Main Line Steam - Possible ramifications of the WCRC suspension

Thanks for the clarification.

 

The AA indicate that Fort William to Kyle of Lochalsh is 74 miles by road and estimate the journey time to be 1h 39m, while the Mallaig journey is 40 miles and 57m journey time. Factor in the ferry cost and time, and the Kyle trip looks reasonably favorable for many. While it might be enjoyable to take 3 hours over the drive to Kyle, it certainly isn't essential to do so.

Going back to the Jacobite's contribution to the local economy, I'd suggest that, while it is a useful draw for visitors to the West Highlands, there won't be that many folk who go just for the steam train ride. As other's have suggested, it is one of many contributing elements for those choosing a holiday in the Highlands. It's loss would be a great shame, but it wouldn't suddenly decimate the local economy. It would, however, likely have a significant effect on a small number of business' along the route.

 

But you are going on......and on...........and on. You've got the hump because somebody said "100's of deaths", ONE DEATH WOULD HAVE BEEN TOO MANY and it's only by a very big slice of luck the SPAD incident didn't cause one death. You've made your point, people have listened.
On the "short train long train" subject............spare us eh? give it a rest.
I think we are all in a bit of shock re the WCRC matter. There are going to be big changes in the industry, I hope WC survive, but changes, BIG changes will have to be made.

 

Getting back to the more immediate effects, I see SD have posted this on their web-site regarding Thursday's S&C trip:

"Unfortunately we have been forced to postpone next Thursday’s trip to Carlisle.
The reason, as you may be aware, is the recent announcement over Easter that our train operator, West Coast Railways, has been temporarily stopped from running steam on the mainline by Network Rail until May 15. West Coast had hoped earlier this week that it would still be possible to sub-contract this train for steam haulage to the only other steam operator but unfortunately this has not been possible.
In the coming days we will identify a new date in the summer when this operation can be accommodated by West Coast.
Please accept our sincere apologies for the postponement of this trip and for any disappointment caused.
We have written to all passengers booked on this trip both by email and by post."​

Also, I've been wondering about Wayne's hints that DBS might be able to pick up one or two trips in the south. What about the Westbury-Kingswear trip on Sun 19th? DBS have steam crews that know the road, provided their shifts can be rearranged. 2 weeks after the suspension, we're getting into the time-period where it might be possible to re-roster DBS crews without disrupting their normal operations too much.

More of a problem could be finding an air-braked loco (and support crew) and getting it to the start-point. Britannia will be busy on the Swanage Railway next weekend, IR's Fives are on the NYMR (I think) which (by my calculations) leaves the Duchess and Clan Line. I notice that '28 has a Pullman turn on Friday. Am I being too fanciful to suppose that she might stay in steam on Saturday and be towed down to Westbury ready to work the train on Sunday morning?

 

According to network rail only a mere 7, not that huge changes, need to be made. Read them. Tell me if they are huge.


Permanent reminder on all my posts in this thread. I am not downplaying anything, not excusing anything not a supporter or detractor of NR or WCRC - nor am I hyping anything up. Merely trying to steer a level headed rational response based on logic and the facts we have available.

 

Whilst this whole argument is somewhat of a diversion, because hatherton hall is correct that any deaths would be one death too many, it is worth remembering that at Southall, the HST hit a freight train, not another passenger train.

It must also be said that slightly different timings could have resulted in a number of possible collision combinations as to which train might have hit which and my understanding is that the crossings of Wotton Bassett Junction have moving parts, and hence even a few second earlier and 1Z67 could have been derailed had the road not been reset awaiting the HST clearing the signal overlap. (Considered opinion seems to be this would be an automatic part of the signalling system as the route for 1Z67 would have been entered for when the HST was clear).

Steven

 

As Al sayes, its possible support crew pending for 28 to move down and DBS arranging a crew to take her to Westbury, now, if 70000 had still been at Minehead, it would have been an easier job.

 

You are corect in that the 7 points are, or should be, readily achievable by any organisation. In fact they should have been in place anyway. What is huge is the culture shift required by WCR to achieve restoration of their licence.

As to what are the "facts" we only have what is known in the public domain. There is probably much we dont know. ORR apear to be examaning records which are not available in the public domain.

 

There are 7 points - what none of us can or do know is how much work is involved in meeting each and every of those points - even if 6 are simple, but the other one very involved, they may represent the need for huge, considerable or minor changes. We just don't know because Network Rail have only specified what they want the end point to be - we know nothing of where WCRC are starting from.

Steven

 

Thank you sir, I think that was what I was trying to say. WC's standing in the industry has been damaged by this business, it'll take a long time for folk to "forgive and forget"

 

In the happy event of this happening,would DBS be happy to use the regular(ex-green train,now maroon) SD coaches which I think are at Southall? I understand DBS have already run a diesel trip with WCRC stock in the north last week so presumably there is no objection in principal?

 

If it is the ex Green Train then I think it is vac braked only. Therefore DBS won't touch it.

 

Thanks,had'nt realised that. So presumably stock availability could be a big problem.

 

The facts that you have available are only those in the public domain; there are hints that there is more to the suspension than has been made public with "criminal prosecutions" being possible hence the reluctance of those with knowledge to discuss further in case of legal consequences.

I'm sure the moderators are monitoring this but note at posting 126 needs to be kept in mind !

 

For those of us that don't know, its logical to presume all TOCs are subject to regular audit by NR in support of their licenced status. Based on this assumption one can conclude that previous audits had provided adequate confidence in the management arrangements of WCRC and that it had all the minimum requirements in place to satisfy the basis of issuing / maintaining a licence.
Following on from this it is apparent that NR has had to issue a suspension as a last resort and that it would not have made public the basis for having to do so if it believed effective corrective action would be achieved simply and swiftly. In other words publicly criticising WCRC in the way that has occurred would not have been done lightly and certainly not if everything could be put right in away that avoided damaging the WCRC business.
This raises the question of at what point WCRC drifted from the point of being compliant, meeting audit requirements etc to being found to be deficient in a number of fundamental key areas, the lack of management control being so inadequate as to necessitate a suspension.
Management system auditing routinely raises corrective actions, matters for improvement, non conformances - call them what you will. Some will be mandatory corrective action, some may be observations. It seems probable in this case that WCRC has not effectively dealt with previously raised issues and then a recent incident has caused an unscheduled audit or inspection which has revealed several weaknesses presumably not picked up previously or that have occurred since the last assessment.
It also seems probable that with the licence due for renewal shortly WCRC would have been due for a full reassessment in any case which may have been brought forward by the incident(s).
There may also be questions of the surveillance process itself if it has previously failed to identify, in earlier audits, weaknesses that have been present for some time. It would be unusual, though, for a business to have competent management arrangements but to drop them or stop applying them unilaterally between audits unless the audits are at long intervals. As a minimum I would expect WCRC to be placed on an at risk status and for auditing to be at much more frequent intervals until such time as that confidence can be properly returned. This will be costly because the business will have to meet the costs of the more intensive surveillance in order to regain its licence.
Hoping that the seven points will be simply and easily addressed, my optimism does not extend very far in that direction. Put simply it seems likely that it will be an uphill struggle for WCRC to regain the confidence of NR, principally, but also the wider market given how standards must have slipped so catastrophically to warrant the withdrawal of the licence.

 

Looking to post 'restoration of WCRC,' the reputation of the visible tour operating part of WCRC will undoubtedly suffer as will the company as a whole through loss of earnings
It will be interesting to see if Joe Public bookings are down and if WCRC might seek to Rebrand or even withdraw to a new position up the supply chain
Now then, WCRC Have come in for a bit of stick over the years, and for lovers of mainline steam their current predicament highlights the dominant position they have (had to) assume. But this is the devil we know and perhaps we have a part to play in ensuring a buoyant end of season if we dont want them to disappear completely. ..

 

Ladbroke Grove involved fire

Don

 

Does anyone know what, if any, audit regime WCRC (or any other TOC, for that matter) have been subject to in the past, whether from NR, ORR or anyone else? I don't think it's safe to assume that what 26D_M describes has actually been applied. If it had been, they might not be their present predicament.