Common safety & acess procedures?

Admin please move this to another section if so deemed; I only posted it here as it (IMO) affects all pres lines & centres.

Shed visits & line side photos.

A friend visited a preserved railway "North of the Wash" and asked to take a photo of one particular loco that was in the shed. To take that one photo he was told have to buy an annual lineside permit and to gain entry to the shed he'd also have to join the Society for a year
Two other railways in the Midlands state categorically no entry to the sheds whilst another havs decided only members of the operating staff who are actually on duty are permitted entry to their shed.
Meanwhile on my last visit to Loughhborough, I didn't have time for a ride on the GC, but was able to buy a platform ticket that also permitted entry to the engine shed. Many other lines sell reasonably priced Lineside photo permits just for a day, weekend or gala duration.

My point is that presumably, all centres and lines are governed by the same legislation, but some permit what others do not. Please discuss...........

 

The Railway Magazine for April 2012 (the current edition at the time of writing) has a comprehensive overview of lineside and shed access and photography on heritage railways.

The matter is not guided entirely by legislation, other than the rule book the particular heritage railway works to is a legal document. There is also the railway's view on the risks of being sued if something goes wrong. It is also apparent that shed and workshop visits are being cut back to reduce the possibility of thieves using such visits to plan metal thefts.

Other factors are the presence or lack of it of staff, both volunteers and paid. No two of our heritage lines are identical (which is part of the attraction) and therefore no two are run in identical fashion.

Hope this is a starting point for discussion,
John Webb

 

Why did you deem it necessary to put 'North of the Wash'? Is there something different about such places? Are you insinuating that south of the Wash you are welcomed with open arms yet north of that place is uninviting?
If you weren't making a particular point, it was a stupid and unnecessary thing to put.

 

This is an oft-discussed problem to which there is no answer. In essence each line has to have a Safety Management System in place which details all the necessary procedures which will be applied in the normal workings of that heritage line / operation. Within those procedures should be that of access to the property and - if carrying passengers - the procedures to be adopted for carrying them on trains in safety, including the procedures to be adopted when an accident occurs to trains carrying passengers at the time of the accident.

Within that SMS remit each line must judge what accesses may be required by the public, what risk(s) will such access engender, what actions need to be taken to facilitate - and make safe - that access and whether the cost of providing that access is cost effective i.e earns more money than it costs.

A couple of examples will suffice to explain; the Llangollen Railway operates on sections of line with tight clearances and crews have expressed concern at lineside access hence to ensure crew safety and avoid risk of injury / death to linesiders, lineside access is only allowed to working members actually engaged on railway business. There is no exceptions and whilst during the last Steel Steam and Stars in 2009 lineside access was temporarily extended to photo charter participants for the event only, the rule of No Lineside Access is still rigidly applied.

However this question of access goes back even further to the 1980s when Carnforth Steamtown was a regular site to visit when chasing steam workings on the S&C. As David Smith gradually extended his rolling stock hire business the site became more of a workplace and less a museum site leading to the question being posed as to whether the site should allow visitors and comply with the relevant safety measures or accept it had become a workplace as defined by the Shops & Factories Act of the day. The owner accepted that the cost of safety provision for visitors was greater than any income that would be generated hence his understandable decision to close the site to visitors and formally accept the legal provisions of the Shops & Factories Act regarding access to the site.

It is unfortunate that many heritage lines have grown beyond their initial installations but have failed to recognise that, as they grow more they create greater risks for visitors, yet do not update their procedures in acknowledgement of this. Some lines will grant lineside access but subject to specific conditions, others will not allow it under any circumstance and others have yet to decide what level of access can be allowed and have given a low priority to making that decision in view of other legal formalities which they are involved in as part of operating their respective train services.

It is therefore a major point that each line will have its own level of accesses and a common procedure is virtually impossible to design; I understand the HRA is currently looking at the vexed question of lineside access but has yet to find common ground to initiate any standard procedure for all heritage lines / operations.

 

Each line/centre has unique arrangements which will depend on a range of factors, such as lineside clearances (think of the Ffestiniog Railway, pretty much zero clearance for much of the line) , amount of activity at sheds/ stations, access points via footpaths or not etc, visibility, what stock is used and a host of other considerations. My own local line(MHR) has had accidents to passengers and loco crew, as well as other incidents (fires and thefts) but I cannot recall any incidents regarding linesiders, except for issues of trespass on local Farmers' fields. Others here may be able to name some, I think there was an issue a few years back at a (diesel?) gala. I do use my PTS to take photos when not on volunteer turns, as do others, as volunteers we are "railway people" first and photographers second, and would not nowingly do anything that could result in trouble for "our" railway, but I do realise that I am in a lucky position to be able to lineside, and that there may come a time when such access is curtailed by the Management, or even by legislation if that is deemed neccessary.

 

Yes... though apparently the SVR declined to respond, which was odd considering dozens of other lines answered. I'm assuming there was a communications breakdown somewhere, or that nobody with the authority to speak for the SVR was available at the time, since I can't imagine any reason a railway would outright refuse to answer questions on a topic of interest to so many people.

 

Apparently they (SVR) stated that they did not wish to be included in the survey. But they didn't give a reason for this. There is nothing obvious on their website about lineside passes, although the RM article says that it understands such passes are issued.

 

WSR have just issued a new list of no-go areas:
http://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/shopimages/articles/extra/WSR Restricted Areas amended.pdf
Photographers especially please note.

Steve

 

Yes, I've now seen the article, and the actual wording only increases my confusion. (Easy to do, admittedly!) I'm not a linesider myself, so could easily be missing something obvious, but assuming the questions were asked in a sensible manner, it seems a distinctly strange response. Given that the SVR isn't a "no linesiding, full stop" railway, it's reasonable for prospective linesiders to want to know the line's policy, surely. The newish SVR Live website seems the obvious place to publish it. The SVR definitely seems to be improving in terms of openness and communication, but that still has a few strange exceptions -- the truly astounding lack of a general enquiries email facility is one, and this is another. Saying (in effect) "no comment" is almost always the best way to convince people you have something to hide, even when you don't!

 

I've only just noticed the small box bottom left of page 32 which lists another dozen railways which did not respond at all to requests for information, so the SVR wasn't entirely on it's own.

 

That's true, and a fair point. That said, some of those others might (I don't know) simply be down to disorganisation. If what RM says is accurately worded, the SVR did respond, but actively declined to co-operate with the article. It looks... well, rather silly, to be honest. It's not as if they needed to go into immense detail. If the response had been on the lines of this (entirely fictional and hypothetical!) response:

"The SVR told us that lineside passes may be issued, subject to certain conditions; prospective lineside photographers are asked to get in touch with [contact] for further information."

then, although it still wouldn't have been as good as having a clear policy posted up on an SVR website, I wouldn't have found it anything like as unsatisfactory. It's basically the same vague response, just presented in a slightly better way!

 

Perhaps the RM's interest in lineside photographic passes just isn't the most important thing on their radar just now so responding simply got prioritised out?

 

That could be the case, yes. I've no idea exactly when the RM asked its questions, and it might have been (for example) at a hectic time in arranging gala details. That said, I think a railway with 200,000+ visitors a year really ought to have a policy statement ready and waiting on an issue like this; it's hardly an unforeseeable or unreasonable question to ask, after all. That way the SVR could have just referred the magazine to "our web page at X" and satisfied all concerned in 30 seconds flat.

I don't want to blow this out of proportion; this isn't an issue that I'm going to write to my MP about or anything! I like the SVR, and am proud to have it based in my home town. On the whole I think it's an excellent railway; it just has a couple of odd holes which I think could be filled pretty easily for an overall benefit to all concerned, and this is one of them.

(Rather off-topic, so just as an aside, but related: photography policies at many tourist attractions, even major ones, are hopelessly vague and out of date. In the age of Flickr etc, it's long since ceased to be the case that "personal and non-commercial" implies "unpublished".)

 

Sorry to tell you Steve it was the Spring steam gala back in 2004 that put a stop to photo permits on the MHR and not the diesel gala.


14th May 2004: LINESIDE PHOTOGRAPHIC PERMITS
It is with much regret that the Mid Hants Railway have taken the decision to withdraw this facility, but following untoward incidents at the recent Branch Line Event, the whole ethos of Lineside Photographic Permits has been called into question.
Since the Railway first put permits on sale in December 1983 much has changed, especially with regard to the safety of personnel who need to be On or About the Line. MHR staff are required to comply with the Railway’s Safety Case, which calls for ALL personnel who are required to be On or About the Line to comply with the following conditions:
1. They have to be medically fit, especially vision and hearing, and sign an undertaking to that effect
2. They are required to undertake a training course
3. They have to pass written and practical tests
4. They must wear approved high visibility garments
5. They must carry their identification certified at all times
6. They must undertake a retest every two years
With all that in mind the decision has been taken that the sale and use of Lineside Photographic Permits be withdrawn WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT
PLEASE NOTE THAT COMMENCING FORTHWITH LINESIDE PHOTOGRAPHIC PERMITS HAVE NO VALIDITY ON THE MID HANTS RAILWAY
Photography from stations is unaffected provided the person concerned holds a valid ticket or authority issued by the Railway.
P.Hawley
Superintendent of Operations

 

Thanks Lee, my memory is very fallible, my age you know! Anyway I;ve had a look at this year's Spring Gala allocations and will no doubt see you somewhere near Ropley or Wanders!

 

I'm there all three days. I would think there should be some different light condition for photoing between Friday and Sunday with the start of British summer time.