As we are now midway through the second year of the Three Counties Project a critical look at ourselves is justified. Our membership has grown steadily, with a wide range of vehicles now being represented. Our move to Chalgrave Village Hall for our meetings has been a success judged by the attendance figures, which have been in the fifties for several of our meetings last season.
We are still researching possible sites for a permanent Three Counties Museum, but before we can progress in this direction, charitable status must be obtained, and museum registration will also be necessary. Unfortunately without the Heritage Lottery funding and other grants it will not be possible and full business rates would be payable on any premises bought or rented.
The Committee have persuaded member Mike Francis, an accountant by profession, to guide us through our application to the Charity Commissioners. A volunteer is needed to act as Curator to deal with the procedures involved in obtaining Museum registration. This is a lengthy procedure involving accurate documentation of all the artefacts accredited to 3CBCVM - we also have the added problem of a number of the number of exhibits which are privately owned. These problems are not insurmountable, but need to be properly addressed at an early stage.
Members who were present at the April meeting will be aware that we now have our own mugs for sale at £3.00 each, details of which can be found elsewhere on the site - initial sales figures have been encouraging, so get one before they all go!
The Spring meetings have been notable for the high standard of speakers, including Group Captain Peter Garth of the Airship Heritage Trust, and Colin Curtis OBE, whose talk about the development of the Routemaster was most enlightening. It is pleasing to note that Colin has agreed to visit us again next year, on March 25th. Future meetings include presentations by Sam Mullins of the London Transport Museum, and Dennis Talbot of the Manchester Museum of Transport, and also slideshows by Michael Trew and John Hambley. Anyone who can recommend new speakers for the future will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks to the efforts of Nick Doolan and Jonathan Wilkins, the Three Counties Website is going from strength to strength, and has given us a world-wide web presence - we have received contact from people as far away as Canada supporting our cause here in the Three Counties.
Finally, thanks must go to Carol Warren and Avril Chapman, who between them have served the refreshments at the Chalgrave meetings. Thanks must also go to Mick Rolley for his supply of refreshments, and to all members who have donated prizes to and taken part in the raffles, the income has allowed us to cover our meeting expenses comfortably.
Dave Johnson
Notes from the nearside
This column is intended for little snippets of news, gossip and items of interest which crop up from time to time - any items for inclusion are very welcome. Anyhow, some of my own opinions.
Cobham Bus Rally in April was well attended although many of the vehicles seemed to be very modern compared to previous years - this seems to be a trend that rallies are taking now - less older vehicles and many more new and company vehicles.
The RF 50 event in May co-incided with the Quainton event on Whitsun bank Holiday Monday, again both events were well attended although the former event naturally contained a rather singular theme compared to the latter.
Luton Festival of Transport on June 10th was somewhat damper than usual by all accounts and was not up to the usual high standards in terms of organisation and location compared to past years. Three Counties had a stand, and with our new display boards we made a good impression to the public, thanks go to all those members who provided vehicles for the display. Going back to the organisational aspect of things, it would be a shame if all the good work put in by the CVPG so far was lost in future events. It is believed that a number of entrants have voiced their opinion direct to the CVPG regarding the format. Lets hope for a return to top form next year...
One slightly sad note to round off the above event, Mick Rolley regrettably broke a rear spring on his Lincolnshire Lodekka OVL 473 in a pothole on his way back from Luton. Fortunately after some 'phoning around Malcolm Skevington came to the rescue and all was well again within a week.
On another sad note, we must record the cancellation of Mick and Vic's Woburn Rally this year, due to the authorities considering the Foot & Mouth risk to be too great if the event went ahead. It is a bitter blow particularly at this late stage of planning and organisation. I sympathise with the view of the authorities, as many of our larger vehicles are stored on farms, and there is a potentially small risk if there are livestock present on the site. This event would also have been the BBPG's tenth anniversary rally, what a shame that such prestigious events have had to be cancelled - we look forward to their return next year.
Vehicle Notes - The Midland Red Leyland Leopard
674 made it through the rest of the season without further mishap, and since then attention has largely focused on attending to a few minor matters, other pressures preventing a concerted effort on some bigger jobs that we know will have to be done eventually. Firstly, the rearmost catch on the rear floor trap has been replaced. A 'new' one was procured during a touring holiday in Worcestershire, when Carolyn and I happened to tour into Martin Perry's yard at Bromyard, a coach operator and dealer whose services I recommend to those owning vehicles of a similar vintage to ours. There has also been the small matter of a broken bolt on the driver's seat pedestal, which has required the seat to be removed. Still it's been a chance to treat some areas which are usually inaccessible, and to clean up the lino in the cab.
So, what's been happening with your vehicle?
Matthew Gamble
Report on the Risk assessment Course
The course was held on Saturday 10th March at Manchester Museum of Transport. Our thanks to the Museum for its hospitality. It was led by David Greenway and attended by 12 delegates from a variety of museums and events.
I have to admit to having a prejudice against health and safety gurus, or at least, I had. Because secretly I was disappointed that the course was not about how to stop volunteers drinking Hammerite or throwing lighted matches into cans filled with petrol. Instead, it taught us to how to recognise real risks, how to quantify them, and how to come up with defensible measures which should mitigate against those risks. I would recommend the course to anyone whether they work in a vehicle workshop or an office.
First, that word ‘work’. It was made quite clear to us from the start that in the eyes of the law, volunteers are indistinguishable from paid staff, and that the organisation for which they are volunteering is responsible for their safety (even if they do wilfully drink the Hammerite).
Then David teased out of us why accidents occur. They are caused either by unsafe acts - stepping out in front of a bus, for example, or unsafe conditions - allowing people to circulate in an area where buses are being driven. He also outlined the domino theory - that if you have a number of minor injury accidents, then statistically you are likely at some point to get a major injury accident. Similarly, if you are getting a number of serious injuries, the chance of getting a fatality increases. So the key means to prevent fatalities is to stop the minor accidents occurring. This doesn’t mean that because we have had no accidents to date we can be complacent - there’s always the exception to buck the statistical trend.
The first step in Risk Assessment is identification of hazards. A hazard can range from a wire trailing across a floor, to a need to lift batteries, to the need to reverse a bus on a crowded rally field.
The second step is to consider who might be harmed. In a workshop sealed off from public access, it should be restricted to paid staff or volunteers - assuming we have sealed it off properly. On a rally field, it could clearly be members of the public, of whom photographers, for example, are at particular risk from moving vehicles.
The third step is to assess the level of risk. We’re back to probabilities, or chance. Seizure caused by over-excitement on a rally field may be a minor risk which could, potentially, be suffered by lots of people. There is rather more chance of someone slipping a disk carrying batteries in a workshop, but it’s a risk that is restricted to a small number of people. So risk is a measure of the likelihood of harm, and the severity of that harm or damage. We need to consider whether existing precautions already adequately control the risk. For instance, there may already be a rule on a rally field that no driver is to reverse a vehicle without assisted, or standing instructions in a workshop on how heavy items are to be carried.
The fourth step is to consider what further action is necessary to control risk. You may decide that not only must buses not be reversed unassisted on a rally field, but also that all such movements should be completed before the crowds arrive.
Steps 3 and 4 need to be codified. We don’t need to get mathematical - we only need a scale of risk of high, medium and low; we need to state who it might affect, and what we’re going to do to minimise the problem. But we do need to think about the details. The general public might be at risk on a rally field. But we need to think about particular groups, for example, photographers, or pregnant women. We can then show that we have considered the problem in a structured and defensible way.
The last step is monitoring and review. How many accidents are we getting now? And what can we do to reduce the risk yet further? We’re about to do something new - changing an engine, perhaps. So we need to do a new risk assessment.
That was the first session. The second session saw us split into groups of three with specific problems to consider. For example, City of Portsmouth Transport Department have a particular situation on running days when buses are required to reverse into their building. Another group considered the hazards, risks, and control measures involved in changing an engine. Our group considered the risk at a running day, when bus owners known and unknown offer their vehicles for service, either beforehand or on the day. An example here was that the bus might be unroadworthy. The remedy is to insist on seeing a valid MoT certificate. Or we might decide that only a PSV tested vehicle will do. Or we might go one stage further and insist on an inspection on the day. There is a risk that the driver might be reckless or incompetent. Again, the measure to mitigate risk might be to insist on the driver being PCV or PSV qualified. But what if he’s fine on Optare Aleros but has never driven a crash box bus with vacuum brakes? So, another mitigating measure might be to insist on a separate test or vehicle familiarisation run before we let him loose on passengers. Then there’s the insurance aspect, and so on. The key we learnt was that identifying hazards, assessing risk and establishing controls were not rocket sciences.
The course was highly productive. Above all, it gave those of present the confidence to think about problems logically, and think about how to reduce levels of risk, rather than panic and stick one’s head in the sand. One immediate outcome has been that NARTM is to review and reissue its ‘best practice’ guidance notes for bus drivers and conductors, for example. So far, ours is a fairly accident free movement. We can’t afford for it to be otherwise.
I am sure all of those present at Manchester will wish to thank David Greenway for his time and expertise and Tim Stubbs for organising it.
Matthew Gamble