RAIB Investigation: South Devon Railway

Can you provide the statistics to back that statement up? I am not as sure as you that the lessons have been noted.

 

Sadly, there will always be people out there who are convinced they know better than the authors of the safety management system.

Sawdust.

 

But the fact that the staff are doing what they do, other volunteers aren't pulling them up for it, and the management aren't responding suggests that the railway can't "learn" by itself. It may be perfectly obvious to others, but how do you get a railway to realise it, if they don't realise already.

 

Why should I provide statistics. I believe you like them?
I only mentioned in my post, discussions. I did not infer that lessons were, or were not, learned. Given the volume of posts, here and on other fora, following the reports of the Court appearance and RAIB report and also at the time of the accident, I guess it has been a talking point on most heritage railways. I also referred to those 'who were worth their salt', so I guess you possibly know of some who might ignore the RAIB recommendations. Equally I could ask for statistics/names etc. but I won't.

 

In a hobby/pastime/interest where many of its protagonists put so much emphasis on things like what colour something is painted, are you entirely surprised by this?

 

I dont think your rudeness is justified, and your assertion that the lesson will have been considered is counter to the considerable anecdotal evidence of my own and other peoples experience. It was reasonable therefore to ask if you had contrary evidence that showed that the lesson for others had been taken on board. I rather suspect that for many people the attitude will be "well it couldnt happen here", and that is a dangerous path. Safety Management Systems are only worthwhile if the contents become the "way things are done round here". Failures of the system are inevitable, and what then becomes imperative is that no one "walks past" a problem and everyone feels that they can say "stop".

 

Indeed, and that wasn't the point I was trying to make. I have no issue with the idea of spreading the cost over a period, and if the fine had been tripled I'd have no issue with tripling the time in which to pay it either.

The point is, the fine of "only" 40k doesn't really do justice to the seriousness of what almost happened, in my opinion. To equate the cost of a child's life with the cost of, say, a new Mercedes, seems to trivialise it a bit. Also, the next time someone says "can you just bodge it together and get it in traffic ASAP", it would be really good if the fitter was able to say "can you afford £x if someone sees it and reports it? And furthermore, if you can, you can afford to buy another coach, so sod off". 40k doesn't quite cut it, it's the sort of number where some idiot might still take the risk.

Still, I don't want to turn a debate over the incident into a debate over the fine, so I'll leave it at that.

I hope, though, that someone has had a quiet word in the ear of the directors of the SDR and pointed out that in slightly different circumstances, some of them could well have been looking at jail time.

By the way, for the record, I've never been to the SDR but I have met two of their volunteers and they were both consumate professionals. I am sure the entire railway isn't rotten from top to bottom. I don't buy this idea of them being a 'small' railway though - they've been at it almost 50 years in one form or another, and should really be one of the more professional outfits by this point.

 

This problem sadly exists in a lot of our preserved railways today.

 

Penalties imposed have to be proportional to the issue itself. If anyone had been killed or seriously injured the penalty in this case could have been imprisonment of fitters/ managers / directors.

Courts cannot completely consider what might have been.

The £40k fine and £13k costs will seriously damage SDRs finances, that sort of figure is the difference between profit or loss for a heritage railway.

Perhaps the fine would have been better spent on repairing coaches?

 

There was no intended rudeness, but I am sorry that you read into my post a lot which was not there.

 

I can't help wondering if the issue was not cost, but time from suitably skilled individuals. As you say, though, the time for that consideration was before the incident; what's happened since is the materialisation of a risk that I suspect wasn't properly considered.

 

From the report however once the SDR were aware of what happened, the response was far from prompt and adequete

 

The final arbiter of a vehicle being fit to run lies with the guard. It may however take a very strong minded individual to red card a vehicle when C&W have passed it fit to run.

My ultimatr motivation is that as a guard if I get it wrong its a day out with thr magistrate

 

Which makes one wonder why their standards didn't so much as fall down here as plummet off of Beachy Head while backwards and on fire. C&W has long been a "neglected" element of smaller lines, precisely because the motive power can be such a money sink, but I wouldn't expect it of such an old line as the SDR.

That being said, the current fine of around £60k (when all costs are factored in) would be something that could give other lines pause. £60k is an enormous bite out of any reserves, and I suspect even the members of the Premier League would find that sum eye watering, especially as its not going on the railway.

 

It seems clear from reading the RAIB report that the Guard had not properly checked the train anyway, so their confidence to overrule C&W is a moot point in any case.

There seems to have been failures on a number of levels.

As for the importance of safety culture: I often see people on here and elsewhere advocating what you could call "backinthedayism": grumbling at the obligations of safety culture and even sometimes claiming that railway preservation would never have got going if modern regulations had applied fifty years ago. People should have the common sense to look after themselves, is a frequent refrain. This incident might not have been caused by that sort of attitude, but is exactly the type of incident that such an attitude leads to.

 

It is extremely difficult to educate some volunteers, especially those who have never been employed in a safety critical industry.
Even basic things such as wearing safety glasses & dust masks are frowned upon by many.
Volunteers might step out of a clean & safe office environment one day into an industrial one the next day & their awareness of what is dangerous is unlikely to be what is required , especially in safety critical operations.

Bob.

 

I think taking a forty grand fine plus costs hit on your balance sheet. Getting a big b****cking and coming out of court with tail between legs is wise punishment. No doubt being told that they are going to be watched for a fair while aswell is warning enough to sort your self out.

 

You seem to have misunderstood my post. I do not suggest for a moment that the system failure is excusable.

 

People often say there is too much H&S compared to the old days. Well regarding railways we can get some idea of how safety was integral to the railways by comparing old rule books. I own SR (1933), lLMS (1939 reprint), the BR black book (1950s) , the Rail Industry group standards (on the web) and the SVR rules. What is suprising is not the diferences but the similarities. The big 4 took safety seriousy, even if at first sight we have more rules now