Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Good to see Chelfham open again - thanks for the update and photograph Mark and Nigel.

 

stooks are still seen widespread in this area,particularly south molton,winkleigh and dolton area,although these days they are wheat for thatching and not oats

 

Stooks was used in Warwickshire when I was young.

 

Much activity over the weekend, firstly around Rowley, and also exploratory work bridge 54, south of Blackmoor Gate. The Rowley clearance work continues on from that started in January.
This gorgeous view looking towards Blackmoor by James Bloomfield, shows work in progress as of yesterday:
https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/files/embedded/imagesWorkingWeekend190330JamesBloomfield/image010.jpg

 

Good to see that the needless wearing of hi-viz vests is so prevalent on the railway before it has even been built. This really bodes well for the heritage feel once trains start running.

Just my opinion

Peter

 

Im no expert on h&s rules, but this probably has more to do with the presence of tracked vehicles, and people with chainsaws, etc.

 

I agree with your sentiment, but the hi-vis is not about it being a rail environment. Any construction site requires hard hat, hi-vis and safety boots and glasses and gloves (especially if vehicles/mobile plant are used). Health and safety legislation has had a positive effect on the wellbeing of those employed in construction and, however unnecessary/ unattractive it all may seem, it is here to stay. Those chaps simply do not have a choice whether or not they use PPE or not

 

Except that this clearly is not a construction site yet and there seems to be considerable choice about about the clothing worn in this picture. I agree entirely about the positive effect of H&S legislation, but the wearing of hi-viz vests unnecessarily does nothing to promote safety as it will not protect you from anything, least of all if you are stupid enough to get in harms way. It is a visibility aid, no more.

Peter

 

Excellent to see, I was wondering when work would recommence.

 

No. There is a requirement for a risk assessment. The risk assessment might have such requirements and over the last 40 years the trend has been for ever more onerous mitigations. Arguments will continue about their worth.

 

People like the nanny state. It is now embedded. Sorry but that ship has sailed get yer silly vest on and zip yer lip.

 

Whatever the legal requirements are - or not - for the wearing of Hi-Vis I have to say that if I was working there and someone gave me hi-vis clothing to wear I would happily accept rather than wear our my own clothing.

 

In other non tedious hi viz ranting news.

Lyn is currently being unloaded in Minffordd Yard for a little holiday.

Tim

 

There is a requirement for a risk assessment, and that risk assessment will inevitably require the use of PPE. In the event of an accident, the employer will have to answer if staff were not required to use "normal" measures to avoid the possibility of accidents. Not ensuring the use of a precaution which may have prevented that accident makes you "negligent", and will end up costing a lot of money.
Personally, I'd rather see the L&B spend its money on track and ballast, rather than litigation and fines.

 

I agree with the thrust if not the detail of your points despite previous posters inferring wrongly that I am wholly opposed to contemporary H&S processes. My quibbles with the posts above are not with what has become the practice but with the requirements of the relevant legislation. I know a little about this as for several years until retirement I had senior management oversight of H&S in a fairly complex organisation.

 

Not so many years ago, I worked on a land based maintenance contract for an offshore gas producer. Their requirements were very strict, applying 'rig' safety culture to the 'landfall' site, and even then into the office complex some 15 miles away inland. Having worked on MOD airfields and camps, their 'safety' regime was, to me, OTT. They wouldn't let me carry a spanner up the stairs, let alone my control system computer. No lift in the building, so a forklift truck was used to raise said spanner and computer to the first floor. Their plans came adrift as the FLT went over a speed bump and dropped the lot. I still hadn't worked out how they were going to get the FLT into the building to lift everything into the roof top plant room.... Back on topic, though, if the workers are all trackside trained to wear HV, then whenever they are tasked a job on the operational railway, the safety culture is already in place.

 

Oh dear - I wish now that I hadn't commented on the random wearing of HV vests in that picture. It was just a personal observation and not a very important one. It certainly does not warrant a serious debate about H&S.

I would add that in a heritage railway setting appropriate PPE does not have to always include HV clothing. Most heritage enginemen do not wear HV kit unless they are going trackside and some railways do not require it even then. With a little thought H&S and heritage can exist alongside each other without any compromises.

If people want to discuss this further I suggest a seperate thread.

Peter

 

Sorry if this isn't the appropriate thread to ask, but as Lyn is currently abroad does anyone know what loco is running the trains at Woody bay at the moment?

 

I suggest you ring Woody Bay Station on 01598 763487 for details like that. They are nearer to the coalface than anyone else!

Mike P

 

The rostered loco is Axe. Isaac is almost ready for service after an 18 month overhaul.