West Somerset Railway General Discussion

See post 26937

 

I acknowledge that views vary, but his perception - here and elsewhere - accords with my observations of the nature of the operation of the NYMR over recent years, particularly over the use of pre-Mk1 stock.

 

That doesn't answer the question, given how the law is written.

 

It's not on the list! I don't particularly see a need to do so either, the point of masks is to protect other people, if the only people in your compartment are within your household anyway it would seem a bit pointless. I'd imagine they'd be more relevant when people are getting on and off using the corridor. It's certainly going to be interesting to see how it all works out.

 

The big difference is that the compartment stock on the IOW is non-corridor so once groups or individuals have been escorted to their compartment, there they stay until the doors are opened to let them out at the end of their journey. The only corridor vehicles are the Ventnor West set where the two carriages are joined by a bellows connection which can be locked shut leaving each third class saloon (both with peripheral seating) to accommodate small groups. Compartments will be disinfected between trips and the timetable has been adjusted to aid this.

 

Just read the website as suggested.

 

Statutory Instrument 2020 No. 592, law since 15th June, doesn't appear to give 'reasonable excuse' to passengers occupying compartment stock. My interpretation is that they will be breaking the law.

 

You don't need a face mask when...
"where a person is allocated a cabin, berth or other similar accommodation, at any time when they are in that accommodation—

(i)alone, or

(ii)only with members of their own household or a linked household;"

(From thed SI you quoted)

Ian C

 

I suggest it relies on the exemption contained in the regs (clause 3.3.g) which exempts a person from wearing a face covering.
"where a person is allocated a cabin, berth or other similar accommodation, at any time when they are in that accommodation—
(i)alone, or
(ii)only with members of their own household or a linked household;"
They would need to wear one in a corridor, though.

As to whether heritage railways fall under the regulations as public transport, that is quite clear in the regs and has been discussed in other threads: .
“Public transport service” means any service for the carriage of passengers from place to place which is available to the general public (whether or not for payment,....... and whether or not there are breaks in the journey)

edit: Beaten by ICKDAB

 

Yes, I absolutely agree with every word.

It is utterly unthinkable that an organisation review might be conducted anywhere other than under PDG auspices.

The County and District Councils both have opportunity of input within this forum. It is made for the job.

 

I'd forgotten that exemption, and can see how that may work with non-corridor stock, particularly noting the IOWSR's wording about travelling with members of the same household.

 

All this may well be true but I think that there has been a big influx of retirees to the area who have then become volunteers, and have no real interest in those NER/LNER roots - the NYMR has become a place for the elderly to amuse themselves playing trains while not really being bothered what those trains are. I would prefer to see it run along similar lines to Beamish, or the Bluebell, both of which are very successful but still pay serious attention to heritage matters. It continues to astonish me that the NYMR is a registered museum but has no heritage or collections policy that I know of.

 

This brings the basic problem to the fore IMHO. The WSR started off as a volunteer led heritage railway but has now grown into a sizeable commercial enterprise where commercial activity brings about the involvement of legal rights and responsibilities. No longer a case of "turn up and play", the current WSR needs to have documentation covering its actions and activities (as witnessed by the ORR action earlier this year) and a responsible commercial attitude. It is this move from enthusiast to commercial activity that I believe lies at the heart of the current malaise with the WSR failing to adapt its structure sufficiently to meet the new environment. One had hoped that the hiatus of the present "lockdown" would have provided the opportunity to re-structure ready to meet the post-covid19 scenario but the unwillingness of parties to (a) accept the changed environment (b) accept the need to create a suitable structure and (c) unwillingness to sacrifice rights of one body to gain a better organisation of all bodies is leading to a finale that will lose every body every right and privilege that they currently hold dear.

It seems that the bodies concerned are so desperate not to give up long-held rights they would rather lose everything gained over the last 40+ years. Dinosaurs indeed IMHO

 

Very few passengers were wearing face masks when I traveled on GWR on Wednesday from Bristol to Yeovil

 

I'd taken that to mean ferries, cruise ships and train sleeper berths but can see how it might be applied to railway carriage compartments, even if that might not have been the author's intent. Live test needed!

 

Quite a few lines have at least the odd example of a non-corridor compartment vehicle. It will be interesting to see how many have been maintained in a condition as to be readily usable.

 

On the Bluebell we are planning to use only non-corridor compartment stock, but the instructions at the moment still require masks, though I guess it is unenforceable once in a compartment. We are only planning to sell tickets to groups, i.e. per compartment. Who knows though what the guidance will be a month from now when we actually open - the situation is very fluid.

Tom

 

I've heard various stories about compliance on trains. But the law is explicitly clear on what you or I must do as passengers.

 

It is a legal requirement. However the operating companies are only required to notify passengers and provide the socially distanced accommodation, not police the regulations.