LMS Patriot Project Updates

In some sectors the ways of working evolved from inspectors on site, looking over the workers' shoulders, to Quality Control, with the QC system approved by the customer. Then that in turn evolved to Quality Assurance, with certification of the QA system by an independent body, which in turn is accredited by a national accreditation body. Sometimes that system has led to an emphasis on box ticking and losing sight of the ultimate purpose, but done properly it came to be regarded as better than the older ways.

 

That's because that's how marketing sells outsourcing.
Its the eternal dichotomy that you can't really properly monitor outsourced work without having the in house expertise, but you won't maintain the in house expertise unless you are actually doing the work.

 

Which it can and should. But that can only happen where the end customer remembers that what they’re paying someone else to do is their stuff, and that if it doesn’t do what they want it to, they will be the ones with a problem.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Well, my employer’s marketing department must hate me then, as I am always at pains to try to ensure that both customer and supplier come to the table to balance risk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Do they let you near the customer before the contract is signed? [grin]

 

So very true. I've often said that you can't outsource the problem you can only outsource the fun of fixing it. I have no problem with outsourcing work that will only need doing once in a blue moon, or to provide a temporary increase in capacity, but if its important activity that will be happening all the time you'd better understand it.

 

A lot of sound, basic, logical advice/comments..

 

I help negotiate them - and then run them post sales.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Absolutely agree! You know what you want, it is your responsibility to ensure that you get what you wanted.
'72010 Hengist' seems to have had a few issues lately with components and has been able to resolve them because of inspection and checking goods on receipt. That is how it should work, then everyone knows where they stand. If the specification is faulty then it is the specifiers fault.
It was not like this in the early days of rebuilds etc but now things have changed, for the better in my opinion.

 

As I understand things Llangollen Railway decided they didn't need a handover when the CME gave notice of impending retirement and decided he could leave almost immediately (would anyone with half a brain do this?). The then board didn't think this was a problem but it was beacause there was no handover, the new CME wasn't up to the job and things went rapidly downhill from there. They even managed to lose vast amounts of the paperwork which was supposed to be handed over when the loco was moved to Crewe.

 

Was that before or after the Patriot team had planned to move? That is an alarm bell and a half.

The smaller the organisation, the more important the individuals, which is always going to be a problem in the small-scale operations that are heritage railways. If Webb had dropped dead, then the next man would have stepped in without the world ending
Obviously a hand-over is good practice in any event, but it can be vit where all the "soft" knowledge is in one person's head.

 

This is factually inaccurate. The railway unfortunately did not advertise for a replacement CME, but promoted from within, despite a board resolution that they would advertise. Unfortunately governance of the old Llangollen PLC was extremely weak, paperwork was signed, a promotion made and the board didn't get their job advert! There was a period of hand over of a year. After which Dave Owen retired and offered his advice for free, he was on the end of the phone at all times and volunteer at the railway. The issue was, the phone never rang! When things went downhill, customers were blamed, the board naively bought these stories, and Dave Owen's view, which I know for a fact he gave, was completely ignored.

With the benefit of this report, as someone who saw all this happen from the inside, I hope you will agree your 'half a brain' comment was rash and entirely misplaced.

The loss of paperwork affected many engines.

 

As any of us could get killed in a road accident at any time then ideally a handover to an in house appointment should be unnecessary. However it frequently doesn't work like that.
I left an employment I had been working many years in the midst of a major reorganisation, and had no idea who I should be handing over too as all jobs were being completely reorganised. So I spent my notice period working very hard on documenting everything I was involved in. Subsequent events demonstrated that no-one bothered to read the documentation!

 

As a member of the board when Dave expressed his wish to retire, two of us advised and voted against the internal appointee, but were overruled.
This scenario happened later again when two directors were given the job of appointing a Chief Engineer with the ultimate result of the downfall of the railway . I was the only director with any commercial experience, but any advice offered was constantly turned down by a small clique of fellow directors.
I and a fellow director were told off for having the cheek to sit in on a meeting with a client !
I can understand why Dave Owen is unhappy, and with the stunt pulled on 7822 by a director and an engineer when the lockdown started ,I personally was disgusted although once again was overruled.

Bob.

 

What was the stunt?

 

When the national lockdown was announced it coincided with 7822's move to the West Somerset Railway. The WSR asked for the move to be postponed because of this. A certain engineer employed by the plc told them that they had to remove the loco from site, and when I suggested that they take a coach from the carriage works and put 7822 in there I was given the excuse that there was no shunter available.
This piece of idiocy resulted in an extra bill of several thousand pounds for the plc when money was already tight.

Bob.

 

Yeah that does sound rather silly putting it lightly

 

I appreciate that Bob, that all fits with what I've heard from other sources.

 

Remove the engine from site, despite Foxcote having its own shed at Llangollen, which we couldn't use because a certain 9F had to be inside instead. All railways had by this time closed their doors and sent their staff home. Foxcote spent lockdown in a barn in Dorset, for which the society paid rent, and of course we had to take out insurance.

 

Whoever is at fault, in the end it's a tragedy for anyone who's ever been involved at Llangollen (I was a volunteer there as a teenager in the nineties).
Llangollen without Foxcote is greatly impoverished, and Foxcote on another railway is just another GW loco.
I do hope that everyone can put whatever happened behind them, and have a fresh start working to revitalise a successful highly scenic railway with lovely stations and interesting and appropriate motive power, including Foxcote.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk