SVR General Discussion

At my own TOC, there is an active campaign set by our Operations Standards department to raise awareness of the risks of ECS moves to and from depots, in the very sort of parameters you mention, due to a perceived large ratio of incidents per ECS move versus passenger services.

 

I also think a few things need to be set out here.

I don't believe anybody here has said it outright cannot happen. Like any proposal, the overall idea likely can be achieved.

In fact, there is a scenario of mainline TOC operating a service into a heritage railway on frequency that can be highlighted here. 'The Royal Scotsman', over the Strathspey Railway, to and from Boat of Garten.

But that service might very well highlight why the Severn Valley service is not a case of can't, but is a case of won't. When you consider the frequency of the Scotsman onto Strathspey metals, alongside the ticket price for said train, GBRF/Belmond have the budget able to accommodate this method of working. They also change over the locomotive on the train, from GBRF 66 whatever is air braked and available in the Strathspey's fleet. So no requirement for GBRF to sign beyond Aviemore station, likewise for Spey crews to sign and drive 66's. As Mk1's and Mk2's are part of the core fleet at Strathspey, the train make up of the Scotsman itself is not foreign to Spey crews, but with air braking requires rostered guards to be passed out on air brake systems. A minor training situation rather than learning entirely new tractions, or new routes.

So, we come back to the Severn Valley. We aren't talking about a train that can have the mode of propulsion changes, we're looking at the same DMU passing from mainline metals and through to Bewdley as a single service. That requires one of three methods:

Method 1 - WMR crews operate throughout. This situation requires the driver and guard to learn a new rulebook and sign a new route. At my own TOC, my rules and traction assessments as a driver is undertaken every 3 years. First day for the RSSB Network Rail rules, second day for traction. If you add in the requirement to learn another rule book, then comes the need to test. 1 additional day every three years may not seem like much, but you then apply that over just a typical link of 20-30 drives in a depot, adds up in terms of another day not driving.

Also, who undertakes the additional rules tests? Is the cost allocated to WMR or SVR?

SVR most likely has a different method for reporting line defects/signal issues etc. On Network Rail lines, the RSSB Rulebook mandates that we must carry multiple copies of certain forms to fill out alongside the signaller while reporting on GSMR. What is the equivalent on SVR, and if similar type forms, where will these be accessed when booking on and off duty?

Method 2 - Handover. As it suggests, the train is handed over to SVR crews at the boundary. Now, this can break down into two sub sections. The first is that the service is then continued to Bewdley by SVR crews, but as a WMR service. That comes with the Union issues that Harry has previously mentioned, that it is possible that a regular TOC service is being operated by a member of staff not employed by said TOC, subject to the same T&Cs/benefits, and perhaps undercutting the cost that an WMR is seen as. You also need the SVR crew to be trained on the traction. Who is undertaking such training, is it within the operational standards that WMR set out (in acknowledgement to requirements set by the train leasing company), and who is conducting paying for that training, assessment and continued monitoring (OTMR downloads, in cab driving assessments, and three yearly Traction assessments)?
The second of the sub section to this, is handover to a route conductor but continued WMR staff in the seat. That happens quite often for galas etc, but such a regular operating service of multiple trains per day, may be difficult to resource and also will incur the additional costs of two drivers and to guards per service between mainline and Bewdley.

Method 3 - SVR trains operate the train between Kidderminster Mainline and Bewdley, a la NYMR style. Requires passing out of SVR crews on traction, RSSB rulebook and route to and from Kidderminster mainline station. Thus also subject to the RSSB standards of assessments, frequency etc. But also, if the SVR operates the service outright from there, then the leasing charge for the train and path are suddenely allocated to SVR. Still not cheap, and that would come as part of SVR's overall costing to the package.

There's going to be a lot more detail needed in these three, and I'll be the first to admit, I've tackled this post purely from a Train Crew perspective. And not every nuance, but sadly my break ends and off to work I go....

 

Understood, and largely agreed. Method 1 is, realistically, the only way this might happen. The questions are real and serious, but are capable of being dealt with intelligently by reasonable people. I'd be interested to know what the material differences are between SVR and RSSB rulebooks, and how difficult it would be to handle those as local rules as part of the wider rules training.

What bugs me is the tension between the need for rules in the industry, and the increasing lack of flexibility or intelligence. It's a theme that is emerging in the overspeed incidents on the ECML, where there are suddenly multiple occurrences of drivers taking divergent routes while not recognising the impact of the speed change, and the answers seem to be "more rules" and "more controls", yet there is outrage when it's suggested that route knowledge is insufficiently robust as a way to ensure safety, and some form of automation may be required. Special care is required and should be expected - but to the extent suggested?

 

"No change to infrastructure"
Are you going to leave all eg the firebuckets on the station on a day when the station doesn't have 4 or 5 volunteers keeping an eye on it?

How about all those vintage-style posters?

The vast majority of the general public are not too bad, but as soon as you open the railway up on what is effectively uncontrolled access, your vandalism risk goes up.
(I occasionally pass through Hanwell station on the GWML. It always seems to be graffiti'd or otherwise unloved. I assume the area is no better or worse than either side, but it always looks worse - I suspect some of it is becuase the painted surfaces are less easy to rapidly clean)

 

Where are people going to park? Bewdley seems to be quite limited in parking when you have SVR staff/ volunteers and visitors at the best of times without people taking up the parking spaces for close to 12 hours contributing nothing to the railway.