I suppose it’s because “normal” charters are inherently less risky with people confined to the train or to stations rather then wandering about on the track bed.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Severn Valley Railway to suspend photographic charters
- Thread starter geoffk
- Start date
- Status
I suppose it’s because “normal” charters are inherently less risky with people confined to the train or to stations rather then wandering about on the track bed.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,265
Then add in that there are plenty (a minority, but still plenty) of enthusiasts who are unable to behave sensibly when on or around the railway and the risk is all too understandable. You only have to look at the antics of photographers that have been highlighted before to see the problem.
It's very easy to reach the same conclusion as the SVR and that it just isn't worth it. Too much risk for too little opportunity for the organisation.
Wilts Wanderer
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 2,482
I guess the point of a photo charter is also to get multiple shots that you can’t normally get from the lineside, so by its nature it requires access unusual locations within the boundary fence (and therefore inherently less safe.) The concept of a spectacular run past also isn’t great for the loco, as it usually results in demands for thick black smoke and a lot of regulator, which doesn’t do the boiler any favours, or the coal budget for that matter either!
I can see a future whereby some days are set aside for charters, dining trains etc, and other dates provide a more normal timetabled service for the enthusiasts. It’s a lot easier to check online what is happening on any given date compared to before, and I imagine the speculative walk-up passenger at a preserved line is pretty non existent these days.
I can see a future whereby some days are set aside for charters, dining trains etc, and other dates provide a more normal timetabled service for the enthusiasts. It’s a lot easier to check online what is happening on any given date compared to before, and I imagine the speculative walk-up passenger at a preserved line is pretty non existent these days.
Hi! (Long time lurker not so first time poster)
in regards to the disability point that was made a few posts back, I really can’t see it exploding in to a media circus. Disability regs apply to activities that should be accessible to all, I would be willing to argue that this is a minority pursuit and therefore exempt from regs. (Not a lawyer, but quite in to law) but I believe that would be the defence, we’re not talking about something that makes day to day activities difficult *que the harassment lol*
in regards to the disability point that was made a few posts back, I really can’t see it exploding in to a media circus. Disability regs apply to activities that should be accessible to all, I would be willing to argue that this is a minority pursuit and therefore exempt from regs. (Not a lawyer, but quite in to law) but I believe that would be the defence, we’re not talking about something that makes day to day activities difficult *que the harassment lol*
The advantage of a photo charter is that you can plan / choose timing at various locations. The timing can be setup to start earlier / end later than normal operations on the line. You can also make several passes if the light is changing (clouds).
I have done several over the years. Typically the group has consisted of a bunch of generally older mainly male enthuisists who have been about railways for a while. People keep an eye out for each other. And if somebody steps out of line then you'd get called out by the other participants. If there is something special going on where there is a particular opportunity for something unique (visiting locomotive) then you get some pretty serious photographers.
Biggest safety issues away from the stations are slipping on embankments or when climbing walls/fences or on greasy/slippy sleepers. At stations there can can be congestion for setups and also in darkness there are additional trip hazards.
My view is that stopping these things on safety grounds is just another symptom of modern HSE attrition. Put bluntly if these are unnacceptable then how can you justify allowing people on station platforms with a drop to the track and high speed trains passing - with a yellow line rather than a barrier?
So in theory a photo charter could be run without the photographers having track access?
I asked that on a different forum and a well know organiser said it would be of no interest to the participants.
Depends on the circumstances of the location and the day. So the answer is an in principle 'yes' and a likely practical 'no'.
Some of those 'various locations' may well depend on track access. Whether it be to alight and walk off some distance or to stay lineside. Some locations that are away from the actual line may well be more easily accessible to a group travelling using the train. And organising a group with the train is a practical way of handling this.
My view is that being on an open platform forced to wear a mask which is steaming up my spectacles in an environment where there are trip hazards and a platform edge along which fast trains run at high speed within inches of its edge - and when I do board or alight there are steps and a gap I apparently have to mind - I perceive some risks there. If people are going to start applying what seem arbitrary risk analysis to charter groups who are supervised - then let them apply the same sorts of analysis to the risks of open platforms - regardless of whether the unsupervised public seem to actually cope with them in the real world.
In theory yes, but the locations would be limited to station platforms or other places accessible to the public, such as overbridges or foot crossings. Reaching these could be time-consuming if away from a station, thus reducing the opportunities for photography. A large group walking along a narrow country road brings its own dangers, almost certainly greater than walking alongside the track!
Photographers' buses have sometimes been used. These are only of use if the roads closely follow the railway. There has to be co-operation between the railway and bus driver to enable everyone to reach the desired location and get off the bus before the train passes. The RPSI tours in Ireland used to have these and you had to book on one in advance. The one I tried wasn't very good but the chasing bus I was on in Italy a few years ago was quite successful. Perhaps there's some mileage in this idea (ha ha) on UK heritage lines.
Shades of the Titfield Thunderbolt!
Surely in this day and age there would be some sort of course or certification for people to obtain to take trackside photos? I’m sure given the (obvious from this thread) popularity of the hobby it would be welcomed. Something akin to a drone operator’s licence springs to mind. Combine basic PTS, H&S etc and bundle it all in to one qualification. If you have the card you can go trackside (on permitted events, not just choose to wander to your local line and jump the fence).
Or am I being a bit too H&S mafia here??
Or am I being a bit too H&S mafia here??
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,265
One of the points of having PTS is that it is about allowing you to access the lineside only if it is required in the course of your duties. Clearly that does not cover photographers on day trip.
I'm afraid people who are arguing for these trips to still have lineside access really aren't understanding the current regulatory and legal framework and the concept of reducing risk to levels that are ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable). Pretty clearly, allowing photographers lineside access is not ALARP.
Oh of course, please don’t misunderstand my use of PTS, I was just generalising. Naturally only authorised people SHOULD be allowed on the line. However on the opposing side of heritage lines have allowed this to happen previously there could be an argument for some sort of scheme as per my previous post (please note I’m neither a photographer nor a heritage member, just trying to look objectively and get some opinions for my own curiosity)
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,265
I refer you to my previous comments about ALARP. Having a bunch if photographers on the lineside doesn't fit with that, and managing that risk isn't worth it for the financial reward on offer.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Correct - no further questions m'lud
pdeaves
Established Member
I think there are two issues.
- Allowing photographers lineside;
- Chartering a particular train with the sole purpose of letting those paying for it the chance to photograph it.
So where does this stop or self limit?
Banning shed and facilities visits?
Controlling numbers on platforms to a much lower level during busy periods?
Replacing all pedestrian line crossings with pedestrian bridges?
Deciding every slam door has to be supervised?
Safety briefings to all passengers before departure?
Eventually you *logically* reach the point where somebody will argue that an operating heritage railway is in itself is not 'ALARP'.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Shall we try to remain rational? ALARP and total removal are two different things
All activities carry a degree of risk; organisations through safety management systems determine the level of risk they are prepared to accept.
In the instance of photography charters and lineside access, it is evident that the level of risk previously agreed to be acceptable (as evidenced by the activity taking place) has been reviewed (possibly due to external events suggesting or compelling a review to be undertaken) and has resulted in the current level of risk being determined as unacceptably high.
It has been determined that these activities can not be reworked in such a way to reduce the risk to an acceptable level and thus the activity has been withdrawn.
One of the factors in play is probably that the cost of reworking the activity to an acceptable level of risk makes that activity financially unviable or places a now unacceptably high burden on the resources the railway has.
To comment on one other point: On the Swanage Railway during Santa Specials we endeavour to have a porter or other assistant at each carriage door because we are aware of the increased risk of slip or fall given that there are far more young children boarding / disembarking from the train than on a usual running day. A combination of excited children clutching a present from Santa and often grandparents in charge of the children holding a bag or coat creates a much greater risk. Whilst the railway may not be at fault should a child slip or trip we endeavour to reduce the risk so that the eagerly anticipated treat is a memorable experience for all the right reasons and not the wrong one.
In the instance of photography charters and lineside access, it is evident that the level of risk previously agreed to be acceptable (as evidenced by the activity taking place) has been reviewed (possibly due to external events suggesting or compelling a review to be undertaken) and has resulted in the current level of risk being determined as unacceptably high.
It has been determined that these activities can not be reworked in such a way to reduce the risk to an acceptable level and thus the activity has been withdrawn.
One of the factors in play is probably that the cost of reworking the activity to an acceptable level of risk makes that activity financially unviable or places a now unacceptably high burden on the resources the railway has.
To comment on one other point: On the Swanage Railway during Santa Specials we endeavour to have a porter or other assistant at each carriage door because we are aware of the increased risk of slip or fall given that there are far more young children boarding / disembarking from the train than on a usual running day. A combination of excited children clutching a present from Santa and often grandparents in charge of the children holding a bag or coat creates a much greater risk. Whilst the railway may not be at fault should a child slip or trip we endeavour to reduce the risk so that the eagerly anticipated treat is a memorable experience for all the right reasons and not the wrong one.
Well some of those things have been happening for some time now.
"Proper" shed visits are now very rare.
Bluebell stopped yard access many years ago ( I heard after a woman in high heels(?) slipped over.
Now longer able to access the shed at Loughborough unless on a tour for some time now. I am sure there are others, even Ropley Yard was closed for a while a few years ago.
Platform control for events such as a Flying Scotsman visit or Santa trains have existed for years.
I am sure the ORR would like all crossings on the level replaced everywhere, but that may be a thing to look forward to in the future.
Slam doors are probably OK until someone falls out of one.
kje7812
Member
Considering the thread, access to Bridgnorth works and yard has been restricted for a number of years, same for the yards at Bewdley and Kidderminster. Only (some) special events where there were taped off areas, guides and reduced work going on.
Shed and facility visits are much more limited than they once were.
I have been held outside stations to allow platform areas to be cleared.
There is a programme to reduce the number of vehicle and pedestrian crossings.
Central locking.
If people start behaving stupidly then it may head that way.
If I may can I bring to this threads attention another thread from Disputes and Prosecutions.
On that thread it is being argued that railcard holders should receive a reminder from the railcard seller / issuer that the card will expire in xx weeks time thus avoiding the situation where expired cards are accidentally used resulting in penalties being applied after a ticket check.
One could argue that on the basis that if people need this sort of reminder, then it is hardly surprising that some facilities (ie shed visits, photo charters) and other features of a heritage railway (ie passenger operated doors) are being called into question on the grounds of safety.
On that thread it is being argued that railcard holders should receive a reminder from the railcard seller / issuer that the card will expire in xx weeks time thus avoiding the situation where expired cards are accidentally used resulting in penalties being applied after a ticket check.
One could argue that on the basis that if people need this sort of reminder, then it is hardly surprising that some facilities (ie shed visits, photo charters) and other features of a heritage railway (ie passenger operated doors) are being called into question on the grounds of safety.
Sending a reminder to check the expiry date on a railcard which has sat in a wallet for more than a year is totally different to mitigating a valid safety risk for those not trained/briefed/able to guard against it prior to encountering said risk.
Shed visits have not been offered on some railways for a long time, and on others only in very modified form. An engine shed is a very dangerous place for those not prepared. Photo charters are full of risks, and if those on the charter aren't conducting themselves properly it's entirely appropriate to examine the offering in the first place. Although I personally suspect it's primarily the economics driving the choice to withdraw photo charters, which safety feeding into the costs.
There's no suggestion passenger operated doors need to be removed entirely, only that the risk of opening unsafely (in motion/without looking) and leaving the door on the latch is guarded against. Especially now that many visitors to a heritage railway will not be familiar with such doors from the mainline railway, as they've almost entirely disappeared.
- Status