Heritage Rail Train Driver?

[E&W Lucas]

Some observations:

1. Heritage railways have to be able to produce documentary evidence of someone's competence to perform a task, and that training has been carried out. It isn't just "turn up and drive" - there has to be a system in place.

2. Ditto medical fitness.

3. Not everyone that turns up, is suitable. Aptitude is as important, as on the real railway. Perhaps more so, as you are having to learn part time. You cannot train the untrainable, no matter how willing. I am certain that some of those that complain that they never got anywhere, on whatever railway, fall into that category.

 

[Beveridges]

Heritage railways have to be able to produce documentary evidence of someone's competence to perform a task, and that training has been carried out. It isn't just "turn up and drive" - there has to be a system in place.

Yes but 10 years is rediculous, who is going to stay that long when you can just get a paid driving role on the real railway in a fraction of that time, and also, who is to say you would even be here in 10 years time? It is very unforseeable future.
In that time anything could have happened, including relocating. Then the hard unpleasant unpaid dirty work would have all been for nothing.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

The other problem is that a lot of managers don't like confronting volunteers, so they are often not outright told that they are not suitable, but that "they'll be on the next course". You would have thought that these people would have twigged when everyone else is getting trained ahead of them.

 

[Beveridges]

I think life is too short to spend that many years of your time doing something you don't want to do

 

[E&W Lucas]

The other problem is that a lot of managers don't like confronting volunteers, so they are often not outright told that they are not suitable, but that "they'll be on the next course". You would have thought that these people would have twigged when everyone else is getting trained ahead of them.

I'd agree with that. Far better to be honest with people, put some sort of testing in place, very early in the process, and if the aspirant can't pass it, steer them towards something else. Something along those lines is supposed to be getting introduced at the NYMR this year. Not before time.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Heritage railways badly need to professionalise in their recruitment and training processess. My railway has started doing that with all new traffic department entrants being interviewed, then having to pass a number of training modules in a new modular based format before they can be considered for 'higher' training - which also requires the recommendation of their manager. Training in other areas of the organisation is slowly being dragged up to a better standard as well.

However, still there are people I know who are clearly unsuitable yet have not actually been told that face to face yet. Aside from being deeply unfair to the people involved, it doesn't create a great impression to the authorities.

 

[Dave1987]

The derailment at Quorn on the great central is another example that processes on heritage lines really need looking at. I think the RAIB are interested in what happened as well.

 

[Tomnick]

'Processes' on heritage railways - including the GCR - have had a good 'looking at' over the last few years, believe me. Things will, inevitably, go wrong from time to time - the real test is whether the training and assessment prior to any incident, and the internal investigations subsequently, are up to scratch. In the grand scheme of things, a loco becoming derailed on a set of trap points and ending up well clear of the adjacent running line isn't anything to get too excited about.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Now in response to the more general points about progressing through the grades at heritage railways - my experience suggests that those with the right attitude to the job and the ability to learn the necessary skills and knowledge will progress far more rapidly than the chap who turns up and wants to be passed out and competent by the end of the week, yet won't do anything other than moan in the meantime. It's not too difficult to build yourself a decent reputation - across departments - by showing a willingness to get stuck in and do the job properly, in turn easing your progress through the grades in your own department, and across into other departments if you so desire!

 

[Dave1987]

'Processes' on heritage railways - including the GCR - have had a good 'looking at' over the last few years, believe me. Things will, inevitably, go wrong from time to time - the real test is whether the training and assessment prior to any incident, and the internal investigations subsequently, are up to scratch. In the grand scheme of things, a loco becoming derailed on a set of trap points and ending up well clear of the adjacent running line isn't anything to get too excited about.

I'm sorry but it was the whole loco that came off not just one axle. I don't think it right to say things will go wrong from time to time. If everyone does what they are supposed to do properly then nothing should go wrong. I have heard rumours about what happened but that is it.

 

[Tomnick]

I wish everyone was as perfect as you obviously are. People will inevitably make mistakes, whether they work one turn a month on a heritage railway, or almost every day as a full-time job - trap points (and overlaps, TPWS, flank protection etc.) would be entirely unnecesary if that was the case. The trap points did what they were designed to do here, to maintain the safety of the adjacent running line - does it make a huge difference whether it was just one axle off or the whole lot, as long as it didn't foul the main?

I don't understand the reference specifically to heritage railways anyway. The 'big railway' seems equally capable of dropping things onto the deck.

 

[TDK]

I'm sorry but it was the whole loco that came off not just one axle. I don't think it right to say things will go wrong from time to time. If everyone does what they are supposed to do properly then nothing should go wrong. I have heard rumours about what happened but that is it.

The thing is Dave, people do make mistakes, as long as the person who made this mistake is competent, up to date with assessments, fit for duty and was not blatantly dissobeying rules it is a railway accident, however once again if you want to compare this incident and others with mainline there is an easy equasion, the number of trains run against the incidents percentage wise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't understand the reference specifically to heritage railways anyway. The 'big railway' seems equally capable of dropping things onto the deck.

Read my above post regarding percentages and you can then understand Daves point

 

[Tomnick]

I've read your post, and it's meaningless without the actual figures.

 

[E&W Lucas]

I wish everyone was as perfect as you obviously are. People will inevitably make mistakes, whether they work one turn a month on a heritage railway, or almost every day as a full-time job - trap points (and overlaps, TPWS, flank protection etc.) would be entirely unnecesary if that was the case. The trap points did what they were designed to do here, to maintain the safety of the adjacent running line - does it make a huge difference whether it was just one axle off or the whole lot, as long as it didn't foul the main?

I don't understand the reference specifically to heritage railways anyway. The 'big railway' seems equally capable of dropping things onto the deck.

I will second everything that you are saying. It is getting pretty obvious that Dave1987 has one almighty axe to grind with the heritage sector. In fact it is getting a little tiresome. Don't rise to the bait.

 

[Tomnick]

Thanks - it's good to know that I'm not alone in my thoughts at least! It's hard to sit and watch all sorts of dubious claims against heritage railways without putting forward a sound defence. Anyone who reckons we're all 'playing trains' ought to see the amount of work (almost entirely volunteer-led in our case) that goes into the safety management system that, nowadays, is the basis for the safety of the whole operation.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Although i don't volunteer in Loco, i find as long as you don't turn up and act like a know it all the KWVR is very welcoming to new volunteers. That is my experience from my department (p-way) anyway and talking to people in other departments.

 

[Beveridges]

I'm sorry but it was the whole loco that came off not just one axle. I don't think it right to say things will go wrong from time to time. If everyone does what they are supposed to do properly then nothing should go wrong. I have heard rumours about what happened but that is it.

Accidents happen on the real railway as well.
2 collisions and 1 derailment at Newton Heath since 2011, for example.

 

[Dave1987]

I will second everything that you are saying. It is getting pretty obvious that Dave1987 has one almighty axe to grind with the heritage sector. In fact it is getting a little tiresome. Don't rise to the bait.

I don't have any axe to grind against the heritage sector, but you seem to be in love with it and defend it even to the hilt.

My point is yes the trap points did their job, the loco is on the ground so isn't going anywhere but why is it on the ground? Like I said I have heard rumours about what happened but don't know exactly.

On the big railway if and incident happens, even something minor like a failure to call or a station overrun (doors not released), both of which inconvenience passengers but are not safety incidents, a full investigation goes on and the driver might be put on an action plan. But it certainly isn't treated as a "ow well these things happen" never mind. Certainly if a train I was driving became derailed because of my actions I would expect repercussions and possible loss of my job if I had had previous incidents.

Tomnick to just say "these things happen" I don't think is acceptable. But yes TDK people do make mistakes but it is what happens as a result of those mistakes that matter.

I'm obviously way out numbered with my opinions about aspects of how the heritage sector operates. E&W Lucas I'm not bothered if you are getting tired of my opinions as I'm entitled to have them. I will be interested to read the RAIB report on this (if they choose to investigate it this is).

Beveridges yes I know incidents happen on the big railway as well but like TDK said as a proportion compared to the amount of services run there are far far less on the big railway. A lot of the recent incidents involve misuse of level crossings by the public.

 

[Tomnick]

Tomnick to just say "these things happen" I don't think is acceptable. But yes TDK people do make mistakes but it is what happens as a result of those mistakes that matter.

I didn't just say that - indeed, I didn't say that at all. It is, of course, important that anything like this is investigated thoroughly to establish what went wrong and implement any necessary measures to reduce the risk of something similar happening again. These little incidents (and bigger ones) will still continue to happen though, both on the heritage railways and the 'big railway'.

I would be interested and probably amused to read any rumour mill rumblings though...

Beveridges yes I know incidents happen on the big railway as well but like TDK said as a proportion compared to the amount of services run there are far far less on the big railway. A lot of the recent incidents involve misuse of level crossings by the public.

Some figures would be helpful, rather than carrying out meaningless comparisons between 'a lot' of one and 'quite a few' of the other.

 

[Mr Sam]

ive done a few days at a local line, lots of varied jobs from the boring unpleasant that no one wants to chasing metal thieves off site

from what ive gathered it takes some years for loco "owners" to trust you at the desk also that even the lower powered loco's are to powerful for preserved line speed restrictions

 

[Dave1987]

I didn't just say that - indeed, I didn't say that at all. It is, of course, important that anything like this is investigated thoroughly to establish what went wrong and implement any necessary measures to reduce the risk of something similar happening again. These little incidents (and bigger ones) will still continue to happen though, both on the heritage railways and the 'big railway'.

I would be interested and probably amused to read any rumour mill rumblings though...

Some figures would be helpful, rather than carrying out meaningless comparisons between 'a lot' of one and 'quite a few' of the other.

I will PM you.

 

[Jonfun]

Certainly if a train I was driving became derailed because of my actions I would expect repercussions and possible loss of my job if I had had previous incidents.

And you don't think that if it was the driver's fault (which there's no been no suggestions indication that it was, it could equally be the signalman or whoever's) that he wouldn't face repercussions and potentially the suspension or loss of his certificate of competence to drive?

Things have gone on the mainline that are *far* worse than anything I've ever seen on a heritage line (and I mean far worse), but I don't hold any bias against mainline trains. If you haven't already, I suggest you read Red for Danger, a book about how railway accidents have happened in the past, and what has been learnt from them. In this case, I would assume that after assessing the scene, craning out the loco, and shunting the stock off the "catch" bit of the catch points that they ended up sat on, they'll then sit down and look at exactly what happened, and how to make sure it doesn't happen again.

The big railway has lots of safeguards (AWS, TPWS, CDL etc) which heritage railways don't. It's not fair to compare the two - as a heritage railway guard I wouldn't be able to just go over to a mainline train and work it without training etc, just as a conductor from Northern or wherever wouldn't be able to just wander over and carry out guards duties on a heritage line without being properly trained.

If an incident happens, it's happened - be that heritage, or on the mainline. The important thing is finding out how it happened and looking for ways to stop it happening again.

 

[Dave1987]

And you don't think that if it was the driver's fault (which there's no been no suggestions indication that it was, it could equally be the signalman or whoever's) that he wouldn't face repercussions and potentially the suspension or loss of his certificate of competence to drive?

Things have gone on the mainline that are *far* worse than anything I've ever seen on a heritage line (and I mean far worse), but I don't hold any bias against mainline trains. If you haven't already, I suggest you read Red for Danger, a book about how railway accidents have happened in the past, and what has been learnt from them. In this case, I would assume that after assessing the scene, craning out the loco, and shunting the stock off the "catch" bit of the catch points that they ended up sat on, they'll then sit down and look at exactly what happened, and how to make sure it doesn't happen again.

The big railway has lots of safeguards (AWS, TPWS, CDL etc) which heritage railways don't. It's not fair to compare the two - as a heritage railway guard I wouldn't be able to just go over to a mainline train and work it without training etc, just as a conductor from Northern or wherever wouldn't be able to just wander over and carry out guards duties on a heritage line without being properly trained.

If an incident happens, it's happened - be that heritage, or on the mainline. The important thing is finding out how it happened and looking for ways to stop it happening again.

Indeed i heartly agree with this. What I didn't agree with is this

Things will, inevitably, go wrong from time to time

Prevention is better than cure....

 

[Tomnick]

It is inevitable though! If it wasn't, we'd long since have stopped suffering accidents and other incidents on the big railway.

 

[Dave1987]

It is inevitable though! If it wasn't, we'd long since have stopped suffering accidents and other incidents on the big railway.

But I dont think it is inevitable though. Otherwise every railway in the country both preserved and mainline would have a similar number of incidents each year.

 

[Tomnick]

It's inevitable that, on a heritage railway somewhere (and on the big railway somewhere else), something is going to go wrong at some point in the future.

 

[Dave1987]

It's inevitable that, on a heritage railway somewhere (and on the big railway somewhere else), something is going to go wrong at some point in the future.

Well i think we need to agree to disagree to be honest. There is no reason to say that any particular railway be it mainline or preseved will definitely have an incident in the future. I might be likely or unlikely depending on the railway but it is not definite.

 

[Tomnick]

It's a little way off the original point anyway. Hopefully we can agree that any such incident would be treated just as seriously on a respectable heritage railway as it would on the mainline?

 

[Dave1987]

It's a little way off the original point anyway. Hopefully we can agree that any such incident would be treated just as seriously on a respectable heritage railway as it would on the mainline?

I'm sure it will be.

 

[Wikipedia]

Shocked to hear what goes on at the ELR! I volunteer at the Epping Ongar Railway doing all kinds of random things I'm asked to do or I offer to do myself. Mainly Carriage & Wagon but sometimes help out with other things and on running days I am a Travelling Ticket Inspector or Porter. I wouldn't say I got the bad jobs but I just didnt't get many jobs to do because nobody knew me but once I got to know people I was up and running in no time!

You'll be welcomed at the Epping Ongar Railway anytime.

Sounds pretty much like me at the Eden Valley to be honest.
All welcome at EVR also!!

 

[TDK]

I've read your post, and it's meaningless without the actual figures.

I am not the one defending anyone or anything, you want the figures you work them out for yourself
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Thanks - it's good to know that I'm not alone in my thoughts at least! It's hard to sit and watch all sorts of dubious claims against heritage railways without putting forward a sound defence. Anyone who reckons we're all 'playing trains' ought to see the amount of work (almost entirely volunteer-led in our case) that goes into the safety management system that, nowadays, is the basis for the safety of the whole operation.

The major difference is that Heritage railway is a hobby and you do it voluntarily so therefore it isn't hard work as such as you don't have to do it if you don't want to!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I didn't just say that - indeed, I didn't say that at all. It is, of course, important that anything like this is investigated thoroughly to establish what went wrong and implement any necessary measures to reduce the risk of something similar happening again. These little incidents (and bigger ones) will still continue to happen though, both on the heritage railways and the 'big railway'.

I would be interested and probably amused to read any rumour mill rumblings though...

Some figures would be helpful, rather than carrying out meaningless comparisons between 'a lot' of one and 'quite a few' of the other.

On the mainline there are certain incidents that are called railway accidents that merit the emergency button to be used, these are the most serious listed below!

1. Collision with a person
2. Collision with road vehicle or railway vehicle
3. Division
4. Fire on a train
5. Line blocked by obstruction
6. Train in distress or an uneven load
7. Derailment

How can you refer to a derailment as a "little incident" just shows the diversity between heritage railways and mainline - A derailment of any sort is a very serious BIG incident.