And those travelling to escape the city to walk the mountains and visit a beach have possibly been commuting on trains all week so the last thing they'll want to do is spend the weekend on a train.
Is precisely what will, and is, happening. Hence a small number going into 'administration' of some kind - Llangollen being one. The problem with many is that they linger rather than disappear entirely, occasionally bursting back into the public eye when a potential funding opportunity presents itself. Just as proposals to re-open stations/whole railways as part of the big railway do. A handful of enthusiastic individuals pottering around, doing a bit of restoration in a yard somewhere, dreaming of the pre-Beeching or even pre-grouping sunlit uplands when every railway ran at a massive profit. If only the lottery/council/martian invaders would fund their project. Alas many didn't run at a profit even in the railway heyday. Lots of branches made a loss from day one - even on running costs never mind a return on capital construction costs.
It's a stretch to call some of those "preserved railways": Transperience at Low Moor was basically a museum, presumably inspired by the nearby Eureka in Halifax as much of the indoor space was very "child-centric". You did have the chance to ride a few old buses/trolleybuses/trams, but not on a revived or preserved alignment.
I never understand the French preoccupation with velorails. They're a poor railway experience, a poor cycling experience, and don't really make any contribution to heritage - effectively they're a glorified fairground ride that takes up a whole bunch of trackbed that could be used for something better. I take your point on "at least one of them", but ideally make that "just one and no more"
These people are operating commercially. One step up from a 'velorail'. On the line in Ecuador between Ibarra and San Lorenzo. They offer jungle wildlife trips!
I think you're very much in the minority. Whenever I visit the Dean Forest Railway , for example, the vast majority of passengers drive to and board at Parkend, despite Lydney Town being convenient for buses and Lydney Junction for the national rail station.
I think so. Albeit not as much as perhaps should be the case.
It's (theoretically) less than 40 miles from me, but I've never done it. Journey time by public transport is 2 hours 10 minutes if the connections work out.
Same here.
Correct....but it doesn't exactly endear the railway concerned to the owners of nearby properties!
Though it may be of interest to enthusiasts, especially if rare, it doesn't give a great impression to the general visitor.
This is a big problem. Preserved railways 'generate' an awful lot of motor traffic. Many volunteers drive long distances, often several days a week.
Mostly they’re not in good condition. Too many railways look like scrapyards with assorting rotting junk littering the place up. Every vehicle on site should have a purpose: either operational, under restoration (with a credible timescale) or supporting the above (providing parts or as stores vehicles). Anything else needs to go, and those in use as parts/stores vehicles should be moved away from the main public facing areas wherever possible.
Are you saying that volunteers who enjoy maintaining and operating railways, families who take the kids to see Thomas and enthusiasts who travel to see and ride behind preserved traction would all buy bikes and take to cycling locally instead?
As can families and enthusiasts, thus generally increasing the length of their journeys and the amount of traffic on the roads. The opposite of what the OP hopes to achieve.
I agree that even for railways with a connection to National Rail or a reliable bus connection, the vast majority of visitors will arrive by private car- particularly families. However with "green" issues becoming more of a hot button, the ability to cater for those not using private cars (and electric cars aren't the answer on their own) is an advantage for those railways that have it.