GWSR General Discussion and Operations

Maybe the real answer, Alex, lies with the insurers.

 

Plenty of shots from public areas though.

 

That wouldn’t surprise me at all.

 

I expect you're probably right.

 

Volunteers are trained, have experience of the line, positions of safety, have knowledge of safety procedure and are lineside for a reason.

Photographers are probably not any of the above

 

I can't speak for the GWSR, but on my railway, photography permit holders have certainly more PTS training than the average volunteer, and some photographers will have more PTS training and experience than some PTS-passed volunteers. One thing they should learn, indeed, is that they should only be lineside for a reason: in their case it is photography.

Incidentally my railway does have lineside areas that are out of bounds to photography permit holders due to increased risks - tunnels, for example.

 

Plan to visit tomorrow to get done 6023 haulage. Anyone know which diagram it's on?

 

Should be train 1.

 

I wouldn't know what the rule book of GWSR requires, but, from experience of working on 4 infrastructure controllers (2 public sector, 2 heritage sector), PTS does not allow someone to use equipment (apart from undertaking visual inspections) without a lookout. Clearly, most photographers are using equipment that of necessity requires them to place their attention through a limited field, without a lookout, and therefore with less attention to what is going on around them.

I have to say that I have positive experience of encountering a photographer who thought they were videoing from a safe space and who clearly did not expect the train I was in the cab of to be coming - purely because the train they were focused on was coming in the opposite direction. Fortunately, slow speed meant that the train was stopped before reaching them - but they were unaware of it until the driver got out of the cab, and walked up to them to ask them if they wouldn't mind adopting a safer position. Their response to the driver was that they 'had a permit, and had NR PTS' (which on that railway exempted them from the railway's internal PTS) - completely ignoring the fact that if the train had not stopped short they would have been hit. Anyone working lineside (which I would include taking photographs) should only work within protection or with a lookout.

Ever since that experience, I have been somewhat sceptical of claims that lineside photographers are not a risk.

 

Thanks. Now to devise a plan that gets me haulage, a photo or two and a visit to a pub in Broadway.

 

Ian, don't forget to do a report on whats on offer if you do find a pub, those of us who like you inhabit the NP Tap await your report and who knows, if its good a works outing might be on ,

 

I always find the better pictures come from the safe side of the fence. Is it naive to say the local OS map to find access to suitable footpaths, over bridges etc ,good footwear and a day rover ticket may be a better investment than a PTS?

 

Lineside Passes mean that the holders have PTS Certificates and are identifiable. This action by the GWSR means that those who go line side - and there will still be plenty - will not have PTS and are not identifiable.

It seems like a head in the sand reaction to me.

 

There are certainly some great shots to be had from public places, but there isn't really a convenient public footpath that goes along a significant length of the line like, say, the SVR, but more perpendicular paths which don't really link up to each other.

And without going lineside you do miss out on some great views:







And those are just the ones 3 minutes walk either side of the C+W workshops, there are some great ones to be had south of the tunnel and on to Gotherington, and the approach to Broadway which I still haven't got round to doing. Trouble is, whenever I find I can be on the railway I always seem to end up volunteering for something!

 

Linesidew photographers are a risk. Not every lineside photographer, I hasten to add but I don't know a way of differentiating them. Having the knowledge to gain a PTS isn't a difficult thing to do but it doesn't stop people doing daft things. As a driver, lineside photographers are one of my bigger worries. You come round a curve to find one scuttling across the track to get to the other side, you see one fall off one of those stepladders some cart around (fortunately sufficiently clear of the track The worst one, though was on a photo charter. After a runpast and ready to set back for another only to discover two had gone behind the last coach to look at their photos because it was the only place they could get some shade.
However, the big difference between a volunteer on duty and a photographer being lineside is that the former needs to be there, the latter doesn't. Volunteers not needing to be on the lineside are effectively in the same category as photographers in this respect.

 

This is a classic one of a photographer near miss on the main line. The guy was very lucky

 

Somehow I doubt he had been PTS trained, though.

 

It is an action that means that unless someone is working they shouldn't be there, which is very clear. Anyone else is trespassing, which is also very clear.

Indeed. If he'd been PTS trained and was following NR rules (and several non-NR railways) he would have known that he should not be using equipment without a lookout (let alone using it whilst standing within 4 feet of a running line with back to traffic).

A reasonable and proportionate policy for lineside access by photographers would be that they should be PTS trained and have a lookout with them. However, I am not sure how many photographers would be willing to cover the cost of having a lookout trail the for the day!

In my time driving I can remember four emergency brake applications. One because a signalman put the board back in front of me a bit prematurely, a second because someone drove a car onto a AOCL crossing an played 'chicken' the train and two others because photographers were in places they should not have been and not paying enough attention to their surroundings - in one case someone with a Pass and the other an off-duty member of staff. Whilst unscientific, this sample would indicate that the risk is both real and present.

 

However as alluded to earlier if a photographer was to suffer an injury of some kind then the GWSR could not be found liable in court of negligence / breach of the legislation under which it is permitted to operate by the ORR.

The men / women from the Ministry have lost patience with the Heritage sectors continued failure to properly implement ROGS (as was most recently demonstrated by the SDR toilet incident). The views of NP members has zero influence with the people in curly wigs who, expect compliance with the law as it stands - not the "well the worst hasn't happened so far so such and such a practice must be fine" mentality expressed on here.

As was explained in a rather fiery thread on the subject some time ago, ALL RAILWAYS - Heritage or otherwise have an obligation under the ROGS legislation to (i) prevent unauthorised access to their infrastructure and (ii) put in place a rigorous system of training + periodic assessment for those they do chose to authorise.

Banning all lineside access for everyone other than the railways own staff (by which I mean p-way, fencing gangs, S&T etc who have undertaken an internal PTS course) or simply banning lineside access for those unwilling to attend a photographers PTS are the only two legal options Heritage Railways have if they wish to remain compliant with the law.

Under such a regime anyone going lineside without a PTS is trespassing and the railway cannot be held liable for them being there - assuming that all lineside fencing is of good quality and of a suitable type (e.g. palisade in urban areas with trespass problems) and all the necessary signage is in place at potential access points (platform ramp ends, foot crossings etc)