WCRC Exemption from CDL (central door locking) regulations until September

[Llanigraham]

They'll certainly feel cold in certain weather conditions without it. Or are you suggesting they're that clueless they won't be able to tell if the train is cold or warm?

No, I think what is being said is that Joe Public doesn't know or care whether their carriage is steam or electrically heated. On that I would agree.

 

[12LDA28C]

I think they're saying they wouldn't care whether it was steam or electric heat as long as there was heat.

Indeed, but you're unlikely to get electric heat from a steam loco in the absence of a genny van or ETS-fitted loco.

 

[Greybeard33]

In an interview with The Herald, WCRC's commercial manager did not rule out fitment of CDL to the Jacobite if the judgement goes against them:

The end of the line for the Hogwart's Express? World-famous train under threat

The world-famous 'Harry Potter' steam train that runs from Fort William to Mallaig is under threat due to safety regulations.

www.heraldscotland.com

"The Jacobite is our flagship - we aren't just going to roll over and give up," says James Shuttleworth, commercial manager for WCR.

"If the ORR comes down on us heavily, it's going to be difficult and we will have to make a decision on that.

"It's our intention that we keep running it but if we have to fit door locking, it's going to be an expensive business."

 

[paul1609]

Re the Jacobite service if they loss the CDL exemption then they could try downgrading it to 25mph and follow the NYMR Grosmont to Whitby model which ORR have currently accepted to 2028. If the ORR didn't allow that model then it brings into question the NYMR exemption and preserved railways that operate at 25mph in general. The Jacobite services currently have 25mins or so at Glenfinnan which could be removed to allow for the slower running times, the morning return service would need to be retimed as it doesn't have the long Glenfinnan stop.

Following the fatal accident on the national network at Balham where a person was killed when his head collided with a signalling gantry, heritage railways were advised by the HRA/ ORR to carry out urgent risk assesments of such an incident occuring on a preserved line to identify any locations where such an incident could occur and take steps to mitigate the risks involved. This will have been caried out on the NYMRs network rail operations. On the Whitby branch I believe the operation is on a single track railway but on a double track formation and the only place where two trains pass is at very slow speed in Whitby station itself. Whitby station having a greater seperation of the tracks to allow for the curvature. I have no idea about the Mallaig Extension but the fact that a limited route exemption for 25 mph is allowed for one route does not mean that it will be allowed nationwide. Indeed I believe the NYMRs decision to give up Grosmount to Battersby rights was part of its success in getting its current exemptions.

 

[3RDGEN]

Following the fatal accident on the national network at Balham where a person was killed when his head collided with a signalling gantry, heritage railways were advised by the HRA/ ORR to carry out urgent risk assesments of such an incident occuring on a preserved line to identify any locations where such an incident could occur and take steps to mitigate the risks involved. This will have been caried out on the NYMRs network rail operations. On the Whitby branch I believe the operation is on a single track railway but on a double track formation and the only place where two trains pass is at very slow speed in Whitby station itself. Whitby station having a greater seperation of the tracks to allow for the curvature. I have no idea about the Mallaig Extension but the fact that a limited route exemption for 25 mph is allowed for one route does not mean that it will be allowed nationwide. Indeed I believe the NYMRs decision to give up Grosmount to Battersby rights was part of its success in getting its current exemptions.

The Jacobite is a booked train and if you buy on the platform your given a specific seat so there shouldn't be any standing passengers in the vestibule areas, it also has stewards onboard who should be stopping anyone learning out of the droplights. You could also fit bars to the doors, the Midland Pullman has a diagonal bar fitted internal which allows you to reach the external door handle but limits the options for leaning out of the droplight.

 

[sprinterguy]

Of course, as the Statesman charter train goes to Mallaig, as does the Midland Pullman HST with Mark 3s.

And The Jacobite itself has used mark 2s on one rake since it became a two train operation. Of the pressure ventilated variety, mind you, although an air con vehicle did perform buffet duties during at least the 2011 season.

In the second half of the eighties, IIRC, there was a passenger working that took the seated stock off the sleeper up to Mallaig and back, which was presumably the first use of "coffins" on the Extension.

 

[357]

They'll certainly feel cold in certain weather conditions without it. Or are you suggesting they're that clueless they won't be able to tell if the train is cold or warm?

What a ridiculous statement. I'd have thought someone with your knowledge would know exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[43096]

Restricting the amount a sliding window can open to prevent heads going out must be fairly simple. Bars can go over door windows although that spoils the look but still allows an arm to get through to reach a handle.

There's the problem. Some idiot being able to get to the door and open it while the train is in motion. Surely a very low possibilty if door controlling stewards are designated at each end of each carriage.

As stewards are mostly volunteers paid expenses that's a resource that can be quickly arranged, or not. (Accommodation around Fort William may be an issue.) Retrofitting central door locking will be possible at a price but how long would it take?

Those steards need to be trained and competent, too. Let's not forget why the Jacobite stopped running for a period earlier this year: the stewards weren't following the agreed protocols around the doors and the unlocking of the manual bolts and, presumably, WCRC weren't managing them, either. That, for a start, is a good enough reason for the ORR to enforce CDL fitment for WCRC.

Further compomise? Extended derogation to allow retrofitting?

There's been 20+ years of compromise from the ORR in the form of exemptions, plus several years notice that there would not be further exemptions. How have WCRC compromised: by doing precisely nothing.

 

[Brush 4]

Is this a serious suggestion? How much do you think that would cost, and who would fund it? Never going to happen.

That could and probably was said about replica locos yet, here they are with more to come. It would be funded by those doing it, as the new build locos are. Obvious really. I'm talking about the long term, not next year.

 

[43096]

That could and probably was said about replica locos yet, here they are with more to come. It would be funded by those doing it, as the new build locos are. Obvious really. I'm talking about the long term, not next year.

There's a rather big difference between a single loco and a whole set of coaches. First off, the bulk of the enthusiast interest is directed at the loco on the front - so it follows that it will be much easier to raise funds for the loco rather than the stock. It is exceptionally unlikely that anyone is going to invest in brand new coaches for charters: there is no way they would ever pay back; they simply don't get enough use to justify the cost.

You do realise just how much it would cost?

 

[12LDA28C]

What a ridiculous statement. I'd have thought someone with your knowledge would know exactly what I'm talking about.

Since the only way to heat the stock from a steam loco without a genny van or ETS-fitted loco is by steam heat, then my point stands that they certainly would notice if there was (steam) heat, or no heat if the weather was cold. It's been raised several times in this discussion why a genny van would be impractical on this train.

 

[357]

Since the only way to heat the stock from a steam loco without a genny van or ETS-fitted loco is by steam heat, then my point stands that they certainly would notice if there was (steam) heat, or no heat if the weather was cold. It's been raised several times in this discussion why a genny van would be impractical on this train.

Yes but if the option is MK2 stock or no train, I think we will see a generator.

 

[Dave S 56F]

Restricting the amount a sliding window can open to prevent heads going out must be fairly simple. Bars can go over door windows although that spoils the look but still allows an arm to get through to reach a handle.

There's the problem. Some idiot being able to get to the door and open it while the train is in motion. Surely a very low possibilty if door controlling stewards are designated at each end of each carriage.

As stewards are mostly volunteers paid expenses that's a resource that can be quickly arranged, or not. (Accommodation around Fort William may be an issue.) Retrofitting central door locking will be possible at a price but how long would it take?

Further compomise? Extended derogation to allow retrofitting?

Vintage trains have already fitted bars to their droplight windows on their M.K.1 and M.K. 2 carriages to prevent passengers sticking heads out and besides V.T. stewards are very strict on passengers hanging around in carriage vestibules to film or loiter.
And further also fitted retention tanks to their lavatory,s and eco electric flush systems. but still no C.D.L. fitted I think V.T. have a 2 year exemption for this.

 

[Brush 4]

There's a rather big difference between a single loco and a whole set of coaches. First off, the bulk of the enthusiast interest is directed at the loco on the front - so it follows that it will be much easier to raise funds for the loco rather than the stock. It is exceptionally unlikely that anyone is going to invest in brand new coaches for charters: there is no way they would ever pay back; they simply don't get enough use to justify the cost.

You do realise just how much it would cost?

Cost doesn't come into it. These things happen because people want them to. There is no logical reason for replica locos, there are more than enough locos around the country. It is done because people want to bring back lost classes, pure sentiment, no financial logic whatsoever. Logically and practically, new MK1's will be needed though, in the longer term , as they age and ever more costly rules become more stringent, which they will. No regulation ever goes in reverse, it just increases step by step. LSL are the most likely to do this, to ensure a long term future for railtours with vintage stock or, new build 'old' locos with new build 'old' stock.

One possible long term outcome of increasing regulation is the total banning of old locos and stock, in which case only new build locos and stock will be allowed on the main line anyway. In that scenario, we will then see new A3, A4, MN, Castle, Duchess, Deltic, 40, 45, 52 etc. The new LMS diesel 10000 will rule the main line. In the long term. Think beyond the here and now.

 

[fireftrm]

The new LMS diesel 10000 will rule the main line.

It is not being constructed to main line standards....

 

[Brush 4]

Oh well, 60163 then....

 

[43096]

Cost doesn't come into it. These things happen because people want them to. There is no logical reason for replica locos, there are more than enough locos around the country. It is done because people want to bring back lost classes, pure sentiment, no financial logic whatsoever.

Cost does come into it. There may not be a pure financial logic in such decisions (heart over head), but there has to be the finance there to get it done - or it won't happen.

Logically and practically, new MK1's will be needed though, in the longer term , as they age and ever more costly rules become more stringent, which they will. No regulation ever goes in reverse, it just increases step by step. LSL are the most likely to do this, to ensure a long term future for railtours with vintage stock or, new build 'old' locos with new build 'old' stock.

One possible long term outcome of increasing regulation is the total banning of old locos and stock, in which case only new build locos and stock will be allowed on the main line anyway. In that scenario, we will then see new A3, A4, MN, Castle, Duchess, Deltic, 40, 45, 52 etc. The new LMS diesel 10000 will rule the main line. In the long term. Think beyond the here and now.

Just think about what you're saying. How are you going to get "new Mark 1s" with new standards? The Mark 1 design doesn't meet current standards in any way, shape or form - and hasn't for many years. You can't build new Mark 1s because to get acceptance they have to meet current standards, which means current crashworthiness, doors, windows etc. Mark 1s don't meet any of that and a new Mark 1 won't, either. You'd need power operated doors and no window droplights for a start, the opening window vents in the saloon would probably be barred too and forget it with the seats - you'd need a current seat type. The best you'd get would be something like a current design (so, say Mark 5) perhaps with hopper windows. And we haven't even got to cost yet...

 

[cf111]

Semi-serious, but maybe the answer is for someone to buy the line off Network Rail, allow Scotrail to continue to run their service for a track access fee and run it as a heritage line? It's only going to get more and more difficult to run heritage rolling stock on the "national network", even a quiet branch line.
I suspect the line consumes way more money in maintenance than it recoups in track access charges, so it could be a win win for everyone.

The line provides public transport to a very remote part of the country and that is and should always be its primary function. I don't think it would be a good idea to give a heritage operation primacy over a line that is not at any risk of closure. You are quite probably right, I doubt it makes any money for Scotrail.

 

[JKF]

Logically and practically, new MK1's will be needed though, in the longer term , as they age and ever more costly rules become more stringent, which they will. No regulation ever goes in reverse, it just increases step by step. LSL are the most likely to do this, to ensure a long term future for railtours with vintage stock or, new build 'old' locos with new build 'old' stock.

Rather than the expense of new builds, would we not be more likely to see more modern coaches adapted to appear vintage?

In my flat (Grade 2* listed) we have some timber double glazed windows at the rear which have stuck on glazing bars to maintain a georgian appearance and keep the heritage section of the local planning dept happy. In a similar style take some surplus Mk3/4/5 stock (or EMU stock), add stick-on glazing bars, maroon paint, wooden tables, vintage style seats and carpets, fake gas lamps, the odd bit of brass etc. Even try making compartment stock out of it. It’d probably do the job for most punters.

(speaking as someone who dislikes the inauthentic but ubiquitous maroon-painted MK2 coaches on every preserved line, but I’m not everyone!)

 

[Dryce]

The line provides public transport to a very remote part of the country and that is and should always be its primary function. I don't think it would be a good idea to give a heritage operation primacy over a line that is not at any risk of closure. You are quite probably right, I doubt it makes any money for Scotrail.

The subsidy for services in Scotland rather makes a mockery of the idea that anything makes money for Scotrail.

The WCRC service is piggy backed on existing infrastructure - but presumably only runs because above and beyond the subsidy of that infrastructure because it is actually profitable in its own right.

Is there a breakdown of passenger numbers for the line that sets out the WCRC vs Scotrail numbers? And also the number of leisure passengers on the Scotrail service. At the majority will be leisure passengers on Scotrail (and obviously on WCRC !).

A brutal assumption might be that the cost to the tax payer of each passenger on Scotrail is substantially higher than the cost of each passenger on the WCRC service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cost does come into it. There may not be a pure financial logic in such decisions (heart over head), but there has to be the finance there to get it done - or it won't happen.

Just think about what you're saying. How are you going to get "new Mark 1s" with new standards? The Mark 1 design doesn't meet current standards in any way, shape or form - and hasn't for many years. You can't build new Mark 1s because to get acceptance they have to meet current standards, which means current crashworthiness, doors, windows etc. Mark 1s don't meet any of that and a new Mark 1 won't, either. You'd need power operated doors and no window droplights for a start, the opening window vents in the saloon would probably be barred too and forget it with the seats - you'd need a current seat type. The best you'd get would be something like a current design (so, say Mark 5) perhaps with hopper windows. And we haven't even got to cost yet...

In feel a 397 is to me like a modern MK1. I guess you could spec that but with hopper windows.

Hellishly expensive though.

 

[D6130]

In feel a 397 is to me like a modern MK1. I guess you could spec that but with hopper windows.

....or perhaps convert the redundant TPE Mark 5a coaches with hopper windows and dual braking. They would give the enthusiasts that authentic Mark 1 feel with their bogies rattling and swaying about at anything more than about 30 mph!

 

[Brush 4]

Conversion is another way of doing this. Mk1 style windows fitted. The sliding top windows don't have to be real, just need to look the part. A variety of bogies is acceptable, including Commonwealth and B4. If slam door is banned, or is likely to be, just paint them on to the plug doors. Blue/grey, maroon, SR green, plum and spilt milk and chocolate and cream liveries.
Look at that blue and white Midland Pullman, it may be an HST but, somehow, it manages to look the part.

Preservationists have achieved so much without having any money to start with. Continuous fund raising and appeals - which continue today - see them through to their various goals. No such thing as can't, just tricky but achievable...eventually.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think there do need to be opening windows, otherwise you might as well just ride in a modern EMU or DMU and take a picture of the steam locomotive, costing far less. Sliders you could lean out of wouldn't be allowed now but I don't see why hoppers wouldn't.

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

Mk1 underframes are capable of outlasting several rebodyings (is that a word?) so why look for new build? The bodyside parts (crash pillars, end pressings, &c.) are already available and being replaced in the heritage world.
Pat

 

[1Q18]

Having to replace vacuum brakes with air is flagged throughout this thread as being a big deal for the Jacobite, but is it? At least three of the regular locos (Riley Black 5s 44871 and 45407 and the Worth Valley’s 45212) are dual-braked already, so that only really leaves the NELPG’s K1, 62005, and West Coast’s home fleet Black 5, 44932 (although not sure if that gets much use on the Jacobite, I’m sure someone can say for certain) being vac-only. Are both of the Jacobite sets exclusively vac-braked or are they dual-braked, either partially or completely?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Mk1 underframes are capable of outlasting several rebodyings (is that a word?) so why look for new build? The bodyside parts (crash pillars, end pressings, &c.) are already available and being replaced in the heritage world.
Pat

One of the issues with the Mk1 is that it has a separate underframe rather than the monocoque designs that everything uses these days.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One of the issues with the Mk1 is that it has a separate underframe rather than the monocoque designs that everything uses these days.

It is technically possible to put an integral body on a MK1 under frame, that's what the Networker Classic did. But it doesn't cost an awful lot less than new build for a far shorter life.

 

[DJ_K666]

There is a part of a mk1 coach door catch. The bolt itself and a smaller square section piece which is what latches the twist handle at an angle when the door is open.

If this was to be used on a kind of servo to engage and disengagd it, along with limiting how far the window can open then maybe a cheap form of CDL could be devised which wouldn't bankrupt WCR

 

[skyhigh]

There is a part of a mk1 coach door catch. The bolt itself and a smaller square section piece which is what latches the twist handle at an angle when the door is open.

If this was to be used on a kind of servo to engage and disengagd it, along with limiting how far the window can open then maybe a cheap form of CDL could be devised which wouldn't bankrupt WCR

But then you come back to how that's going to be powered.