SVR General Discussion

You can argue anything, it doesn't mean that it's correct. I know if I was writing a risk assessment in my professional capacity and was presented with the options of 1 person in a hazardous place being directly supervised by two rigorously trained individuals or 40 unknown people in a hazardous place milling around under the indirect supervision of a small number of stewards which one would probably create the lower level of risk.

When it goes wrong (and inevitably at some point, it will) the HSE will come down on you with the same fury regardless of if you're a volunteer, museum, heavy engineering firm or office staff. At that point it's up to you to prove that you did everything reasonable to prevent the accident, not that the victim or cause was acting irresponsibly.

How many heritage railways could stomach a 7 figure fine? How much trust do you have in those 40 strangers desperate for a good shot, how well were they listening to your safety briefing? Finally, how much profit do you need to make to make it worth shouldering that risk?

I appreciate that does all sound very apocalyptic, but it would be if the worst happened.

 

They are though works trains with no passengers on board and photographers bussed to strategic places for photos it would seem, so looks like participants are well herded.

 

Then limit where the public can stand, to the point, if needs be, of restricting them to platforms, public areas of the railway, adjacent footpaths etc, and supervise it more strictly

 

What will the SVR look like in five years time?

 

Sorry Martin, I should have said that I've got no doubt that the charters that are run are organised very well, and I don't really have any concerns with the people and organisations that do run them. I was just trying to illustrate the point that just because a footplate looks more hazardous (fire, heat, movement) doesn't actually mean that it automatically carries a higher level of risk. However, what you have said also demonstrates the level of work and the quality of it that needs to go on behind the scenes, just to get to the point where you can actually get people on the train. I wouldn't chastise anyone who in the face of that decided it wasn't in their best interest.

 

Too much on photo charters. Although they can make small financial contributions, they will never save or resuscitate a railway on their own. We have to look at the bigger picture/s.

The future must entail giving the customers what they want at a price they are willing to pay. The days when enthusiasts were content to play railways for their own pleasure and let customers share that pleasure, I am afraid, are long gone. The more so with every passing year. New ideas like some of those expressed above, some shorter/cheaper journey's with something to keep and attract interest at the journey's departure and end. Clean toilets, decent variety of food. I had a visitor over from Canada this year. He was somewhat surprised to be offered his sit down Bridgnorth breakfast in polystyrene containers with plastic knife and fork - neither heritage or acceptable in this day and age - even Spoons does better!
In short I suggest Heritage Railways need to think out of the box with new innovative ideas, and always have in mind the bottom line.

 

The only thing I would say is that some railways can continue to be more like the club that shares with visitors than others. A cheaply built line that has few significant earthworks or structures, minimal signalling, and a smaller set of operational vehicles will be able to be sustainable at a lower income level. That ship has sailed for other lines though, and no one wants to see an SVR stripped back to a long siding.

 

And here we come full circle. The SVR is a huge sprawling organisation that has many different departments, a large number of fixed, high risk assets and extremely high fixed costs. It also employs both paid and volunteer labour in a high risk environment.
The idea that the next GM must be a Railway Enthusiast first and foremost is strange to me. They more importantly need to be qualified in running a vast and varied organisation safely and profitably. If they have a railway or heritage background fantastic, but it shouldn't necessarily be a pre-requisite. Any manager worth their salt will respect and value the views of their workforce and the long term aims of the business, but ultimately decisions should be in the best long term interests of the organisation.
Perhaps controversially, I would suggest that as we venture into choppy, uncharted, waters a fresh pair of eyes (& views) isn't necessarily a bad thing.

 

(Emphasis added in quote.)
Or even less than half a day. I've wondered for a little while whether it would be workable to offer a "taster ticket" ie Kidderminster-Bewdley return. Whenever short journeys come up people tend to mention Highley because of the Engine House. Sure, but what *else* is there in Highley? Not much beyond the Ship Inn. But take people to Bewdley and there's a town centre 10 minutes walk away that's well set up for tourists and families. Plus the Kidder-Bewdley stretch of line offers a variety of scenery, Falling Sands viaduct, the tunnel, the safari park, etc.

I get that a lot of these things would be difficult to make work, and I imagine the SVR has looked at such things internally on various occasions. But if the answer to *every* "How about giving X a try?" question is some variation on "It's not likely to be workable because..." then that inevitably means the very stagnation and decline that surely everyone wants to avoid. As I've said I have much less insider knowledge than a lot here, but it does feel like the easy changes have already been made.* So some of the future changes are going to have to be difficult ones, and they're not all going to be to everyone's liking.

* Most of them. Something that ties into my plea for better communications in the earlier post: the lack of public information and updates while the Highley restaurant was closed was just not good enough. People want to know *at Kidderminster* that the restaurant is closed, not when they get to Highley expecting a meal. Even now, there are issues - I ate there in December and while the food and drink were fine, the cakes table was devoid of any price labels, not even the traditional bit of handwritten cardboard. That's absolutely basic customer service stuff.

 

Some terrorist could chose to do a drive a loco day and turn the locomotive into a bomb. Far fetched and unlikely, but it could happen.

 

They wouldn't have ran for so many years at a loss across so many heritage railways.

 

I meant the SVR at large knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing, as shown over the last 3 years losing many lifelong members and volunteers.

 

There are various types of safety briefing, stop nit picking. Clearly briefings other railways give to photo charter participants work.

 

I hear the faint rustling of straws being grasped.

 

Much less likely than a fit and well person in their 70s falling on a straight and level road - as happened recently to someone I know. And that's without drawing in the additional circumstances (height, uneven ground, distraction) that have been discussed.

Risk assessment is, amongst other things, an assessment of the probability of a risk, and the cost if it materialises. "It's never happened yet" is less a risk assessment than an invitation.

 

That is true they do. What a number of us have been trying to explain to you though is how it might be completely understandable that what works in one place doesn’t somewhere else. Because I think your view is one I have heard from others and because there is a general point about the future of our wonderful hobby I will give it one last try.

The GM or MD of a railway is generally the individual responsible for all aspects of safety and safety culture on a day to day basis. They can be personally liable in the event of failures, possibly even when the roots of that failure pre-date their tenure in the role. Imagine a fatality that requires them to give evidence at a coroner’s court or similar and having to answer the question “why did you do nothing about….?”

This railway had unfortunately had a some falls from height which coincided with a general increase in scrutiny around such incidents because of a noticeable kick upwards in the numbers. Suddenly all potential falls from height are being closely watched especially at certain railways which for whatever reason have had a “run” of events.

Repeated failures to deal with a particular issue, be it a fall from height or speeding or whatever will result in the ORR issuing a warning, formal or otherwise. That is a road that if taken leads to enforcement and a real potential of being shut down for a period. It has happened (Foxfield springs to mind, but there have been others).

Additionally you realise that in fact not only are there risks associated with these charters that look suddenly a bit more serious, but the price you can charge isn’t covering your costs and what is more you have lots of other more urgent things you want your managers and volunteers working on.

What do you do? The logical answer is to stop.

 

2m from the lineside is not a hazardous work area