhead]

The two don't always go together. Personally speaking I'd be much happier in a slightly riskier world that didn't feel so officious, constraining, unpleasant and unwelcoming in the name of safety. However please don't take that to mean that I think every single rule is wrong, and every rule violation should be ignored, it's not a one extreme or the other position.

Life isn't risk free and people should be allowed to determine the level of risk they wish to accept in their lives.

 

If the world was completely sanitised there would be no sport, no reaching for the stars but equally what you accept as risk for yourself cannot be viewed as acceptable always for someone else.

 

The railway like any other industry that comes into contact with humans has a duty of care to those people to minimise the risk of being injured or worse. It is due to the care and attention played by most parties that our railways are a safe environment for passengers and staff alike and that is down to the safety regime that is constantly developed whenever a risk is identified. There have been some terrible disasters on the railways and there nearly was another which appears to have come about because someone didn't follow the rules.

 

Rules aren't always designed to be broken.

[Reorte]

... there nearly was another which appears to have come about because someone didn't follow the rules.

"The rules" are not some monolithic 100% fine or 100% unacceptable group. Let me repeat myself - "However please don't take that to mean that I think every single rule is wrong, and every rule violation should be ignored, it's not a one extreme or the other position."

 

A dislike of the general trend does not imply disagreement with any particular rule, and a "so what" attitude towards a breach of it.

 

Life is safer now than it was, say, 30 years ago, but not that much. It is, however, noticably more unpleasant and unwelcoming, a net change for the worse. Disagree with the sentiment if you will but please don't try to imply that it's unarguably wrong. And please don't use the "chose your own risk but don't impose it on others" argument as a defence for every single thing done in the name of safety. That is just as much imposing your view of the world (people can choose to travel and by what means anyway). Some people may have the view that others should be able to accept more risks and not have as much suffocation around them. Others may think that the current situation, even with all the rules properly adhered to is still far too dangerous, and no price is too great for sorting that out.

[woodenhead]

Personally I think life gets a little cr*ppier every year! but I think that is an age thing and we all suffer from it.

 

The unpleasantryness (is that even a word?) comes from our eyes opening and seeing it as it really is.

[Reorte]

I'd love to be convinced that that's all it really is, I'd be much less depressed if it was.

 

Maybe I should add that based on everything I've read on this thread I think it's good that NR have done what they've done, it sounds like something definitely needs looking at.

[kevinlms]

The two don't always go together. Personally speaking I'd be much happier in a slightly riskier world that didn't feel so officious, constraining, unpleasant and unwelcoming in the name of safety. However please don't take that to mean that I think every single rule is wrong, and every rule violation should be ignored, it's not a one extreme or the other position.

So 'Safety' is officious, constraining, unpleasant & unwelcoming? Turn it up!

 

In Victoria, Australia, they ran a campaign on how work place safety, is about coming home safely to your family. Can you really answer against that?

 

http://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/about-vwa/campaigns. See video 'Homecoming'.

 

The campaign aims to reinforce the message of "The most important reason for making your workplace safe, is not at work at all".

[Titan]

I think there are some that are needlessly worried about the future of mainline steam. The problem here is the management of safety procedures by one particular company. The fact that they happened to be operating a steam locomotive is neither here nor there, and not relevant to the problem. Thus it should have no effect whatsoever on the future of steam operations by competent organisations.

 

This is not the first time WCRC have been suspended due to poor safety management. So to those that think a harsh 'slap on the wrists' might focus the minds at WCRC and that they would now be safer as a result, well not only quite clearly did it not work before, but it seems that they may have deteriorated further or at best they are just as bad.

 

Now WCRC have made it even more difficult for themselves to convince NR they are capable of running trains safely. NR are not going to let them run again until they have confidence in them, and judging by their past poor performance there is a possibility they may not be capable of doing enough to achieve that.

 

So the end of Mainline steam? Certainly not. The end of WCRC? possibly, unless they have a miraculous step change in management attitude.

 

However it could all have been a lot different - and now for a bit of speculation - if there had been a collision we would have been faced with a level of destruction on the scale of Colwich. Had Tangmere suffered the same damage as 86429 we might even have had a boiler explosion to add to the carnage. What would the frenzied media make of that?

[locoholic]

To me, the attitude of the WCRC management towards rules and officialdom is best summed up by the abandoned sheds at Hellifield which WCRC built, apparently without proper foundations, and which were then deemed unsafe to use, to remain as a blot on the landscape to this day.

[Hobby]

I know it's more than just the one incident but that one at Wootton Bassett is truly frightening, to over-ride AWS to the extent that the track equipment could not even apply the brakes at the next signal is unbelievable. To do that they must have physically over-ridden the safety systems, something one of them on their own could not have done. If that driver and fireman (and anyone else on the footplate at the time) are still able to man a footplate then the company employing them deserves to be struck off for good. Those involved should be banned for life as well, there is absolutely no excuse for such actions...

 

I know that someone earlier defended it but it also brings into question the staff that need to be on the footplate. The fewer the better otherwise you can easily have a conflict of interest. If the loco owner is really that concerned that a professional driver is unable to control the engine correctly then perhaps they need to get a licence so they can drive it instead... Max 4, driver, fireman, and possibly Route Conductor and Inspector but no-one else. The more you have up there the more chance there is of mistakes (or worse as WB shows) being made.

 

People are moaning about safety rules but let's be realistic here, Railways have always had Rules in place which Railway Staff have had to abide by so the trains can run safely. It's been proven beyond doubt that if staff flout those rules then sooner or later there's an incident. I am assuming that those people in the more recent posts are just referring to life in general when they say they want more "risk" in their lives, however if they are referring to more "risk" on the railways then I wholeheartedly disagree! 

[PhilH]

It has to be remembered that WCRC hAve a sizeable chunk of the charter market in the UK, both steam and diesel. Therefore if they are forced out of business it will leave a huge hole in the infrastructure and rolling stock available to the market.

 

I'm not too sure that there would be a big queue to try and take over these assets, especially as the owner of WCRC has a track record of being somewhat difficult to deal with....and before anybody shouts JH I get the feeling that he has enough toys in this sector to be going on with.

 

So...the end of mainline steam? Probably not, however it is a well known fact in the industry that due to huge pressure on track occupancy in the future doubts have been raised as to whether special trains running at 75mph can be accommodated on railways of the future without the protected paths enjoyed by freight trains. NR could well see this as an excuse to turn the screw and do away with steam specials... However that is speculation, pure and simple.

In the short term, as I say, there will undoubtedly be a big reduction in steam on the mainline if WC do go under.

[Supaned]

Regarding footplate crews and the number of people on the footplate , it matters not how many were there for the Wootton Bassett incident - each of them present was culpable for allowing a vital safety system to be isolated. The driver and fireman would certainly know the importance of it (assuming of course that they were actually trained and currently qualified on operating rules and procedures in the first place) , if there was an Inspector then they should certainly know the implications , and if a representative of the locomotive owner was there , who , we are told earlier in this thread , has a working knowledge of the systems on the locomotive to be able to assist with fault finding , then they would also have known the implications , after all , the requirements for ALL traction operating on the main line network are the same regardless of steam , diesel or electric.

 

Consider also that a driver from a TOC was recently prosecuted for a similar set of circumstances as this , therefore I'd hope that the footplate crew involved in this incident are treated in a similar manner - their actions were wilful and deliberate , and it's only a matter of good fortune that this wasn't a lot more serious.

 

Personally , I do have concerns about a lot of the open access operators on our rail network and their safety management "systems" - as a full-time driver for a large TOC I am expected to fully comply with rules and procedures , my work can be randomly downloaded at any time without me even knowing it has been done and if I do make a mistake I am expected to and am prepared to answer for the consequences of my actions. Likewise with route knowledge , I am required to be properly conversant with the routes I work over , assessed before I am permitted to drive over those routes for the first time , and have supplementary written exams on those routes to provide more evidence of my knowledge.

 Compare that with the incident at Stafford , where the person in the driving seat wasn't even a qualified driver (and why was that TOC still allowed to operate to this day) , or recent incidents such as Wootton Bassett and Loughborough (I'm sure that will come into the public domain soon if it already hasn't) and the "bodge" culture is plain to see. Sign any bit of paper and hey presto , instant driver with instant route and traction knowledge - all well and good until it goes wrong. 

 And there is evidence to support my assertions regarding route knowledge - one simply has to look at the signal passed at danger statistics , which the RSSB nicely tabulates into an excel document - sort them by TOC/FOC and the trend is readily apparent.

[Supaned]

And regarding main line steam operation , this won't help the case considering the disruption that they frequently cause in terms of lineside fires , trespass by idiot photographers and performance issues due to locomotive faults "wrong sort of coal" etc . I've lost count of the number of near misses I've had with photographers when there is a tour in the area.

[Southernman46]

Regarding footplate crews and the number of people on the footplate , etc, etc

Totally agree - the industry only needs to remember one word (and with no disrespect implied on my part either)

 

"Hodder"

[PhilH]

As West Coast were both owner and operator of the steam locomotive in question and driver and fireman were WC employees there would be no need for an owners rep on the loco.

[Reorte]

So 'Safety' is officious, constraining, unpleasant & unwelcoming? Turn it up!

 

In Victoria, Australia, they ran a campaign on how work place safety, is about coming home safely to your family. Can you really answer against that?

 

http://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/about-vwa/campaigns. See video 'Homecoming'.

 

The campaign aims to reinforce the message of "The most important reason for making your workplace safe, is not at work at all".

Did I say "safety", and nothing else, implying a disregard for absolutely anything to do with it?  No, I didn't. Please actually read posts and think about what they're saying before replying to them.

 

Some "safety" measures are indeed officious, constraining, unpleasant, and unwelcoming. Others are entirely sensible and appropriate.

 

Someone who spends their life jumping at every shadow might just jump away from something dangerous as a result but I don't think encouraging people to jump at every shadow is a healthy thing to do.

[roythebus]

Like I said earlier, there's a lot of distractions on the footplate of a steam loco. Has anyone considered something like a gauge glass breaking, necessitating the attention of more than one crew member? For the earlier poster who seemed to thing that a steam loco cab isn't all that different from a modern diesel cab, they're from a totally different era.

 

It may be there was a genuine fault with the aws/tpws that needed it to be isolated in service. An electrical fault maybe? Flat battery? Let's stop speculating and wait the RAIB report.

 

I'd also say that every heritage railway has been under the spotlight recently following a couple of tragedies that have been discussed elsewhere on here. We're all subject to the same basic rule book and ROGS laws.

[Reorte]

Apologies for getting a littler shirty there then.

 

I was mostly talking about the atmosphere and environment with those words, nothing more specific than that, and it spreads far further than the railways (indeed I was talking fairly generally). The more "keep outs, do this, don't do that, everything you do is being monitored, rules will be rigidly enforced etc." the more unpleasant a place is to be. Some of that is absolutely necessary for adequate safety but there seems to be an attitude in some places that more of it can always be justified in the name of safety. I disagree and find that change of atmosphere, which is prevalent everywhere, distinctly unpleasant, especially where the change has come about in areas where the risks weren't high enough to get worked up about in the first place.

 

Please remember also that this is all about the general "more safety == better world" position, not about the specific case being discussed, which is plain frightening.

[lonesome_whistle]

A couple of observations regarding what has been written over the last few pages.

 

Firstly WCRC'c commitment to keep its trains running with a third party running the show as with today's Cleethorpes-Llandudno charter applies only to those trains they promote themselves. The likes of Steam Dreams and Railway Touring Co etc will be left to make their own arrangements which, in the short term is likely to mean cancellation.

 

Secondly, as has already been hinted at, The Torbay Express is a DBS manned train and will not be affected by the current suspension of WCRC.

 

Thirdly, PhilH, as a member of a steam locomotive support crew appears to have worked with both West Coast and DB Schenker steam crews. There are massive differences between the way the two companies recruit and man their steam jobs - DBS Drivers and firemen are recruited from their full-time driving grades and are always accompanied by a steam traction inspector whereas a WCRC footplate crew only comprises a driver and a fireman (who is just that and has no competency as a driver). I'd be interested to know how Phil rates the two different approaches although I appreciate that might not be a subject suitable for public discussion.

[PhilH]

Quite..we work mainly with DBS but also provide locos to be manned by WCRC on occasions. I'll leave it at that, but no inference is to drawn by not commenting on different approaches. I just don't feel it's appropriate.

[Talltim]

The statement released today by WCRC indicates that all trains will continue to run as scheduled, by an alternative operator.

That leaves more questions than answers, and many trips already cancelled.

You wouldn't be able to use any of the same crews I presume, and would DBS crews have all the route knowledge etc for the routes?

It seems a strange thing to promise, and not as easy to implement as West Coast have made it sound.

Actually leaving them to it might teach them a bigger lesson as this was a long time overdue.

It is not WCR's licence to operate that has been suspended, but their Track Access. NR do not have control over their licence, that's the ORR

WCR hire their drivers out to other TOCs anyway, and some drive for them part time in addition to their jobs at other TOCs.

Presumably when working for the other TOCs they run under the Safety Certificates and Authorisations (the replacement for the Safety Case since 2006) of the the hiring TOC. So, providing the hiring TOC has the traction and vehicle types covered, and the crew has the relevant knowledge, the trains could in theory end up running with the same vehicles and staff anyway.

I suspect that this would not happen, as the other TOCs would not want the bad publicity.

[stewartingram]

From one working within the rail industry, and stepping back a bit to see what is happenning here, it appears to me:

 

The SPAD was NOT an isolated incident that caused suspension. It was the final straw. So discussion on what happened on the footplate, or relevance to implications to mainline steam are mostly incidental.

Railway operators, in simple laymen's terms, have a Safety Case, their own internal working procedures; as well as complying with NR operating rulebook. As an analogy, the Safety Case can be compared to a Quality Standard (BS5750, ISO9000 etc) that many people will be familiar with at there place of work. The NR rulebook is also perhaps analogous to the Highway Code and laws appertaining to rules of the road which should, must be obeyed.

For those not familiar with quality systems, your company writes a quality manual, stating procedures to be followed. This involves lots of paperwork to prove the system is being followed, with constant signing off of stages of work, and internal audits to check things are done properly. Also the company/systems will be externally audited, with faults in procedure having to be corrected otherwise loss of accreditation will occur. This sounds to me the same sort of procedure that NR is following?

So, and not adding to speculation, if WCR have been, shall we say, somewhat lax, in following their Safety Case (ie Quality system) as shown in external audits, then it is suspended until corrected. The "3 strikes rule" seems to have reached no.3 with the SPAD (don't take 3 as a number cast in stone though!). So it probably is a case of paperwork not being up to scratch, either by genuinely failing to fill in forms, or by these forms being filled in erroneously with the actual work not up to standard (an all too common occurence in quality audits that I have previously done). We are in no place to make judge on that, it would all be speculation, but I'm sure the truth will be told pretty quickly. There is a deadline on this suspension which WCRC will have to meet if they are to survive.

I'm sure there are many good workers within the operation, but if there are bad apples also, the whole thing can go rotten

 

Stewart