Results from former poll's

Poll 7

Can the Safety Management system be merged into the Quality Management system?

Result: 'Yes' (62%), 'No' (37%)

The Safety Management System "produces" the Safety plan that defines task, roles and procedures. Such input is well-placed in the Quality Management system in an Organization. From this point of view, the answer is a plain 'Yes'. However, it has some drawbacks concerning the Safety Approval work if the two systems are merged into one system without a possibility to distingiush between Safety and Quality tasks: Any change in any procedure in the Quality System must subsequently be presented to the Safety Authority because it potentially have an impact on Safety.
But the answer is 'Yes'.

Poll 6

Are bonus arrangements suitable for Operational staff as regularity increasing measure?

Result: 'Yes' (43%), 'No' (56%)

The question was raised by the Chinese delegation at an international railway safety conference. They concluded that when the staff was paid with bonus arrangements if regularity increased, then they had a tendency to jeopardize the safety. As an example, incidents had occurred where the train driver started the train when an umbrella was stuck in the door, forcing the passengers on platform to jump.
Therefore, the answer must be 'No'.

Poll 5

Is Independency intact, if the Project Manager and the Validator report to separate Managers, but have office jobs side by side?

Result: 'Yes' (65%), 'No' (35%)

There has to an adequate level of independency between the Project Manager and the Validator. This independency is intact because they report to different managers. From this point of view, I agree with the 'Yes' voters.
However, during a project lifetime a number of disagreements must be expected between the Project Manager and Validator e.g. whether a change-request should be validated by a time-costly retesting.
It is more comfortable for both parts to be located in different offices during such conflicts.
Therefore, I lean towards the 'No'.

Poll 4

Do simple and low-level safety-related projects have a bagatelle border for approvals?

Result: 'Yes' (38%), 'No' (62%)

It is a question often raised by e.g. operational staff: "We need to change this rubber pipe to another type, urgently - can we do it? It is such a small item without any safety relevance!"
If there was a bagatelle border, who should decide whether the change was below or above the border and on which basis? In order to take such a decision, it is necessary to make a fast risk analysis, define the safety function affected by the change etc. in the head - so why not write it down on some very simple key documents?
Therefore, I agree with the 62%.

Poll 3

Is an ISO 9001 certificate a basic EN 50126 requirement?

Result: 'Yes' (40%), 'No' (60%)

The voting result reflects the ambiguity in the EN 5012x suite; EN 50128 (about software) states that ISO 9003 is a basic requirement. But EN 50126, chapter 5.3.5.d) states there “shall be a quality management system compliant with the requirements of ISO 9001”, meaning ISO 9001 is not a formal requirement.

Poll 2
In which phase should the first revision of the 'Safety plan' be released?

Result: 'Concept' (46%), 'System Definition' (46%), 'Risk analysis' (7%), 'System requirements' (0%)

The voting result shows an agreement among the voters that it has to be in either the 'Concept' phase or in the 'System Definition' phase. According to Figure 9 in EN 50126, it has to be in the System Definition phase. See the Figure in chapter "Focus on the Source" in The Key Documents.

Poll 1:
Would you name the task "to inspect a train and report it ready for test runs" as:

Result: Verification (70%), Validation (10%), Assessment (20%)

I agree with the 70 % majority. I consider it as a verifying task, stating that we are ready to move on to the next phase in the V-model. See further explanation in chapter "Interpretation", question 1 in the quiz in verification, validation and assessment.