ruggedpeak

I don't know of many people who think the Bachmann 08 is better. And the 67 is basic? Maybe you are only aware of the ex Lima Railroad version? Anyone can and does duplicate models that Hornby have done before, but they still have an extensive range that sells. And Bachmann are seeing duplication of core models in the 37 and 47's despite spending over a million on brand new tooling, so it doesn't matter if models are dated or not, they will be duplicated. And 47's also have Heljan in the mix. Hornby are quite happy selling through Railroad 37s and 47s without worrying about massive tooling costs and competition from launch. 31s are now Railroad too, so continue to profit from that aged tooling as Accura do a better one.

It doesn't. What those observations do tell anyone competent in safety is why CDL is likely to be beneficial.

Bit of serendipity I came across an article about how Einstein's theory of relativity was initially rejected by many. Apparently 100 scientists wrote a treatise rejecting his theories despite only about 10 of them were mathematicians or physicists who had the competence to even begin to work through the horrifically complex equations underpinning the theory. Apparently it was common sense that relativity was nonsense. The comment I liked in the article was "common sense doesn't help with things outside our experience." Nail. Head. How can you apply common sense if you have no experience or meaningful understanding of the matter concerned? Obviously you can't, that's common sense 🤣

For those who want an entirely independent view from those actually using the Jacobite I suggest googling the train and looking at the latest Google reviews. I don't know how to link directly to the reviews, and you will need to sort them by date as they post the highest ranked first. Trigger Warning - not all of the latest reviews are 5 stars.

Nope, not you!

It is self evident who the troll is. And bad faith is coming into a thread that has had extensive discussion on complex safety issues and saying that you should just apply common sense, a demonstrably nonsense concept and it is clear from their posts they have not bothered to understand the issues or even read any of the relevant documents. I have no problem disagreeing with people who have some idea what they are talking about or have at least bothered to try and understand the issues, but posting simpled-minded lazy nonsense is rude. And frankly it is insensitive of this troll when a number of us on here have had to deal with the tragic consequences of those who decided safety was not their priority or could be ignored. Something they'd know if they'd bothered to read before posting. I've dealt with the scene at an entirely avoidable double fatality on the railway, it was not nice. Common sense failed that night. So I will call out those who make false accusations, smears or talk nonsense on matters of life and death because I know what happens with people start making decisions about things they don't understand. It is a shame that more people lack the courage to do so, as some of the tragedies that continue to happen might be avoided. I am also assuming nothing, I am reacting to what is in front of me which is clear evidence of ignorance. If you think I am being rude then report me to the Mods, noting that one of them has already challenged this particular troll for their comments. Is it really rude to call out someone who states that they won't pay an extra £10 on a near £100 ticket to comply with the law (law and a decision subject to full High Court scrutiny and confirmed as legal) to ensure the safety of everyone on a family orientated tourist attraction with a known risk of fatality? I'd question the moral standards of anyone who think safety is less important than a small addition to the cost of a non-essential leisure actuivity, however uncomfortable that makes so called 'liberals' feel (their classification, not mine). But of course for so called liberal types it all about their feelings rather than reality or other people or bothering to actually know what they are talking about or listen to experts, of which there are a number on here.

So real world experience, health & safety reports, legal requirements. comments by respected railway experts. No doubt the conspiracty theorists and common sensers will still think there is no need for it. Feeding the troll won't change anything. They have no demonstrable understanding of the most basic elements of safety (as you have highlighted re: the critically important element of "Human factors") nor have bothered to actually read the thread, the comprehensive JR judgement or other relevant docs. Applying 'common sense' to everything as its easier than thinking. After all common sense has worked so well with drink driving, Grenfell, guns in the US, quality control at Boeing etc.

Yet Hornby have an extensive range of modern image locos including Class 67, 08, HST, 87, 153, 88DS, 48DS, 91, 4-VEP etc. No one does any of those except for the forthcoming Cav 60. Many of those are highly regarded, and Hornby are certainly getting money out of the tooling for them.

Shaun D has been doing the rounds and Widnes MC is on his LinkedIn post. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/shaun-dubberley_hornby-customers-growthstrategy-activity-7171167478037921794-4L-5?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

All Hail Andy and Phil.....

The debt thing is worrying but there is a lot going on. New heavyweight Sales Director with serious experience and connections in the world's biggest toy market and hardcore ecommerce experience. Can see that might make our Northern friends interested in a punt. https://www.linkedin.com/in/shaun-dubberley/ And Airfix now in a US equivalent of Hobbycraft with over 1,200 stores https://www.linkedin.com/posts/Hornby-hobbies-ltd_hornbyhobbies-airfix-modeling-activity-7188114001937997825-c2Li? Looks like things are moving forward big time.

Calm down, you were the one suggesting there would be a 20 page pile in because it was WCRC, just pointing out the irony of the most prolific poster by some margin making that complaint. And maybe you put yourself in the cross hairs continuing to making false allegations and smears against others. Now apparently it's a 'mob'.... surprised you haven't gone the full monte and blamed the Illuminati or lizard people for trying to take down WCRC. You are the one baiting, read your own posts including the one above. Don't dish it out if you're not big enough to take it

I'm not 100% clear on what point you are trying to make but in the spirit of discussion I would say: 1) what is the evidence base of saying "they usually crop up in local papers.." - is that based on knowing about all the incidents locally and then seeing how many reported? I have been involved in plenty of incidents that did not get reported when I have searched for any info. 2) what do you mean by 'low risk' and how does that play into the wider risk assessment process, which is not just about risk? The intention with CDL is to deliver on a clear and thought out decision that people dying or being injured due to issues with slam door stock should be eliminated, and that the cost of doing so is regarded as appropriate and proportionate. 3) What safety authorities are sometimes trying to achieve, and CDL is a good example, is pointless deaths and serious injuries occuring to innocent people who are not or should not be in a hazardous environment. Being hit by a coach door or falling out of one on amoving train is a horrible, pointless, and avoidable way of dying. That is totally different from working in a high risk environment like PW on a live railway for example might result in death or injury, but that is not pointless, it is hazardous but if correctly RA'd etc it is necessary. I have worked in hazardous environments and understood that if things went wrong the outcome would be bad but accepted that. What I really didn't want to happen or accept was something dumb happening to me like some muppet opennng a train door and smacking me on the head resulting in life changing injuries. Why is preventing stupid deaths and injuries a bad thing, especially when it is entirely affordable by those paying for it?

👍 Even fatal injuries often don't get reported in the media. I spent many years dealing with fatal and serious injury RTC's in London and often they would not even rate a mention in the local paper unless there was something 'extra' to make it noteworthy, something I found rather sad. Just because people don't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Possibly, mostly by one person trying to stick up for the poor, innocent, hard done-by WCRC it would appear.....

Agree, but a court will want to know what they are doing running non-compliant stock in the consist if there is an accident etc. There appears to be no legitimate business reason for running unusable empty coaches, that will cost to operate and increase fuel costs etc. A longer train may make an incident involving speed and mass related physics like momentum potentially worse than it needed to be. Tricky one to explain and an accusation of playing games with the ORR could be hard to defend. Courts will look into exactly what people were up to rather than what they said they were up to, and make judgements such as "you tried to flex the rules by putting non-passenger compliant coaches interspersed with compliant ones for reasons X, Y and Z, but based upon the detail of the regulations and the evidence of your actions and motives as provided it appears that in fact those non-compliant coaches were arguably in passenger use under the regs despite being locked out.." It is a dangerous game to play, Judges aren't stupid and can and do extrapolate when required. Also what is the rationale for inserting several of them in between coaches that are used by the public on a train in public service? Why not all together at one end, if the Mk1's are locked out of use and passengers can't get from one Mk2 to another? Again from a broader safety perspective this does not seem sensible? Not exactly climate friendly hauling several deliberately empty coaches back and forth using coal power either! All rhetorical questions...maybe there is a sensible reason for all of this, it just eludes some of us mortals..........🤪

I agree with your first point, locking the doors out of use does not make them "defective", it makes them isolated as you say. Doesn't stop some genius damaging them to then make them 'defective'..... Either way, locking the doors out of use does not disapply Regulation 5 and CDL. So in relation to Reg 5, by my interpretation, locking the doors is of no consequence. Those regs, including Reg 5, on CDL apply to WCRC Mk1 stock. There is no door related exemption i.e. even if you welded the doors shut or plated them over, the coaches are still "Mark 1 rolling stock" as legally defined under the 1999 Regs and the Mk1 guidance https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-03/rsr-1999-guide-to-operation-of-mark-one-type-and-hinged-door-rolling-stock.pdf Also under the 1999 regs there is a definition of "rolling stock with hinged doors that does not have central locking". Again this is a very clear legal definition - WCRC Mark 1 coaches are "rolling stock with hinged doors that does not have central locking." So their coaches meet both the separate definitions. Under the guidance there is no leeway, exemption or anything else that means locking the doors changes anything. Under this latter 'rolling stock with hinged doors definition' you could get around it by removing/plating over the doors and removing the hinges. However it would be futile because even with no doors at all 😲 the coaches still meet the "Mark 1 rolling stock" definition. This is important because the 1999 Regs prohibit the use of Mark 1 and hinged door stock on the network without CDL under Reg 5, unless there is an exemption. WCRC have no exemption, therefore their Mk1 stock can't be used. Unless there is some other unknown regulation that overrules and disapplies the main 1999 regs? So the doors are a red herring, you can do what you like with the doors, but if its a Mk1 and/or rolling stock with hinged doors (and WCRC's are both), regardless of them being locked/defective or whatever, you can't run it without CDL unless you have an Exemption. Full stop. The End. In his comments Richard I think changed tack part way through his answer about risk assessments. He started suggesting that operators can do things subject to local RA's, but then basically changed his tune mid-answer by refering to RSSB and needing a "pre-existing" derogation of some sort. I think he realised that from a practical and legal standpoint there is a huge difference between taking a few doors out of public use on an RMB and making them staff only (but presumably still usable), and locking out all the doors in a normal passenger coach. The former seems reasonable subject to the usual RA's etc, the latter less. Is it credible, let alone safe or legal, for a normal passenger coach, especially one with poor crash protection, to be in a train containing passengers when all the doors in a number of the coaches are locked out? I'd definitely like to see the RA making that case. And locking the doors out does not, under these legal definitions, suddenly make these coaches a form of wagon/non-passenger stock. There is plenty of case law around this sort of thing in other sectors, and a court would most likely need convincing with other actions such as removing all the seats if that argument was going to be used. But again, a seatless Mk1 is still both a Mk1 and rolling stock with hinged doors.....so you'd have to remove the seats and the doors to try and argue it is no longer a Mk1 coach, and frankly a court will probably see it for what it is. I am not an expert on rail safety but do know a thing or two about both fire safety in buildings and vehicle collisions. Removing or restricting doors and other means of escape means avoidable deaths are likely if something goes badly wrong. Mid speed collision on the Jacobite that does not push the coaches off the track but jams them together, not helped by their weak structure, and the end gangways are blocked. Anyone who happens to be in that space now requires rescuing as there is no means of normal self-evacuation even if they are capable of doing so. Conversely if people can't exit the doors of one of the Mk2's but can get through of the gangway to the adjoining Mk1.......they can't get out of that as the doors are locked. Safety is supposed to not only reduce incidents but also maximise survival for those affected and maximise their ability to get to safety. Anything that reduces the ability to evacuate is a "bad thing", like locking all the doors. We don't yet know how or if WCRC is ensuring that no one is in these Mk1 coaches when the train is running, that presumably is covered by their RA. Frankly, however you look at it, locking doors of several passenger coaches spread throughout a train is, at best, not very smart. Big crash, headline reads "Nearly half* of doors of doomed Harry Potter train locked out of use". Good luck with that in court. But again, it appears to be academic since the Mk1's should not be on the network in any event if the intrepretation of the Regs is correct. In the same way that the doors being defective or not, and whether they are allowed to used in service under the defects part of the 1999 regs is irrelevant. There may be further discussions about are the doors defective or isolated, and if so can it leave the depot etc, but they are irrelevant until the question of what the is legal basis of WCRC running its Mark 1's on the network is. Happy to be shot down, but there is an apparent case that these coaches should not be on the rails at all. Certainly very interested to know what the legal basis for their use is. *or whatever the correct proportion is.

The turntable is now under the new Library and small industrial units west of the station, location of where it used to be on this extract https://maps.nls.uk/view/75982706 Definitely looks too wee for a Black 5 !

A quick synopsis of their comments, based upon the limited information available to them: WCRC is operating Mk1s without a reg 5 exemption and with the doors locked out of use. Doors locked out of use are still doors, and appear to be deemed 'defective doors' rather than them no longer being doors Under the RSSB regs a train with defective doors should not leave the depot unless there is some form of pre-existing RSSB derogation/exemption Does not appear to derogation or exemption in place This leaves the question as to whether it is legal to have the Mk1's in a train on the network at all........

OK, totes confused as I just ordered the Mk5 DCC chip before they sell out (!) and went straight through to the checkout, so no idea how/when I clicked on anything else and I can't find any tickbox even now. No worries, it seems to have gone away, thanks for responding. Have a good weekend. 😊

Something has changed the website in the last few minutes as I did it twice and both times the carbon thing appeared out of nowhere, once when I ordered and then again when I created a new order before I posted to the forum. Each time I just selected one product, went to cart and straight to the checkout where it was sitting in the cart bit on the right. It did not appear on the cart page at all. Right now there is no check box I can see on the cart page (see below). So not sure what is going on but I definitely did not tick any boxes to get the carbon thing to appear. The good news is having repeated the process the carbon thing no longer appears. Cart page just now. If this issue has been removed then great work addressing it so quickly. I was logged in when I did the first two orders (one paid and completed, one aborted) so if you want to check the web log and tell me I did something wrong then no worries, always happy to eat humble pie if I've messed up!

If you order items as normal, the climate donation does not appear in your cart when you see it before you go to the checkout. It is only when you get to the actual checkout page that it mysteriously appears, eve nthough you have already checked the cart. To then get rid of it you have to go back out of the checkout and into the cart again to remove it, to then re-enter the checkout. I have just checked this as I had the scam item appear automatically without warning or consent in my cart just now and ended up paying it as I couldn't see how to remove it in the checkout. So saying it is "completely optional" is technically correct but somewhat disingenuous. It is added without warning or consent and requires several additional steps, which are not made clear, to remove it. I thought that sort of behaviour had been ruled illegal after Sports Direct and their infamous mugs? It is certainly not ethical retail practice.

Whilst at Cornavin today they removed a Passenger Control Car from a service and left it sitting in platform 4, whereupon Tmf 232 303 promptly appeared from Montbrillant, coupled up and took it away back towards Montbrillant so as not to delay the following service. Was a pretty speedy turnaround.

You can press any of the buttons on either side of the carriage and the correct door will open on arrival regardless of which side it arrives on.

As an aside, one thing a lot of Swiss trains, trams and buses have is a pre-arrival facility on fully powered doors. If you push the door button whilst the unit is in motion that door will open as soon as the driver releases the doors at the stop/station. It also lights the button or a separate light by the door to indicate this in operation. I don't know if this helps dwell times but suspect it does have some impact. It is something I always use as it means I don't have to think about waiting to push the button until the door release has been actuated (as against when the train stops!). I get irritated by stock not fitted with! I don't recall it in the UK but I have only used a limited range of stock so may be in use. Anyway, it is a good thing as you can approach the door push the button and know the door will open immediately.