roythebus Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 I suspect there is a difference in running old stock in passenger service and running it as empty stock. I note the comments from various contributors above. I too lost a couple of mates in the Clapham disaster, both drivers. I still reckon that as heritage stock is very unlikely to collide with other heritage stock or indeed any other stock on a main line run, I fail to see what the problem is providing the stock is maintained to mainline standards. If heritage stock was numerous and in daily service, that's a different matter. As for the NR closedown after the Hatfield crash, I was involved in organising bus services for SWT in a big way! I don't suppose anyone thought of the additional risk to rail passengers using the roads. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 It is clear there are at least five pre-nationalisation (including three pre-grouping!) wooden bodied coaches allowed to carry passengers on the main line, the oldest being the 1890 LNWR dining saloon. The full list of current exemptions from the Mk 1 ban enacted by the Railway Safety Regulations 1999 is here, the specific exemption for the Queen of Scots (including the LNWR diner) is here. The only conditions appear to be that the hauling loco is fitted with TPWS and the end vehicles must not be Mk1s, which doesn't seem terribly onerous given that other operators of Mk1s are required to provide secondary door locks, stewards etc. (Note that, slightly confusingly, the Regs define Mk1s rather more widely than what you or I might; for the purposes of the Regs the term includes all the pre-nationalisation stock). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 It's all part of the safety case system (for the safety nerds amongst you I know I am using this and other terms loosely). If you can demonstrate that you have controlled all risks as low as reasonably practicable (and you satisfy all the non-safety conditions!) then you can operate. I suspect there is a difference in running old stock in passenger service and running it as empty stock. Yes there will be if they have written it into the safety case. The risks with ECS are much less as there are no passengers and probably not even any staff exposed to hazard if a collision happens. However most operators will want to carry passengers so will have to consider the extra hazards this involves. I still reckon that as heritage stock is very unlikely to collide with other heritage stock or indeed any other stock on a main line run, I fail to see what the problem is providing the stock is maintained to mainline standards. That's a bit of a red herring. THe objective is to define the risk posed by operating a particular vehicle or train in a particular way and (unless a design change is contemplated) it does not depend on how many other trains of the same type may be operating. The core of railway safety is understanding and minimise the risks of events that happen very rarely but have very severe consequences, something that human beings aren't by nature equipped to deal with. Hence the safety case has to do a bit more than just saying something is very unlikely. If heritage stock was numerous and in daily service, that's a different matter. ...but despite my previous comment this is true (sort of). For excursion-type journeys the risk might be reduced by only using the trains a specified number of times per year. Also controls such as making sure each passenger has a booked seat might not be possible if the trains were in normal service. As for the NR closedown after the Hatfield crash, I was involved in organising bus services for SWT in a big way! I don't suppose anyone thought of the additional risk to rail passengers using the roads. Lots of people thought of it, but the objective of Railtrack was to minimise the risk within its control rather than minimising the risk to the public in general. Besides which Railtrack did not have the information or expertise to understand that the rest of the network was almost certainly not in the immediately dangerous state that had developed at Hatfield. Incidentally the safety record of buses is similar to that of trains so putting people onto buses doesn't affect public safety very much. The people switching to car or motorcycle instead are a different matter... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 The only conditions appear to be that the hauling loco is fitted with TPWS and the end vehicles must not be Mk1s, which doesn't seem terribly onerous given that other operators of Mk1s are required to provide secondary door locks, stewards etc. That shows the advantage of getting a good consultant to write your safety case, and learning the lessons from whoever did the last one. Although it has the appearance of being precise and intimidating, a lot of this stuff is actually pretty subjective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 21, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 21, 2010 That shows the advantage of getting a good consultant to write your safety case, and learning the lessons from whoever did the last one. Although it has the appearance of being precise and intimidating, a lot of this stuff is actually pretty subjective. er, yes guv (but it can be a nice money spinner). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 It is of course the subjective opinion of those with years of experience of engineering/operating/whatever, which counts for more than that of mere mortals... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etched Pixels Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 It is of course the subjective opinion of those with years of experience of engineering/operating/whatever, which counts for more than that of mere mortals... As far as possible it is kept highly objective. The problem with that is that the better you get at it the less data you get on whether you are doing it right. It's easy with cars because you get forty fatalities a week to study. Same problem as earthquakes really - in Iceland buildings don't fail much due to earthquakes because you get to test any new idea every few weeks. In California nobody is quite so sure becaiuse there isn't objective data on that exact terrain and building style .. yet ... on most building techniques How you measure it also matters a lot - air is the safest per passenger km, but all the risk is at each end of the journey so over shorter flights air is actually more risky than the train - and for some short hops the car. H&S is actually a lot saner than many people think especially in terms of making safety improvements. Eg one minor UK rail accident was caused by someone not stopping the train at the correct spot and walking to the phone but rolling up to the phone, being momentarily distracted and going over the catchpoints. One of the recommendations was to move the phone because no matter how many notices, warnings and penalties exist when its cold and wet there will always be someone tempted to do it again if the phone isn't moved and moving the phone wasn't actually hard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidB-AU Posted June 22, 2010 Author Share Posted June 22, 2010 The full list of current exemptions from the Mk 1 ban enacted by the Railway Safety Regulations 1999 is here, the specific exemption for the Queen of Scots (including the LNWR diner) is here. The only conditions appear to be that the hauling loco is fitted with TPWS and the end vehicles must not be Mk1s, which doesn't seem terribly onerous given that other operators of Mk1s are required to provide secondary door locks, stewards etc. Interesting list. Using some basic common sense, makes you wonder whether the LNER teaks might eventually make it to Middlesborough. Cheers David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 The oldest registered that I'm aware of is a 1919 Gresley teak bodied coach that has run from Whitby - Pickering. Interesting, which one is that then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidB-AU Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 Back to one of my earlier questions, I found out the Great Western Society train of Collett and Hawksworth stock made its last main line run on 26/1/1980 behind Drysllwyn Castle. Cheers David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
37079 Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 In answer to a previous question (which I don't think has been addressed yet) regarding GWR saloon 9004, it has run on the mainline in passenger service as recently as 7th November 2008 as part of the Queen of Scots set. It would have arrived and departed Eastleigh by rail in 2009 and I understand it is now at the Gloucestershire & Warwickshire Railway. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.