Jacobite 2026

The problem is the news article/WCRC press release doesn't state they're asking for an exemption to run CDL fitted Mk1s. It sounds like the same moan as the last couple of years about not being able to run non-CDL stock.

 

I really dont understand where the confusion is coming with this….

- WCR have agreed to fit coaches with CDL

- WCR have drawn up a fitment plan and gone to the ORR

- That fitment plan asks for an exemption to run unfitted coaches whilst they carry out fitment, and when coaches are fitted the unfitted ones will be replaced coach by coach.

- This allows them to run the business normally again, and return mainline charters to the pre-coffin experience they used to be.

- Again sources suggest 3-4 weeks before coach so at 12-13 vehicles per year I can see why they want time to do it, and run their business more normally.

 

But they are clearly fitting…Why fit and then not run them?!

 

That's what I mean. They're fitting them, yet the news report doesn't mention it, nor that the exemption they're asking for is because they've actually started a programme of fitting CDL and want to run a mix of stock. WCRC haven't run a non-CDL fitted tour for well over two years. They've not got a chance of getting it signed off now.

 

IF that is what is being asked for, it is not unreasonable - though I respect @26D_M's perspective on how ORR may see it. But the confusion over what precisely is being asked for is unhelpful, and does nothing for their credibility. The reliance on "sources", though very 10A in style, adds to the confusion.

 

To be fair I don't think 10A is relying on sources, it's just a product of the vacuum that wibblers, myself included, are putting hearsay out there based on what the jungle drums are saying.
If the rumours are correct though and a compliant set of mk1s sufficient for the am Jacobite is ready why would WC delay starting the 2026 season?
It all smacks of game playing rather than serious business practice.

 

Well I mean it’s quite obvious to all but you….The season won’t start without the exemption because the exemption allows the to operate fully an as normal. It’s alright having a done, what happens if one sets down they need spares…. the exemption will allow normal business function.

 

Is it that obvious?
It seems to me WC is the one bleating about the urgency of getting the Jacobite up and running. If you have enough compliant coaches to do so then get them earning and worry about possible breakdowns afterwards? Is there a history of the coaches needing to be stopped in the early weeks of the season?
Don't forget either that the pm service was already in some doubt according to Mr Smith, which seemed to be unrelated to the CDL issue.

 

Which, from an Inspectors perspective, would also likely be a consideration when reviewing an application for exemption when all other stock on the network has CDL and has been the case for over two years.
Presuming any exemption would still require stewards manning the doors fitted with garden shed bolts?

 

Why should the Scottish Government fund something that other private companies have successfully funded themselves - imagine the response from LSL and VT if West Coast received public money for this!!

 

To quote one of the guys we work with recently when speaking to a client;

'Your lack of planning isn't our emergency'.

I would expect this will be the ORRs stance, and I would be disappointed if it wasn't.

Chris

 

SNCF Corail coaches have slam doors, inside actuation door locks and no CDL. Running up to 200kph.
Just saying.

 

Absolutely no chance.

https://orrprdpubreg1.blob.core.win...st-Railway-Company-Ltd-prohibition-notice.pdf

"You are failing to ensure the health and safety of your passengers and crew, thus
putting them at risk of serious personal injury, as you are not implementing the
controls identified in your risk assessment for rolling stock fitted with secondary
door locking, in that:
1) Passengers are being told by train crew to operate the secondary door
locks;
2) Stewards are not preventing passengers from operating the secondary door
locks;
3) Stewards are not preventing passengers from leaning on train doors or from
leaning out of the open droplight windows in train doors of moving trains;
and
4) Secondary door locks are not in the ‘locked’ position or are being opened by
train crew before the train is stationary;
Therefore, creating a risk of persons falling from a train or being struck by
infrastructure being passed by the moving train."

 

That was indeed a failure to implement the system of operation which the exemptions at the time were based on. As I recall the prohibition was eventually lifted and the proper system followed by WC.
If WC hopes to gain a new exemption, then, it is logical to assume that method remains acceptable to ORR if diligently applied.
Will, for an exemption to be issued, ORR expect something extra to be in place which falls short of full CDL but goes beyond the previous method?

 

ORR Prohibition and Improvement Notices are indeed available on the Public Record.
Fortunately minutes of meetings between ORR and operators and rolling stock owners are not on the Public Record. Which is what is currently being debated on here.

 

Is that not a cdl light

 

It could well be.