WCRC loses judicial review in High Court

[Gaz67]

The ORR did that, in response to a complaint, and found what it found. Lax procedures!

Bill Smith is innocent, free the Staintondale one.


Is there a risk of them being ejected from the vehicle? The Croydon tram crash deaths and how they happened suggests that might not be such a bad idea in some cases.

Croydon tram crash, I will give you a much better comparison, read the report of the Merseyrail smash through the buffers in 2021, train doing 41 mph as it entered the station due to the driver replying to a message on his phone, thankfully due to light loading ( COVID) it wasn't as bad as it could of been, they have also managed this with one of their new units , as I have pointed out earlier im this thread I would feel safer on the Jacobite than on a Merseyrail train approaching a dead stop. It was going so fast it negated all the safety devices, basically hitting the station at 41 mph was unthinkable in any scenario.

 

[yoyothehobo]

The latest WCR update (yesterday ) sounds quite positive on a workable outcome to me, I am a glass half full kind of person though, at Carlisle today to view Tangmere, got to say what I saw was in no way representative of many of the negative , hysterical views expressed on here , in my opinion. Can't beat getting out there and experiencing it close up and seeing railwaymen/women at work, may change a few views on here.

I agree, too many hysterical supporters of WCRC on here.

I work in the railway industry and all of my colleagues agree that WCRC dont have a leg to stand on here.

But maybe thats because all my colleagues actively work in trying to make the railway more efficient and safer.

All the people on here going on about common sense. The number of trainspotters you see right on the platform edge as a train comes in, would be in the place they would get hit by a swinging door.

Its time for them to grow up and accept the world has moved on.

 

[Gaz67]

I agree, too many hysterical supporters of WCRC on here.

I work in the railway industry and all of my colleagues agree that WCRC dont have a leg to stand on here.

But maybe thats because all my colleagues actively work in trying to make the railway more efficient and safer.

All the people on here going on about common sense. The number of trainspotters you see right on the platform edge as a train comes in, would be in the place they would get hit by a swinging door.

Its time for them to grow up and accept the world has moved on.

Take it you don't know any Merseyrail drivers?

 

[yoyothehobo]

No i dont, but i also dont know the WCRC driver who was at Wooton Bassett. So i suggest you get off your high horse.

 

[Gaz67]

What annoys me is the view that many have of mainline operators totally professional and safe, tour operators (WCR) amateur and unsafe, this is not the case and the people who spend their time watching and travelling on trains know it's far from being so simplistic .

No i dont, but i also dont know the WCRC driver who was at Wooton Bassett. So i suggest you get off your high horse.

Any opinions on the 2021 incident mentioned above?

 

[30907]

All this stuff about carriage doors isn't a problem on heritage railways.

As a member of on-board staff on a heritage railway I can assure you that it is a regular topic in HRA safety digests, not to mention internal notices.

(Note - I am not suggesting that CDL is likely to be mandated at <25mph.)

 

[Gaz67]

What annoys me is the view that many have of mainline operators totally professional and safe, tour operators (WCR) amateur and unsafe, this is not the case and the people who spend their time watching and travelling on trains know it's far from that simplistic .


Any opinions on the 2021 incident mentioned abov

 

[yoyothehobo]

What annoys me is the view that many have of mainline operators totally professional and safe, tour operators (WCR) amateur and unsafe, this is not the case and the people who spend their time watching and travelling on trains (me) know this is the case.


Any opinions on the 2021 incident mentioned above?

I dont need an opinion on the 2021 incident nor the Wooton Basset one, they are both factually terrible incidents.

WCRC have been banned in the past for their performance and incidents and culture.

I have no idea how you can say that "as someone who watches and rides on trains" that one is safer than the other or is inherently unsafe. It is irrelevant. You have no idea what is going on in the train cab, but you can find a lot of incident reports which paint a picture.

At the end of the day the ORR would have been happy enough with WCRC if they would have been doing what they said they would as a risk mitigation (door stewards) but as they couldnt be bothered doing that for whatever reason, then it makes you wonder what else they werent doing.

 

[Gaz67]

I dont need an opinion on the 2021 incident nor the Wooton Basset one, they are both factually terrible incidents.

WCRC have been banned in the past for their performance and incidents and culture.

I have no idea how you can say that "as someone who watches and rides on trains" that one is safer than the other or is inherently unsafe. It is irrelevant. You have no idea what is going on in the train cab, but you can find a lot of incident reports which paint a picture.

At the end of the day the ORR would have been happy enough with WCRC if they would have been doing what they said they would as a risk mitigation (door stewards) but as they couldnt be bothered doing that for whatever reason, then it makes you wonder what else they werent doing.

You have me down as a WCR fanboy, I am far from it , the last thing I want to do is to get into an argument with someone who works in an industry that I totally respect and has given me so much enjoyment , I am definitely not on a high horse, I am the kind of person that doesn't run with the crowd and goes against the grain, always have done, apologies for any offense.

 

[DarloRich]

You have me down as a WCR fanboy, I am far from it , the last thing I want to do is to get into an argument with someone who works in an industry that I totally respect and has given me so much enjoyment , I am definitely not on a high horse, I am the kind of person that doesn't run with the crowd and goes against the grain, always have done, apologies for any offense.

You are welcome to form, hold and express your opinion. You are welcome not to run with the crowd" or "go against the grain". That is your right

The problem is that your opinion is formed from an imperfect understanding of the situation.

I would suggest further and deeper reading about the subject rather than forming a decision based on "watching and travelling on trains"

 

[GusB]

A few people have mentioned "common sense" and "personal responsibility" in this thread; unfortunately, there are people in the world who have no concept of either. Like it or not, the regulations have to take these people into account.

It's all well and good saying that they would be worthy of a Darwin award if the worst was to happen but if there was a fatality then the whole operation would be subject to scrutiny. In the worst case scenario, all stock that doesn't comply with modern standards would be permanently withdrawn.

What we have now is a compromise. The ORR allows certain vehicles on the rails, subject to certain conditions that mitigate against the worst happening. West Coast Railways failed to adhere to those conditions.

It's in WCR's interests to toe the line, along with other "heritage" operations. The ORR could, if it really wanted to enforce safety, ban all stock that was built before a certain date and that would surely end most charter operations.

To those who think that WCR is being unfairly targeted - please be careful what you wish for.

 

[DDB]

I don't like the phrase "common sense" as I think people actually mean "experience". People don't experience slam door stock in their normal lives anymore. They certainly don't normally have to consider things may suddenly stick out of a train going past.

 

[Falcon1200]

People are injured and/or die every day while pursuing their interests - So what! Living Life is Fatal.

Yes indeed! Health & Safety madness in this nanny state world. As well as allowing passengers to open train doors, not just on the Jacobite but everywhere, no matter where a train is or how fast it is going, perhaps we should do away with other safety measures such as seat belts and air bags in cars - surely people have enough common sense not to crash their vehicles?

If ORR truly are against having charter trains on the mainline network

They are not.

praise to WCRC for standing up to them in every way they can find.

Including such actions as isolating vital on-train safety systems, and thereby almost causing a serious collision?

No.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I don't like the phrase "common sense" as I think people actually mean "experience". People don't experience slam door stock in their normal lives anymore. They certainly don't normally have to consider things may suddenly stick out of a train going past.

Very very good post. And that is one of the key things at play here.

Many commenting saying common sense, are very used to slam doors, on the network possibly historically and on heritage railways. There are now families going on the Jacobite who have never ever used one, or even seen one other than on TV.

And this ignores the main part of the arguement, WCRC agreed a method of working with the regulator, got caught not following it, got told, got caught again a matter of weeks later, and the reaction was in no way a surprise.

 

[Gaz67]

You are welcome to form, hold and express your opinion. You are welcome not to run with the crowd" or "go against the grain". That is your right

The problem is that your opinion is formed from an imperfect understanding of the situation.

I would suggest further and deeper reading about the subject rather than forming a decision based on "watching and travelling on trains"

All I am trying to do is add a bit of balance regarding other operators and the general state of safety on the railways, it is perfectly acceptable for the travelling public to have opinions based on nothing more than their travelling experience, I also value the opinions of Railwaymen/women such as yourself, this forum is a broad church and long may it continue.I have never put myself forward as an expert in railway safety, however I have noticed that whenever criticism points at anyone on the railways other than WCR regarding safety then the ranks on here close, it is very noticeable.

 

[Bill57p9]

And this ignores the main part of the arguement, WCRC agreed a method of working with the regulator, got caught not following it, got told, got caught again a matter of weeks later, and the reaction was in no way a surprise.

Whilst I do agree that this non compliance was a serious matter, I do not believe this is a main part of the ORR argument: every other remaining CDL exemption was granted either with additional mitigation (e.g. NYMR 25mph limit) or a plan from the stock owner/operator to fit CDL.

In fact one of the legal arguments WCRC presented, which was dismissed by the court, was unequal treatment. (Yet in their update, WCRC continue to claim being treated differently to other operators). Last year's Jacobite prohibition did not form part of the legal argument.

We should also be wary on conflating two different things: IMHO the debate around the CDL regulation linked but not the same as whether operators should be picking and choosing which regulations they comply with.

I have noticed that whenever criticism points at anyone on the railways other than WCR regarding safety then the ranks on here close, it is very noticeable.

One word: Culture

 

[Gaz67]

Nobody on here is arguing that the eradication of non CDL slammers by the TOCs nearly 20 years ago didn't make a big difference to safety, the figures speak for themselves. What I would like now are some good old hard facts, if they are available. Firstly I would like to know the figures for injuries and deaths caused by slam doors ( CDL or not) in use by charter operators since their eradication from the network by the main TOCs, secondly the same figures for WCR specifically and finally the figures for WCR operation of the Jacobite in isolation. Personally speaking I think these are very relevant, if I have missed them or other similar facts can somebody bump them please.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there a risk of them being ejected from the vehicle? The Croydon tram crash deaths and how they happened suggests that might not be such a bad idea in some cases.

Ejection mitigation is generally done on rail by way of double glazed, laminated glass. Totally different from road vehicles.

 

[jupiter]

What we, the uninformed, expect when we move about is that the informed have taken steps to ensure we can do this safely without stupid accidents.

The informed have experience of the accidents that can happen in their specialist areas. They investigate to find out why they happened and work out how to stop them happening again. They spend time thinking about "what if" scenarios, and work out how to stop them happening at all.

Every time I get in a lift, on an aircraft, or negotiate a road junction, I'm happy they do this. In fact, I think I'd rather they did more of it than less.

Now and again it seems that some players, manufacturers, operators, put profitability ahead of safety. Remember the poster in the car garage? "Your job can be good, quick or cheap. Pick two."

This isn't about "health & safety gone mad", it's about an operator when faced with the decision "profitable or safe", have evidently not yet selected very wisely.

 

[DarloRich]

All I am trying to do is add a bit of balance regarding other operators and the general state of safety on the railways, it is perfectly acceptable for the travelling public to have opinions based on nothing more than their travelling experience, I also value the opinions of Railwaymen/women such as yourself, this forum is a broad church and long may it continue.I have never put myself forward as an expert in railway safety, however I have noticed that whenever criticism points at anyone on the railways other than WCR regarding safety then the ranks on here close, it is very noticeable.

Most operators don't have the issues wcrc seem to have. Read the reports. They are all in the public domain.

Nobody on here is arguing that the eradication of non CDL slammers by the TOCs nearly 20 years ago didn't make a big difference to safety, the figures speak for themselves. What I would like now are some good old hard facts, if they are available. Firstly I would like to know the figures for injuries and deaths caused by slam doors ( CDL or not) in use by charter operators since their eradication from the network by the main TOCs, secondly the same figures for WCR specifically and finally the figures for WCR operation of the Jacobite in isolation. Personally speaking I think these are very relevant, if I have missed them or other similar facts can somebody bump them please.

This whataboutery is maddening and tiresome. The case here is really simple: wcrc had an exemption to the requirement to fit central door locks. They were found not to complying with those rules and they were punished for that. They then went to court and lost. The rest is just noise.


Btw: the figures you want are zero. However that doesn't matter. Your views or my views on the rules don't matter. What matters is what the rules say and what the punishment for breaking those rules is.

The regulator has bent over backwards over many years in favour of WCRC but that patience has finally run out.

if you are unsure read the reports. It isn't a conspiracy.


I will add a ps: I have been on several wcrc tours over the years. I have seen a couple of "old school" approaches to things but nothing unsafe but clearly things have been going on that the regulator doesn't find acceptable.

 

[Belfastmarty]

Nobody on here is arguing that the eradication of non CDL slammers by the TOCs nearly 20 years ago didn't make a big difference to safety, the figures speak for themselves. What I would like now are some good old hard facts, if they are available. Firstly I would like to know the figures for injuries and deaths caused by slam doors ( CDL or not) in use by charter operators since their eradication from the network by the main TOCs, secondly the same figures for WCR specifically and finally the figures for WCR operation of the Jacobite in isolation. Personally speaking I think these are very relevant, if I have missed them or other similar facts can somebody bump them please.

Statistics for previous times are immaterial here. What is being mitagated is RISK, ie the potential that something COULD happen. Just because I didn't have a car crash yesterday doesn't mean I can't have one today.

 

[Gaz67]

Whilst I do agree that this non compliance was a serious matter, I do not believe this is a main part of the ORR argument: every other remaining CDL exemption was granted either with additional mitigation (e.g. NYMR 25mph limit) or a plan from the stock owner/operator to fit CDL.

In fact one of the legal arguments WCRC presented, which was dismissed by the court, was unequal treatment. (Yet in their update, WCRC continue to claim being treated differently to other operators). Last year's Jacobite prohibition did not form part of the legal argument.

We should also be wary on conflating two different things: IMHO the debate around the CDL regulation linked but not the same as whether operators should be picking and choosing which regulations they comply with.


One word: Culture

That's fair enough, it's a recurring theme on here regarding WCR, it muddies the waters somewhat in the debate about

Most operators don't have the issues wcrc seem to have. Read the reports. They are all in the public domain.


This whataboutery is maddening and tiresome. The case here is really simple: wcrc had an exemption to the requirement to fit central door locks. They were found not to complying with those rules and they were punished for that. They then went to court and lost. The rest is just noise.


Btw: the figures you want are zero. However that doesn't matter. Your views or my views on the rules don't matter. What matters is what the rules say and what the punishment for breaking those rules is.

The regulator has bent over backwards over many years in favour of WCRC but that patience has finally run out.

if you are unsure read the reports. It isn't a conspiracy.


I will add a ps: I have been on several wcrc tours over the years. I have seen a couple of "old school" approaches to things but nothing unsafe but clearly things have been going on that the regulator doesn't find acceptable.

What I am saying is that it is impossible to discuss slam door ops (CDL or not) and WCR at the same time, it leads to the angry responses I get all the time on here. Zero , I honestly wasn't expecting that btw. WCR lapses in safety in the past and slam door operation going forward are two separate issues and to discuss them together muddies the water in my opinion, anyway I am satisfied in my mind that the operation of the Jacobite with a fully compliant WCR is of virtually no risk to the travelling public, not zero risk , that is impossible. Anyway that's me done on this thread, off to find my pics of my 85 freedom of Scotland for the nostalgia thread.

 

[anothertyke]

Nobody on here is arguing that the eradication of non CDL slammers by the TOCs nearly 20 years ago didn't make a big difference to safety, the figures speak for themselves. What I would like now are some good old hard facts, if they are available. Firstly I would like to know the figures for injuries and deaths caused by slam doors ( CDL or not) in use by charter operators since their eradication from the network by the main TOCs, secondly the same figures for WCR specifically and finally the figures for WCR operation of the Jacobite in isolation. Personally speaking I think these are very relevant, if I have missed them or other similar facts can somebody bump them please.

I am somewhat sympathetic to your position, but I don't think the question can be answered simply. Or rather the simple answer seems to be zero, zero and zero. BUT

Back in 2014, the ORR was considering whether fitting of CDL to slam door stock used for charters on the main line was really necessary. Then came the fatalities at Balham (442) and Twerton ( HST). Those events caused a rethink leading to their 2019 decision that the exemption regime would end in 2023. The relevance of those two sad events to stewarded charter operations is of course arguable.

Also, where you have rare events such as these, it is also relevant to consider 'near misses' in which category there are at least three in the public domain, one at Bath spa station, one at York station and one at Reading. Those could have resulted in injury but didn't.

Then you come to the question of what the appropriate mitigation is--- are window bars, stewards and internal door locks enough, what does CDL add? Does the risk change justify the cost? Whatever you or I may think, the regulator decided it did and when legitimately challenged at the JR, its position was comprehensively upheld.

So where we are now is that WCR are seeking a further temporary exemption on the basis of ORR's need to consider WCR's application which seeks to demonstrate that, in the circumstances of the Jacobite, CDL adds nothing to the overall safety case. But that looks like an attempt to rerun the JR.

There is a good fifteen minute review of this on the Green Signals podcast #26, the double act by Nigel Harris and Richard Bowker.

 

[Wolfie]

What we, the uninformed, expect when we move about is that the informed have taken steps to ensure we can do this safely without stupid accidents.

The informed have experience of the accidents that can happen in their specialist areas. They investigate to find out why they happened and work out how to stop them happening again. They spend time thinking about "what if" scenarios, and work out how to stop them happening at all.

Every time I get in a lift, on an aircraft, or negotiate a road junction, I'm happy they do this. In fact, I think I'd rather they did more of it than less.

Now and again it seems that some players, manufacturers, operators, put profitability ahead of safety. Remember the poster in the car garage? "Your job can be good, quick or cheap. Pick two."

This isn't about "health & safety gone mad", it's about an operator when faced with the decision "profitable or safe", have evidently not yet selected very wisely.

Well said, sir.

I wonder how informed in reality some of those taking potshots at the truly informed actually are.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Ejection mitigation is generally done on rail by way of double glazed, laminated glass. Totally different from road vehicles.

Exactly, and why seat belts are not required on most rail stock. Plus modern high-back seats acting as restraints to stop you flying around hitting other people if there is a serious accident.

 

[Wolfie]

I am somewhat sympathetic to your position, but I don't think the question can be answered simply. Or rather the simple answer seems to be zero, zero and zero. BUT

Back in 2014, the ORR was considering whether fitting of CDL to slam door stock used for charters on the main line was really necessary. Then came the fatalities at Balham (442) and Twerton ( HST). Those events caused a rethink leading to their 2019 decision that the exemption regime would end in 2023. The relevance of those two sad events to stewarded charter operations is of course arguable.

Also, where you have rare events such as these, it is also relevant to consider 'near misses' in which category there are at least three in the public domain, one at Bath spa station, one at York station and one at Reading. Those could have resulted in injury but didn't.

Then you come to the question of what the appropriate mitigation is--- are window bars, stewards and internal door locks enough, what does CDL add? Does the risk change justify the cost? Whatever you or I may think, the regulator decided it did and when legitimately challenged at the JR, its position was comprehensively upheld.

So where we are now is that WCR are seeking a further temporary exemption on the basis of ORR's need to consider WCR's application which seeks to demonstrate that, in the circumstances of the Jacobite, CDL adds nothing to the overall safety case. But that looks like an attempt to rerun the JR.

There is a good fifteen minute review of this on the Green Signals podcast #26, the double act by Nigel Harris and Richard Bowker.

Asking the regulator to reverse their position on the same basis that a Court has ruled was reasonable and proportionate seems like a truly forlorn hope. Had ORR been inclined to accept that they could have either not withdrawn the original exemption or not defended the Court case. Of course were they to choose to accept that position now they would doubtless face litigation from those who have complied at likely substantial cost.

 

[Mountain Man]

The latest WCR update (yesterday ) sounds quite positive on a workable outcome to me, I am a glass half full kind of person though, at Carlisle today to view Tangmere, got to say what I saw was in no way representative of many of the negative , hysterical views expressed on here , in my opinion. Can't beat getting out there and experiencing it close up and seeing railwaymen/women at work, may change a few views on here.

Read like trying not to lose bookings.

Of course it's going to be positive. It's basic marketing. They arent going to publish doom and gloom

 

[Bill57p9]

I am somewhat sympathetic to your position, but I don't think the question can be answered simply. Or rather the simple answer seems to be zero, zero and zero. BUT

Back in 2014, the ORR was considering whether fitting of CDL to slam door stock used for charters on the main line was really necessary. Then came the fatalities at Balham (442) and Twerton ( HST). Those events caused a rethink leading to their 2019 decision that the exemption regime would end in 2023. The relevance of those two sad events to stewarded charter operations is of course arguable.

Also, where you have rare events such as these, it is also relevant to consider 'near misses' in which category there are at least three in the public domain, one at Bath spa station, one at York station and one at Reading. Those could have resulted in injury but didn't.

100%: learning from events that either did or could have become nasty is a critical part of any safety culture. If nothing else it can avoid future backlash along the lines of "they were warned" (think Challenger, Columbia, Boeing 737 Max, Ladbroke Grove, ...)

So where we are now is that WCR are seeking a further temporary exemption on the basis of ORR's need to consider WCR's application which seeks to demonstrate that, in the circumstances of the Jacobite, CDL adds nothing to the overall safety case. But that looks like an attempt to rerun the JR.

Have WCR actually applied for an exemption limited to the Jacobite? Or do they still expect a national exemption? I have seen nothing to suggest the former over the latter.
As has been discussed on this thread, the circumstances of the Jacobite (45mph operation on a quiet 45mph single track railway with low footfall stations) offers further risk mitigation over a 95/100mph operation on a 125mph dual track railway through the likes of Reading, Birmingham New Street and York. Whether that mitigation is sufficient is a different matter - my question is whether it has been tested.

 

[anothertyke]

100%: learning from events that either did or could have become nasty is a critical part of any safety culture. If nothing else it can avoid future backlash along the lines of "they were warned" (think Challenger, Columbia, Boeing 737 Max, Ladbroke Grove, ...)


Have WCR actually applied for an exemption limited to the Jacobite? Or do they still expect a national exemption? I have seen nothing to suggest the former over the latter.
As has been discussed on this thread, the circumstances of the Jacobite (45mph operation on a quiet 45mph single track railway with low footfall stations) offers further risk mitigation over a 95/100mph operation on a 125mph dual track railway through the likes of Reading, Birmingham New Street and York. Whether that mitigation is sufficient is a different matter - my question is whether it has been tested.

I don't know. But I guess a Jacobite only exemption if granted would mean the Black fives would need to be up at Fort William leaving them unable to operate the RTC and own programme in England. So probably they would need a national exemption.

 

[Wolfie]

100%: learning from events that either did or could have become nasty is a critical part of any safety culture. If nothing else it can avoid future backlash along the lines of "they were warned" (think Challenger, Columbia, Boeing 737 Max, Ladbroke Grove, ...)


Have WCR actually applied for an exemption limited to the Jacobite? Or do they still expect a national exemption? I have seen nothing to suggest the former over the latter.
As has been discussed on this thread, the circumstances of the Jacobite (45mph operation on a quiet 45mph single track railway with low footfall stations) offers further risk mitigation over a 95/100mph operation on a 125mph dual track railway through the likes of Reading, Birmingham New Street and York. Whether that mitigation is sufficient is a different matter - my question is whether it has been tested.

The thing is that if a Jacobite only exemption was granted and then, God forbid, there was a fatal incident ORR would be crucified for ignoring WCRC's frankly abysmal record.