East Lancs Railway

I think you’re ignoring a massive question here and that’s if an incident has occurred then surely it’s better to admit that it has rather than just deny it ever happened despite evidence to the contrary?
We all know how much you like to be correct on such matters, why is this one any different?

 

I would have thought that this incident would have been reported to the RAIB, even as a matter of courtesy.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Reports to the RAIB are made as a matter of law, not courtesy, and the categories of event required to be reported are well-defined. If the derailment did not occur on or block a running line open to traffic (I don't know where this one took place), and did not result in personal injury, it would not be reportable.

 

It was in the platform at Rawtenstall

 

https://twitter.com/Raw_10_stall/status/1684290411341262855?t=9ouMmBqFTx1on2DtvI5ygg&s=19



Courtesy of The Bash Mash on Facebook.

 

I won’t like, but @D7076 as an armchair expert, I’d say that’s definitely a case of ‘wheels in the dirt’ would you care to agree/disagree?

 

Better to report it, and be told 'Not to worry' than the other thing ...
Pat

 

I know nothing about the incident but I wouldn't read anything into the fact that it wasn't in use the next day in isolation. The loco isn't owned by the ELR and, if I was the owner, I'd like to examine it myself just to satisfy myself all was OK. That is unlikely to happen overnight.

 

Apparently was reported to the necessary authorities as required within required timescales, and loco owners informed same day. Am advised that loco back in service next week following full and proper examination. Perhaps some of the regular ELR 'friends' on this forum need to find another target.

 

Perhaps the ELR should not make itself a target by not updating its website with accurate information. The visit of 34072 has been well publicised in the expectation of increasing visitors hence not advising unavailability - for whatever reason - is surely asking for the levels of criticism that have resulted. After all if you accept the information regarding days of operation then arrange time off work / re-arrange domestic arrangements to visit only to find out that a replacement loco is in use that is a waste that few can / will accept.

 

Sorry Fred, but in the real world $hit happens, locos fail and derailments occur. Yes, it would be wonderful if the railway's website was updated immediately but some poor sod, probably a volunteer has to do it and yes, it's disappointing when another loco is substituted. I wonder how many of those hoping to point their cameras at 34072 actually intended travelling behind it? Rant over.
Ray.
(who'd have preferred to see 47298 over 34072 any day)

 

The roster page was updated on Friday (2 days after the incident) but still showed 34072 working on Friday and Saturday.

BTW I don't think the ELR has ever actively denied that the incident happened - they have just maintained a total silence about it, which itself leads to speculation such as that above.

 

And it's the way that the matter is dealt with - especially regarding informing potential visitors - that defines the quality of service provided by the heritage line(s) hence establishes the public image. I venture to suggest that this recent episode has not improved the ELR's public image.

 

Two separate issues, though. One is the general ability of volunteer run organisations to update this kind of information, where what @marshall5 describes is all too prevalent as both reason and excuse for not providing updates rapidly enough to meet the needs/demands (delete for taste) of those travelling for a specific purpose. The other is the hole that ELR is in/has dug itself lately, where they now suffer from a lack of trust - and in the short term, whether they publish or not, news of an incident like this will be used against them.

 

I seem to recall a while back that when 43106’s tender decided to plant itself in Shropshire, there was an update on the website the same day with an explanation the following day, I really wouldn’t have thought that an organisation like the East Lancs would leave something like comm’s to a volunteer in this day and age.

I really don’t want to have a pop at the East Lancs but with what’s happened recently it’s not a good look is it?

 

I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill here (as Natpres so often does). I saw the photo on facebook a few days ago but I didn't expect a full explanation of what had happened, it just didn't really interest me. Most people won't know that anything happened and even fewer people will care what actually happened. As for informing the ORR etc, the railway will do what they are legally obliged to do and if they don't, the regulator will take action accordingly. We don't need to worry about this.

 

Do you think honesty and transparency are bad things?
An incident has happened, it seems to have been denied by some despite evidence to the contrary.
I’m not necessarily worried about what’s happened, it’s the reaction from those at the top of the organisation in question and the possible repercussions that follow that I find rather concerning.
It doesn’t present our movement in a particular good light does it?

 

In fairness, how much attention would this have had were it not for the other matter on the ELR of late?

 

I agree, but what’s the expression about holes and digging?