WCRC - the ongoing battle with ORR.

[The Stationmaster]

16 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Indeed, not knowing the speed limit is a good case for driving without due care and attention, but not enforceable as a court would not allow two bites of the offences cherry for the simple act of speeding ☹️ 

 

Your initial statement is excellent evidence to support the speeding offence as a direct admission and hopefully was included in the officer's notes and if recently occured on their bodycam 😀

It was a radar gun and a couple of bobbies further long the road.  And yes, I was perfectly honest aboi ut teh speed at which I was driving as I had no reason, as far as I was concerned to do otherwise.  Simple fact is that the 40 signs, which were situated immediately on the eit from a 3 lane roundabout had been removed some time previously.  Normally along there you have to do over 40 to keep up with the traffic so it's good job I've got a dipping rear view mirror!

[Jeremy Cumberland]

11 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Simple fact - reported on here is that Mk1 coaches fitted with CET are being used on The Jacobite and that the exterior doors of those coaches have been locked out of use.

I haven't read a single report that the doors are locked out of use.

[The Stationmaster]

7 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

I haven't read a single report that the doors are locked out of use.

I have.   deuce.

 

But if the doors aren't locked out of use they are breaking the Regulations unless they have a new written exemption.  Typical fast & loose WCRC - they can always manage to con some of the people some of the time.

[adb968008]

Can someone explain to a layman the issue ?

 

if the toilets can be used by a passenger, the coach must either have cdl, but as it doesnt have cdl they are locked out of use, meaning they still cannot use the toilet ?

 

how does that fit with passengers visiting the buffet in a mk1 with doors locked out of use and no cdl is that not crossing the same line in the sand ?

i say this as most railtour stock uses mk1 buffets, regardless of operator and I dont think many have cdl, just former public doors locked and marked emergency or staff use only.

 

Edited May 10 by adb968008

[Jeremy Cumberland]

RSR99 Regulation 5 refers only to "hinged doors for use by passengers for boarding and alighting from the train". If there aren't any of these, then Regulation 5 does not apply. Given the context of when this was written, I am pretty sure that the doors the legislators implicity wished to exclude were those for drivers, guards and catering staff, and they had no inkling of what might take place 25 years later in Scotland.

 

RSR99 says nothing about locking doors that aren't for passenger use, and of course guard's doors aren't locked. I am pretty sure that the CDL-fitted 3-CIG units used on the Lymington branch didn't have CDL on the guard's doors; they were simply labelled "Guard". Possibly the guard's area was secured to prevent passenger access (as I imagine the Hastings unit's guard's areas might be), but they never used to be on 4-CIGs in pre-RSR99 days. At this point it is worth noting that RSR99 Regulation 5 does not distinguish between outward and inward opening doors. This might seem strange, but there it is. The VSOE Pullmans, for example, have a current Regulation 5 exemption certificate.

 

As far as I can tell, there are no longer any ordinary Mk1 catering vehicles with Regulation 5 exempton certificates, apart from some on the NYMR authorised between Grosmont and Whitby only. Vintage Trains Limited has a number of Mk1 TSOs and other vehicles with Regulation 5 exemption certificates, but the only catering vehicles on the list are Pullmans. The other two operators with Regulation 5 exemption are VSOE and The Great Scottish & Western Railway Company Limited, and in both cases the certificates cover mostly Pullmans.

 

If non-CDL-fitted catering vehicles are in current use on main line charters, I am sure many people contribuiting to this thread would be interested in hearing how they are worked. Alternatively, if the vehicles are CDL-fitted, are doors only for use by catering staff also CDL fitted, are they locked, or are the simply labelled and left unlocked?

[BoD]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

how does that fit with passengers visiting the buffet in a mk1 with doors locked out of use and no cdl is that not crossing the same line in the sand ?

Whilst passengers aren’t allowed to travel in a coach with the doors locked out of use can they still pass through that coach to reach other parts of the train/buffet?

Is visiting the buffet classed as travelling in the buffet coach?

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, BoD said:

Whilst passengers aren’t allowed to travel in a coach with the doors locked out of use can they still pass through that coach to reach other parts of the train/buffet?

Is visiting the buffet classed as travelling in the buffet coach?

If your in the queue for the buffet, whats the difference to sitting on a potty ?

 

Recent trips with Riverias mk2 blue greys, has two mk1 catering vehicles, a kitchen and a buffet.

 

No ones stopping anyone sitting in the buffet, or queuing in it, yet those vehicles dont have cdl.. just regular bolts over doors, and a sign saying staff / emergency use only but these doors were originally passenger doors.. its an RMB. All that changed was a sticker on the window and a gate bolt on the inside.

hence why I am asking as i’m not understanding the minutia of the regs, rest of the train is cdl fitted.

 

If a service vehicle is exempt and has no passenger doors, what stops wcrc opening a tuck shop in a bay of seats on a TSO and calling it a buffet ?

heres one of them, the doors are marked for non passenger use, externally and internally, but it wasnt built that way.

 

https://flic.kr/p/2ou3qX8

 

 

 

Edited May 10 by adb968008

[ruggedpeak]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Can someone explain to a layman the issue ?

 

if the toilets can be used by a passenger, the coach must either have cdl, but as it doesnt have cdl they are locked out of use, meaning they still cannot use the toilet ?

 

how does that fit with passengers visiting the buffet in a mk1 with doors locked out of use and no cdl is that not crossing the same line in the sand ?

 

1 hour ago, BoD said:

Whilst passengers aren’t allowed to travel in a coach with the doors locked out of use can they still pass through that coach to reach other parts of the train/buffet?

Is visiting the buffet classed as travelling in the buffet coach?

Both excellent questions, and the answer on the buffet may inform an answer on the WCRC situation. Or may not, depending on the basis that the buffets are operated.
 

1 hour ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Given the context of when this was written, I am pretty sure that the doors the legislators implicity wished to exclude were those for drivers, guards and catering staff, and they had no inkling of what might take place 25 years later in Scotland.

Indeed, and it might take a court decsion to properly resolve it. There is a big difference between one guard's door or a couple of buffet doors, and 4+ doors on every other coach in the train from a risk perspective.

 

If it transpires that there is some exemption for buffets, perhaps on the basis that there would only be one or two buffet cars in a train normally, and it transpires that exemption is the basis of running the Jacobite, don't be surprised if the buffet exemption is withdrawn to prevent further precedent or abuse........

 

1 hour ago, BoD said:

Whilst passengers aren’t allowed to travel in a coach with the doors locked out of use can they still pass through that coach to reach other parts of the train/buffet?

Is visiting the buffet classed as travelling in the buffet coach?

There must be some precedent around this in the annals of railway law and lore or regulations?

 

If not a court will default to the basic English language definitions. If a person, a paying passenger, is inside a railway carriage that forms a train providing passenger services and that train is moving between two or more stations or locations then that would meet the definition of travelling e.g. "going or being transported from place to place".

 

Otherwise the passenger would be 'travelling' whilst in the normal carriage but then magically stop 'travelling' for the duration of being present in the buffet (or toilet) even though the train continues moving, which is a practical and legal nonsense.

[adb968008]

Just sideways thinking back to past events, most recent being 2023 with the Queens funeral charters,

 

LSL had the 90/mk3’s on Euston Manchesters.. vandals smashed a passenger bay window. Whilst it fragmented it held. The stock remained in use the next few days, but LSL locked the coach from passenger use, but you could walk through it.

 

but many other such incidents have occured, and probably do on a daily basis, I assume theres some regulation allowing the stock to remain in use as Ive seen Southern lock an Electrostar coach out of use for similar reasons, or a dodgy door etc in the past… but the service kept going, indeed the dodgy door one showed up for a few weeks as passengers even started to recognise it.

Edited May 10 by adb968008

[ruggedpeak]

5 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Just sideways thinking back to past events, most recent being 2023 with the Queens funeral charters,

 

LSL had the 90/mk3’s on Euston Manchesters.. vandals smashed a passenger bay window. Whilst it fragmented it held. The stock remained in use the next few days, but LSL locked the coach from passenger use, but you could walk through it.

 

but many other such incidents have occured, and probably do on a daily basis, I assume theres some regulation allowing the stock to remain in use as Ive seen Southern lock an Electrostar coach out of use for similar reasons, or a dodgy door etc in the past… but the service kept going, indeed the dodgy door one showed up for a few weeks as passengers even started to recognise it.

Down to risk assessment and genuine need in an emergency. Risk of the window failing and injuring someone walking past was considered low enough to be acceptable, but risk of injury to people sitting in the carriage for significant periods of time was too high.

 

There was a discussion earlier in the thread on the regs for defective doors, but the Jacobite issue is not a sudden, unforeseen in-service door failure on a major commuter route affecting one door or even one coach, but a deliberate decision to operate with multiple doors in multiple carriages in the train taken out of passenger service from the start (back to the regs referring to coaches leaving the yard/depot IIRC) and continuing to do so with no apparent sign of a plan to rectify this within a few days or a week that I assume is normal for such defect rectification by the major TOCs.

[Dunsignalling]

Something of a Catch 22, with each of two rules forbidding what the other demands. Just the sort of thing WCRC have long been adept in exploiting.

 

Such contradiction between different sets of Rules & Regulations are nothing new. Some of them used to provide signalmen on quiet turns with hours of harmless fun devising defensible, and safe, but opposing solutions to dealing with hypothetical incidents.

 

Sometimes having the wriggle room created by such anomalies have been the only way to get things moving within a sensible timescale following disruption. I remember one situation though, where my oppo and I were judged to have chosen an "unnecessarily restrictive" alternative that delayed service recovery. Not that we'd done anything unsafe, but that we should have prioritised a recently-eased instruction in one module over a more comprehensive and long-standing one in another....   

 

One potential parallel with the WCRC situation was a buffet car on a railtour that acquired a cracked window. The guard creatively decided that by taping off the seating area, passengers could be arguably be regarded as passing through the vehicle rather than travelling in it, thereby maintaining access to refreshment. 

 

John

 

 

Edited May 10 by Dunsignalling

[LNER4479]

2 hours ago, ruggedpeak said:

Both excellent questions, and the answer on the buffet may inform an answer on the WCRC situation. Or may not, depending on the basis that the buffets are operated.

For info - on the day I travelled on the Jacobite (26.4.24) the buffet itself was NOT in use; there was a drinks trolley making its way through the train as an alternative. Ergo, no queues of people in the buffet waiting to be served whilst the train was in motion. This appeared to be the new normal arrangement for this season, at least whilst the current situation exists.

[Dunsignalling]

7 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

For info - on the day I travelled on the Jacobite (26.4.24) the buffet itself was NOT in use; there was a drinks trolley making its way through the train as an alternative. Ergo, no queues of people in the buffet waiting to be served whilst the train was in motion. This appeared to be the new normal arrangement for this season, at least whilst the current situation exists.

 

Altogether the optimum solution in the circumstances, IMHO.

 

The arrangement described in my post was put in place shortly after departure on the return leg of a tour from Devon to York and Newcastle, at a time when the provision of refreshment trolleys was very much in its infancy. 

 

John.

[Michael Hodgson]

20 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Oh no it isn't!  I was caught doing about 35mph on a 30mph dual carriageway when the chap in the dark blue uniform stopped the start of my explanation was that I was only doing 35 despite it being a 40 mph limit.  He x carried on his side of the conversation by adding  that not bein aware of a speed limit could be cnstrued as an offence - not that he was c going to construe it that way as it was dual carriageway and he could understand my erroneous impression.  Off to Speed Awareness Course - the first time I'd ever been on one of those but I have to say that the second one I attended was far better run and made much more sense.

I got stopped in Luton some years ago, doing about 35 on a dual carriageway.  I said I thought the limit was 40 along here.  The officer told me they had reduced the limit a couple of weeks previously so I got away with "OK sorry, I was watching the traffic rather than reading the signs - it's the first time I've come through Luton way for a few weeks and didn't notice it had changed". 

[adb968008]

20 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I got stopped in Luton some years ago, doing about 35 on a dual carriageway.  I said I thought the limit was 40 along here.  The officer told me they had reduced the limit a couple of weeks previously so I got away with "OK sorry, I was watching the traffic rather than reading the signs - it's the first time I've come through Luton way for a few weeks and didn't notice it had changed". 

Happened around here, the main roads had a 10mph downgrade.. 40-30, 30-20….
making the/residential side streets as 30mph rat runs as a result, as those were left unchanged.

 

 

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

On 10/05/2024 at 17:55, adb968008 said:

Can someone explain to a layman the issue ?

 

if the toilets can be used by a passenger, the coach must either have cdl, but as it doesnt have cdl they are locked out of use, meaning they still cannot use the toilet ?

 

how does that fit with passengers visiting the buffet in a mk1 with doors locked out of use and no cdl is that not crossing the same line in the sand ?

i say this as most railtour stock uses mk1 buffets, regardless of operator and I dont think many have cdl, just former public doors locked and marked emergency or staff use only.

 

Basically yes.  Coaches conveying passengers are required to have CDL but if a door does not have CDL it must be locked out of use.  But if all the doors of a coach are locked out of use it is not permitted to convey passengers in that vehicle.  Those are the requirements of the two relevant Rule Book Modules.

 

Now if somebody has an exemption in respect of the fitting of CDL a different situation will be created by the exemption - which has usually taken the form of a door with a manual secondary locking (i.e, a bolt) and 'a somebody' to steward the door to ensure that it is not used and the bolt is not touched by an unauthorised person.  And of course in that case the door is not locked - it can still be opened if the bolt is manually withdrawn.  This should not be confused with a door locked out of use which will have been done (in the case of Mk1 vehicles) by means of a key which has been used to lock what many folk used to call the 'budget lock'.  That is a very straightforward dead lock inside the door which can only be operated with a ' T' key (officially 'Carriage Key) and cannot be operated from inside the coach (unless you use the droplight to get at it in the exterior of the door).

 

 

If typu look carefully at this image you will see the hole in the door frame  (c.one third of the way up the drop light) into which the key is inserted to work the lock, which dead locks into the door frame.  Very simple and robust mechanism

 

[The Stationmaster]

On 10/05/2024 at 20:43, adb968008 said:

Just sideways thinking back to past events, most recent being 2023 with the Queens funeral charters,

 

LSL had the 90/mk3’s on Euston Manchesters.. vandals smashed a passenger bay window. Whilst it fragmented it held. The stock remained in use the next few days, but LSL locked the coach from passenger use, but you could walk through it.

 

but many other such incidents have occured, and probably do on a daily basis, I assume theres some regulation allowing the stock to remain in use as Ive seen Southern lock an Electrostar coach out of use for similar reasons, or a dodgy door etc in the past… but the service kept going, indeed the dodgy door one showed up for a few weeks as passengers even started to recognise it.

I don't know what it is now but it used to be simple.  

Outer glass of a double glazed coach window broken - empty the coach but still allow passengers to walk through (and try to keep an eye on it0).

Single glazed window - lock the coach out of use and nobody to be allowed to enter it.

 

The logic was very simple - a damaged or cracked window could go completely due to pressure from a passing train or when passing a structure.  The advantage of double glazing - which I'm fairly sure arrived as a relaxation of the original Instruction - was that it still allowed access through a vehicles if only the outer pane was damaged.

 

Incidentally as far as locking of doors is concerned the Rule Boopk Modeules I refer to are relatively recent and obviously post date the adoption of CDL

[The Stationmaster]

On 10/05/2024 at 19:14, Jeremy Cumberland said:

RSR99 Regulation 5 refers only to "hinged doors for use by passengers for boarding and alighting from the train". If there aren't any of these, then Regulation 5 does not apply. Given the context of when this was written, I am pretty sure that the doors the legislators implicity wished to exclude were those for drivers, guards and catering staff, and they had no inkling of what might take place 25 years later in Scotland.

 

RSR99 says nothing about locking doors that aren't for passenger use, and of course guard's doors aren't locked. I am pretty sure that the CDL-fitted 3-CIG units used on the Lymington branch didn't have CDL on the guard's doors; they were simply labelled "Guard". Possibly the guard's area was secured to prevent passenger access (as I imagine the Hastings unit's guard's areas might be), but they never used to be on 4-CIGs in pre-RSR99 days. At this point it is worth noting that RSR99 Regulation 5 does not distinguish between outward and inward opening doors. This might seem strange, but there it is. The VSOE Pullmans, for example, have a current Regulation 5 exemption certificate.

 

As far as I can tell, there are no longer any ordinary Mk1 catering vehicles with Regulation 5 exempton certificates, apart from some on the NYMR authorised between Grosmont and Whitby only. Vintage Trains Limited has a number of Mk1 TSOs and other vehicles with Regulation 5 exemption certificates, but the only catering vehicles on the list are Pullmans. The other two operators with Regulation 5 exemption are VSOE and The Great Scottish & Western Railway Company Limited, and in both cases the certificates cover mostly Pullmans.

 

If non-CDL-fitted catering vehicles are in current use on main line charters, I am sure many people contribuiting to this thread would be interested in hearing how they are worked. Alternatively, if the vehicles are CDL-fitted, are doors only for use by catering staff also CDL fitted, are they locked, or are the simply labelled and left unlocked?

I should hardly need to point out to you yet again that what matters on the operational railway are the contents of the Rule Book.  I doubt if any, and definitely many Guards/TrainManagers have ever heard of  RSR99 but they are examined in their knowledge of the railway Rule Book.  And the Rule Book is nothing to do with the ORR. but is the responsibility of the RSSB

 

The only impact of the Regulations is where the ORR - who have the responsibility for enforcing them have agreed some sort of temporary mitigation.  WECRC's mitigation has expired and they knew it was coming and should have modified their stock accordingly.  The fact that they didn't is 100% down to them and nobody else.

[stewartingram]

It may be history and not relevant nowadays, but...

After the Mk1 sleeper fire, when I believe passengers wer trapped behind lockedoors didn't the rules change tofforbid locking in?

So presumably it was ok before the fire?

[Bob-65b]

1 hour ago, stewartingram said:

It may be history and not relevant nowadays, but...

After the Mk1 sleeper fire, when I believe passengers wer trapped behind lockedoors didn't the rules change tofforbid locking in?

So presumably it was ok before the fire?

 

No, it wasn't permitted before the fire however it had become custom and practice amongst the attendants to have them kept locked for security reasons even when off the platforms and it doesn't appear to have been a big issue with the Inspectors at the Time. Training for the SC staff then was sadly lacking - very much a case of sitting with Nellie for new starts - getting taught all the good and sadly not helping 12 folk all the bad habits.  Though it wasn't found to be an issue on the other regions, I certainly remember it happening on the Eastern / Midland / Scottish Regions.  The biggest issue was that the locked doors made it difficult for evacuation of the vehicles and for the fireman to get access.  Unfortunately most of those who perished were inside their berths.

 

 

Edited May 12 by Bob Reid

[Northmoor]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

I don't know what it is now but it used to be simple.  

Outer glass of a double glazed coach window broken - empty the coach but still allow passengers to walk through (and try to keep an eye on it0).

Single glazed window - lock the coach out of use and nobody to be allowed to enter it.

 

The logic was very simple - a damaged or cracked window could go completely due to pressure from a passing train or when passing a structure.  The advantage of double glazing - which I'm fairly sure arrived as a relaxation of the original Instruction - was that it still allowed access through a vehicles if only the outer pane was damaged.

 

Incidentally as far as locking of doors is concerned the Rule Boopk Modeules I refer to are relatively recent and obviously post date the adoption of CDL

On more than one occasion at Waterloo in the last couple of years I have witnessed fitters applying profuse amounts of tape over a shattered window pane.  I have not noticed the carriage affected being run empty, but I can completely agree with the logic you describe.  Presumably the greater risk is not nearby passengers being showered with glass (which breaks into small lumps, not shards) but a shattered window panel popping outwards while a train passes a station with waiting passengers.

[RJS1977]

I remember some years ago attempting to remove the droplight from the door of a Mark 1 to enable the framing of the door itself to be worked on. It took most of the morning for me to get it out!

 

Our C&W expert, who was supervising me, then told me he'd seen a train arrive at Bishop's Lydeard with a broken droplight. A volunteer was already waiting on the platform with a replacement, that he managed to fit in the time it took the loco to run round!

[stewartingram]

I've seen panes replaced on 365s at KGX  between arrival and departure.

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, Bob Reid said:

 

No, it wasn't permitted before the fire however it had become custom and practice amongst the attendants to have them kept locked for security reasons even when off the platforms and it doesn't appear to have been a big issue with the Inspectors at the Time. Training for the SC staff then was sadly lacking - very much a case of sitting with Nellie for new starts - getting taught all the good and sadly not helping 12 folk all the bad habits.  Though it wasn't found to be an issue on the other regions, I certainly remember it happening on the Eastern / Midland / Scottish Regions.  The biggest issue was that the locked doors made it difficult for evacuation of the vehicles and for the fireman to get access.  Unfortunately most of those who perished were inside their berths.

 

 

As far as most of the passengers, and certainly those who died, were concerned any locked doors didn't make any difference as all the fatalities were due to smoke/noxious fumes inhalation and virtually all of them died in their compartments.  A lot of evidence was given at the Inquiry - which I attended throughout as I was at that time Area Manager at Taunton - regarding the sort of gases which were found in the coach as a result of various materials, including the paintwork, burning.    The County Police Mortuary Officer, who I had been helping with a lot of information,  turned up in my office one afternoon with a file containing the mortuary photos of all the victims along with notes of teh cause of death - I decided that looking at that was far beyond any information I need if called at the Inquiry.

 

Fortunately earlier that year, immediately following my arrival at Taunton I had quickly found that the Area Emergency, and safety, Plan to be totally inadequate and had spent several weeks of late evenings in the office completely re-writing it.  Hence it avoided criticism at the Inquiry (fortunately for me) although it was clear (to me if no one else)  that training-in  of such plans requires as much thought and attention as putting them together.

[Reorte]

On the subject of glass when did it (presumably!) all change to that type that breaks in to not very sharp granules rather than nasty shards? I'm assuming (always a danger) has been a requirement long before this current debate started.