Tornado

Ok, not to disappoint : D'you think those cab lights use low energy light bulbs that take half an hour to turn on properly, or are they low voltage tungstens?

...with the modern credentials of the design, would LED cab lighting be a possibility?:fear:

:lol:

 

Whilst I know nothing about the specific issues, it seems to me that a number of the posters don't have much experience of what a nightmare the whole Quality Assurance/paperwork bit can be in a large organisation. There is an awful lot of box ticking, and IME decision making posts in such fields tends to attract a certain type of personality for whom the actual quality of work is not a consideration, since it falls outside their area of expertise. The first big shock I had when I came into contact with Quality Management Systems, as that branch of paper pushing was called when I had dealings with it, was to find that the word Quality was a technical term which means something much closer to consistency in english, and had almost no connection at all with the word quality as it is generally used in the english language.

I think it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said "never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence". I think you could extend it to "never ascribe to incompetence what can be explained by bureacratic lack of communication". When practical people who are concerned with getting the job done properly collide with the paperpushocracy then all sorts of peculiar results can ensue. Naturally I don't know, but this has the smell of that sort of situation to me.

 

:help: :frusty: I'm flying out to Germany for a few days this afternoon, I don't know how I'm going to survive without my daily "fix" of this stuff. :wave:
When it rolls out again I hope they've got the colour right. Another few weeks of ramblings would be too much, enough to drive a fella to drink. eace:

 

don't worry you'll be able to catch up on it all on your return..............enjoy the beer!

 

Have to agree with that 100%, having been involved with implementing a QMS some years ago (at the wrong end, of trying to comply with it) when I worked for a large institution. It seemed to me that the object was not to ensure that things were done any better, or differently, but that everything was documented - In other words, things could still be done very badly but were well documented. And, of course, the opportunity was taken to get rid of all those people who weren't actually capable of doing the job and train them as auditors! This meant that they were now free to go round criticising the people actually doing the work, but of course as auduitors they only have to point out deficiencies in the paperwork, they don't have to make constructive criticism!

Unsurprisingly, I left that institution shortly afterwards and started my own business, where we were able to apply a rather more sensible approach to quality, making sure that we did things well but not documenting endless minutiae that didn't make any difference!

 

Based on the 3 days away we've just had at the WHR (no phones, TV or wireless - bliss!) I'd allow at least 1 hour/1 pint per day away to reprise this thread alone :fencing:

 

The only words of German I know are Zwei Bier Bitte :wacko: Perhaps it's best if I didn't mention steam boilers......................or the last war.

 

Quality does equal consistancy in any QMS, simply because you can never know that you are right, you can only know that you are being consistant. I would imagine that this seems to be daft to most people but it's true.

When I was first inducted into a drawing office at the age of 18 in 1962 this was one of the first things that was said to me. The reason was that if you made a mistake, it would be a consistant mistake, and therefore it would be far easier to find all instances of the mistake and hence to change them to something else that was correct. This worked just fine during my 22 yrs in a series of drawing offices and the reason was that it applied only to the drawings and other documents I was producing. There was no outside bureaucracy to convince and to interfere. Apply that to a large company and you immediately hit problems which I won't go into here!

I suspect that WCRC's QMS has been taken into account by its insurers including its insistance on approved suppliers. This insistance on approved suppliers can be seen as a mistake, a consistant mistake - a quality mistake if you like (!) - but it can't be changed because of the insurance issues. As other contributors have said, there is no reason why WCRC can't run a tour with 'Tornado' providing it's on another companies safety case, but perhaps WCRC's insurance policy precludes that too!

Never mind, I'm sure it will all come out well in the end and perhaps it might just provoke loco owners to form their own TOC as a co-operative.

Regards

 

The Hot air from this thread will now be used to warm up boilers before a fire is lit in them, thus putting it to good use.
Sure there are politics and personalities in this as in any business but there is far too much reading between the lines.
I dont see egg on any particular faces, i dont see the teddy thrown out of the cot, where is the Bat thats been taken Home ?
Remember that, as one poster has said, being for sale doesnt create an obligation to buy. and there may be underlying commercial factors; Tornado is a 'celebrity' and perhaps commands a premium which WCRC perhaps privately doesnt want to foot so far into this Year, with Bittern/ DoNZ and Scotsman also available for hire, Leander Dof S and USA are out but tangmere and two Brits are back, and others not far away now... and this has allowed a situation where parties can agree to differ.
One feels that if all these happy returns had still been 6 Months away there might have been more of a will to find a way through...

 

Talking about WW2 reminds me of a time when I was commissioning a machine before despatch to Germany. The customer a German asked if I had ever visited Dusseldorf, where it was going, to which I replied no. An older colleague who was with me said he had. The German gentleman asked if he had liked his visit, to which my colleague replied"don't know, we were bombing it". I had all on to stop laughing at the look on the customer,s face

 

Victor - We will be expecting a full consumer report on the beers sampled. Presume Mrs. V will be assisting with this. Never know, but you might even be able find some time to sample some steam out there as well.

 

You can add 'Dampflok' (steam loco) to your vocabulary, Victor.

 

Rather like a visit to Rottweil shed back in 1972. Fellow there said he had seen England but never been there. Turned out that he was one of the crew of a rail-mounted cross-channel gun.

 

My first (and many other) experience of quality management systems is that they aren't worth the paper they are written on. If you think your safety valves are set to 7.5 bar because you have a piece of paper from an accredited supplier that says so, don't believe it till you try them. That's just one of many. I could bore you with a lot of others, including springs, rivets and boiler tubes, all appropriate to us, but I won't.

 

Agree..........check everything.....

 

In my experience most QA systems eg ISO 2001 etc were little more than a tick box exercise in window dressing. Yes the design had been checked and approved and was to EN STD whatever. But if the designer was a muppet and the checker and approved just box tickers the job was still rubbish. And I've seen a few.

 

I know one local company which imports expensive capital goods from China and they just stick a CE mark on for resale. They have done no paperwork whatsoever to back this up, and dumb customers look at it, the CE mark, and think all is well.

 

If I may quote a comment by a representative from an accredited works, many years ago, when the mantra was being cascaded to the indians, and loco engineers were questioning why standards of finished locomotives had not improved - " Before accreditation we simply made random **** - now we make **** to a plan!" Unless quality is acceptable to the final user all this paper trailing is of no use whatsoever - is that what WCRC believe too?

I wonder though, what is the point of of a VAB, if TOC's can then decide which one they believe and which they don't? - as it appears that DBS are quite happy with the A1 Trust's paperwork and WCRC aren't.

Either assessor's accreditation by Network Rail has merit and can be relied on, or it doesn't. This appears to totally undermine their status

 

I think you might be right that Tormado commands a premium price, but I don't think your conclusions about WCRC's motivations are correct. I don't think that's how the railtour market works. I think it is the promotor (Steam Dreams, RTC, Vintage Trains, et al) who pays for the hire of locomotives, rolling stock, etc. The Train Operating Company (TOC, i.e. WCRC or DBS) is contracted to operate the train, provide footplate crew and guard and handle some (how much?) of the liaison with NR about routes and timings, and with the loco owners about things like coal and water stops. So I don't think WCRC or DBS benefit financially if a less-expensive loco is substituted for a "celebrity", unless there's some quirk of the loco that makes it more expensive or more difficult for their staff to operate (assuming that the replacement loco is not owned by the TOC, of course). Although the tour promotor may save a few pounds per mile, they may also lose a few customers who had booked for the particular loco - if not immediately, they make think twice before booking again.

In this case, the people I feel sorry for are Steam Dreams, and their customers. They will not now be able to use the advertised locomotive on a number of tours because of something that, even to a moderately knowledgable person, looks like a rather technical and esoteric disagreement. Also, they will have to make potentially expensive changes to TOC contracts for future tours if they wish to continue using 60163. Graham Bunker, in particular, must be in rather a difficult position: senior manager of Steam Dreams and the A1ST, and a WCRC fireman. Then again, maybe he's also in the best position to start mending fences.

class8mikado also hints that WCRC may favour the use of some locomotives over others. I don't think that is right. Both DBS and WCRC are well aware that they are in near-monopoly positions in the steam railtour market and, in the case of WCRC, have potential conflicts of interest, since senior WCRC people have interests in a number of steam locomotives. Therefore, they know they have to be seen to be quite fair in their dealings with actual and potential customers (tour promotors) and suppliers (loco owners, etc.) If the rail regulator thought there was evidence of unfair business practices, bad publicity and possibly heavy fines could follow.

 

you should follow "Zwei Bier bitte" with "mein Frau bezahlt" = my wife is paying.