Telford Steam Railway

Hi Folks,
Flicking through a copy of the latest issue of Rail Technology magazine at work today, I read a letter on the 'inbox' page from Ian Hughes at the Telford Steam Railway.
(Avaliable at the link below, page 21 of the web viewer)
Current Issue

Its concerning the ORR prosecution of said railway after an incident there.
I read the letter in total amazement, it seems to be an all out attack at the ORR for taking the action they did, and mentioning previous incidents on other railways where prosecution was not taken, (obviously Mr Hughes does not know the full facts of these) so feeling like the TSR was singled out for prosecution just to make an example for the rest.
I don't know what exactly went on to make the prosecution the option the ORR took, but it must have been very serious for them to have gone down that road. As for being singled out, well someones got to be first, could have been anyone.

One of the most jaw-dropping parts of the letter for me was where it mentions that the comments of the ORR inspector should not be taken notice of! Its like being stopped and given a caution by the police for doing 70 in a 30 limit, then driving away doing 90...

The TSR hopefully has fixed whatever problems there were, and should now be trying to be the ORR's friend. But unfortunately they seem to have gone down the road of making an enemy of the ORR, and I can't help feel that the TSR are committing suicide by publishing these comments in such a public way, in a publication read by many railway professionals, and indeed the ORR themselves. What the ORR must be thinking I would not like to say!

The ORR are the regulatory body for railways in the UK, and so what they say goes, no point arguing about it.

Mike.

 

I recall reading somewhere an article wherein the TSRs chairman - who was the man injured in the accident - totally taking on board what the ORR had to say and generally being very open and realistic about the whole thing.

So I do not think that the comments in this letter should be read as the official opinion of the TSR, rather the personal opinion of Mr. I Hughes (not to be confused with Mr. P. Hughes, the chairman).

 

I thought the guys at the TSR would have done things the correct way, and the letter indeed seems to be the writings of a 'loose cannon' (especially the part accusing the ORR of misconduct and favouritism, pretty serious allegations).

Problem is to an outsider reading the letter it seems to be from the TSR themselves, and so I hope the TSR does not suffer because of it.

Mike.