Britain's Boring Preservation Movement

[mushroomchow]

We have a Mk. 1 converted into a veranda coach at the Central, if that counts. You have to pay through the nose to use it, sure, but at least we have it.

My main bugbear is the insistence on using BR liveries 90% of the time for steam locos. I get that it's what people "around back then" remember, but with the greatest of due respect, the heritage movement isn't just for the old boys. Preservation was much more adventurous with its livery choices in its earlier years, but even that was partially driven by the senior members of the early movement wanting to see the liveries they grew up with back on the rails.

I'd go further and encourage lines to develop their own liveries and identities. Some lines do this to an extent, but I enjoy seeing a steamer with a unique livery - the K&ESR do it a lot, but that's largely due to their unique identity as a Colonel Stephens product rather than any modern intention of developing a bespoke identity.

After all, a lot of heritage lines have now been operating as independent entities for almost as long as they existed in commercial use. It's about time they broke out to form their own identity, because the paying public care less and less about authentic recreation of a tiny period in railway history (usually the 1960s) than they do about steam traction and a "heritage" feeling in general.

Increasingly, I'm noticing lines trending towards BR Blue as a focus, too. It's exactly the same thing that has happened with the standardisation of focus on the 50s and 60s over the past couple of decades - the people calling the shots remember it and want to recreate it. That nostalgia is even more misplaced than the previous creative dearth - the 1970s and early 80s were an absolute wilderness for the railways and should not be remembered fondly.

As for "mutilating" coaches, there are plenty of Mk. 1s rotting in carriage sidings up and down the land, and converting a few of these wouldn't exactly hurt the preservation movement. If anything, there are too many coaches in preservation not to experiment. And then there's the necessity for equal access - the days of being able to bung wheelchair passengers in the guard cage of trains are thankfully coming to an end, but that means stripping out all or part of a coach interior to provide ample space - and I don't see anybody complaining about that.

So yes, in a nutshell, heritage railways need to be more adventurous. A unique identity is far more marketable than "we recreate the same thing you can see at 50 other places in Britain". And God forbid we get 30 years down the line and find the people in charge nostalgic for clapped-out sprinters still running in Regional Railways livery half a decade after privatisation!

 

[muddythefish]

We have a Mk. 1 converted into a veranda coach at the Central, if that counts. You have to pay through the nose to use it, sure, but at least we have it.nd God forbid we get 30 years down the line and find the people in charge nostalgic for clapped-out sprinters still running in Regional Railways livery half a decade after privatisation!

One problem... the preservation movement depends on volunteers, and I can guarantee the vast majority would walk away if the locos and rolling stock on their line was turned in some sort of corporate livery.

Take the SVR. Can you imagine the board proposing a GW 2-6-2 and the GW carriage set into SVR "colours"? There would be a mutiny, and the line would quickly collapse through lack of a workforce.

 

[alexl92]

Part of the reason that New Build steam is becoming so popular is because it's seen as vital to being able to continue to operate steam long into the future - locos from pre-1947 are now 70+ years old and cannot necessarily be kept going indefinitely.

With that in mind, what is the future for coaches on heritage lines? Can Mk1s be kept going forever? If not, what replaces them? There aren't enough vacuum braked mk2s and for anything built later than that there are other compatibilitty issues. Could new-build MK1s be an option?

And as for open coaches...

 

[StephenHunter]

Increasingly, I'm noticing lines trending towards BR Blue as a focus, too. It's exactly the same thing that has happened with the standardisation of focus on the 50s and 60s over the past couple of decades - the people calling the shots remember it and want to recreate it. That nostalgia is even more misplaced than the previous creative dearth - the 1970s and early 80s were an absolute wilderness for the railways and should not be remembered fondly.

The HST and the arrival of the PEP family will be remembered fondly by some.

Also, what I'm sure many of the younger enthusiasts would like to see is a third-rail line running the old EMUs. Ardingly is the one that's often proposed and I believe the Bluebell have it as a possibility out to 2038.

 

[trash80]

Increasingly, I'm noticing lines trending towards BR Blue as a focus, too. It's exactly the same thing that has happened with the standardisation of focus on the 50s and 60s over the past couple of decades - the people calling the shots remember it and want to recreate it. That nostalgia is even more misplaced than the previous creative dearth - the 1970s and early 80s were an absolute wilderness for the railways and should not be remembered fondly.

I don't think you quite understand what nostalgia is and how is works for people.

 

[muddythefish]

Part of the reason that New Build steam is becoming so popular is because it's seen as vital to being able to continue to operate steam long into the future - locos from pre-1947 are now 70+ years old and cannot necessarily be kept going indefinitely.

Well yes, they can actually, because the preservation movement has the capacity to renew any part of the loco - including the boiler. The New Build phenomenon is an attempt to fill in the gaps of types of locos that did not escape the cutter's torch - nostalgia again.

 

[richieb1971]

Top speeds of 25mph are boring. I have no idea why people video trains doing speeds that Usain Bolt could overtake.

 

[Harbornite]

I don't think you quite understand what nostalgia is and how is works for people.

Indeed. The Rail blue era lasted about 26 years (1966-1982) and it wasn't all bad; For example, it saw the introduction of the HST and completed electrification of the WCML. Also, as you were getting at, people have memories of that era and if they want to recreate it with their locos then they should.

 

[XDM]

Top speeds of 25mph are boring. I have no idea why people video trains doing speeds that Usain Bolt could overtake.

Some people see it as relaxing, but 25 mph is a relic from light railway order days in the 1890's, or may be a little later.
I do not see why it could not be raised to 35 mph on standard gauge single track where no other train could be involved if there was a derailment. Mr Grayling could allow that at the stroke of a ministerial pen & those railways that did not want the extra speed could stick to 25 mph.

 

[xotGD]

Indeed. The Rail blue era lasted about 26 years (1966-1982) and it wasn't all bad; For example, it saw the introduction of the HST and completed electrification of the WCML. Also, as you were getting at, people have memories of that era and if they want to recreate it with their locos then they should.

From an enthusiast perspective, introduction of the HST was the WORST thing that happened in the Rail Blue era. Decimated loco-hauled services out of Paddington and Kings Cross, then on cross-country and out of St Pancras, resulting in the demise of some of the best and best-loved locomotives on the network.

As for electrification, if an 86 is regarded as better than a pair of 50s, so be it.

 

[mushroomchow]

Fair enough regarding BR Blue era - though I fear that overzealous pursuing of recreating the post-steam era is going to turn off the general public who, for the most part, just want to see a steam train. They don't care if it's a 9F or an Austerity in a non-authentic livery - riding a steam train is the primary reason they come to heritage railways.

With a tiny few exceptions (such as the Epping Ongar Railway, which itself benefits more from location than anything else), the lines with the highest patronage are the ones where you can turn up and expect to ride a steam train most days. Even the diesel gala at the Central puts on a steam train for the dining service, because people don't pay £50 a head to eat dinner pulled by a diesel.

Diesel heritage is always going to be a niche, because they only really appeal to enthusiasts. Even factoring in nostalgia, the paying public would far rather sit and enjoy a steam train ride they were not even born to witness than recreate a 1980s commute on a 101. We have to ultimately remember that money talks, and that the only railway in the country that could get away with rebranding as a BR Blue-focussed line without alienating its general public customer base would be the Vale of Rheidol (for obvious reasons) - unless, of course, they repainted a kettle into a non-authentic BR Blue livery!

If the Central stopped running steam tomorrow and the Battlefield Line decided it was going to run steam every week, I might still enjoy playing around on the Crompton, but the public would be over to Shackerstone in a heartbeat, even if there is less to do there in general.

Where diesel does have a future is the increasing viability of commercial services on heritage lines. A nicely-kitted out rake or DMU could feasibly operate scheduled services - such as those trialled on the Swanage - which either venture onto the national network or operate regular and more competitively-priced services on the existing routes. This in itself, however, is only viable for lines in areas with obvious commercial destinations - you're never going to get a commuter train operating on the North Norfolk for example. It's also going to be tricky to run a competitive timetable without some relaxing of the Light Railway Order speed rules.

One problem... the preservation movement depends on volunteers, and I can guarantee the vast majority would walk away if the locos and rolling stock on their line was turned in some sort of corporate livery.

Take the SVR. Can you imagine the board proposing a GW 2-6-2 and the GW carriage set into SVR "colours"? There would be a mutiny, and the line would quickly collapse through lack of a workforce.

That's nonsense and a complete misunderstanding of why people volunteer for a heritage railway. Painting a loco in something other than Brunswick Green, or kitting out a rake to give your railway "something different" is not only not an issue in the slightest to all but the most curmudgeonly volunteers, but a positive thing that helps set it apart from what is, by global terms, an incredibly saturated heritage market.

The Verandah coach I'm referring to is part of the longer "Cromwell Pullman" rake, which is itself a bespoke liveried set. It's based on GWR chocolate and cream, but is in no way an "authentic" look. Funnily enough, the carriageworks volunteers at Rothley didn't down tools and quit when asked to produce it - far from it, they were delighted to have something "different" to do and turned out a brilliant coach rake that is very much our own! I'm sure it would be the same at Loughborough if, say, we gave the Jinty a non-authentic GCR livery. Hell, we already did that in recent years with our LMS Crimson 8F, and that was very popular with volunteers and enthusiasts!

A railway doesn't have to paint its trains hot pink with polkadots to have a unique identity!

The SVR is a bad example for a line which needs to think outside the box, because they have a very strong GWR identity, which is clearly different to the prevailing obsession with the BR era on other lines - even Western region ones such as the Gloucestershire / Warwickshire. That's unique in the Midlands at the very least - but I still think you're massively exaggerating the backlash it would produce from volunteers. Frankly, I don't think people are as bothered by it as you think.

 

[Dougal2345]

At the weekend I travelled for the first time on Swanage's Devon Belle observation carriage. I think that's probably the ideal carriage for a scenic railway - almost 360 degrees of unobstructed view (low seat backs, minimal pillars between the windows), with the M7's smokebox visible at the front. A massive improvement on the 4TC and MK1s I'd travelled on earlier in the day.

One of the other passengers, getting off at Corfe Castle, commented 'That's the best £1 [ticket upgrade] I've ever spent'.

If newbuild coaches are ever necessary for preserved railways, this would definitely be the pattern to follow - imagine a whole train of them! I doubt the crashworthiness is anything to write home about though...

 

[VEP3417]

i dont think any old trains have anything to write home about when it comes to crash worthyness

i was slightly disappointed the 4tc had window bars, that did take away some of the "fun"
but then again....i was on a 4tc so really, i had nothing to complain about :P

 

[edwin_m]

Accident reports from the 50s and 60s often praise the crashworthiness of the Mk1s compared with earlier designs, most of which were timber framed. But time moves on, train speeds increase and Mk1s are now banned from the main line with limited exceptions.

 

[Flying Phil]

As Dougal has said, an observation car is an excellent vehicle and the GCR has two with one of the "Cromwell Pullman" coaches and an Ex LNER "Beavertail" coach available. There might be a second "Beavertail" which could revert back to the LNER sloping end??

 

[StephenHunter]

Accident reports from the 50s and 60s often praise the crashworthiness of the Mk1s compared with earlier designs, most of which were timber framed. But time moves on, train speeds increase and Mk1s are now banned from the main line with limited exceptions.

Problem with the Mark 1 is less the frame and more the fact it's not connected with the underneath.

 

[Flying Phil]

Crash worthiness of Mk1 coaches seems to be a long way from "Boring" preservation railways?
I suspect that the "boring" is in the eyes of the beholder and, in reality, there is sufficient variety in the railway preservation scene to satisfy a lot of people - as the visitor numbers affirm (and many repeat their visits)

 

[Harbornite]

As for electrification, if an 86 is regarded as better than a pair of 50s, so be it.

That conclauion can be made if you look at performance stats from the era. I'm not sure how drastic the improvements were, but the 87s were an improvement.

 

[mushroomchow]

I don't really see where crash worthiness comes into an argument for remodelling stock on heritage railways. A 25mph limit means any crashes are unlikely to result in any real structural damage to a Mk. 1, unless you propelled two trains full pelt into one another, carriages first, giving an impact speed of 50mph - which isn't going to happen. Ever.

Certainly, you're not going to see a Clapham Junction on the Mid Hants, for example.

Faster services - like TPOs and testing - are not for public use, so the risk to the public is minimal. A lot of us here, I presume, wish line speeds were higher on heritage lines, but since that doesn't seem to be in the pipeline without changes to national legislation, the current situation remains benign. Even if they were, I don't doubt that a MK 1 would retain its structural integrity in a crash at, say, 40mph.

 

[IanXC]

Where diesel does have a future is the increasing viability of commercial services on heritage lines. A nicely-kitted out rake or DMU could feasibly operate scheduled services - such as those trialled on the Swanage - which either venture onto the national network or operate regular and more competitively-priced services on the existing routes. This in itself, however, is only viable for lines in areas with obvious commercial destinations - you're never going to get a commuter train operating on the North Norfolk for example. It's also going to be tricky to run a competitive timetable without some relaxing of the Light Railway Order speed rules.

Agreed. Although I am coming to the conclusion that some kind of specialist promoter/operator/consultancy is required to get this kind of service going. Preserved railways that have tried this never seem to have made much headway when some of the projects should really be very viable.

The other place diesel heritage traction can hold its own is in improving the service pattern. A heritage railway that runs 1 train in steam is likely to have a limited frequency and an early finish. Much as I agree with the idea that the general paying public visit for steam haulage, having experienced that the opportunity to make otherwise unavailable journies, for instance, having time to stop off en route, have less worry about when the infrequent train is, and have the opportunity of a later last train are definitely going to see the benefit of that. The railway therefore controls it's operating costs when improving its timetable.

 

[mushroomchow]

Agreed. Although I am coming to the conclusion that some kind of specialist promoter/operator/consultancy is required to get this kind of service going. Preserved railways that have tried this never seem to have made much headway when some of the projects should really be very viable.

The other place diesel heritage traction can hold its own is in improving the service pattern. A heritage railway that runs 1 train in steam is likely to have a limited frequency and an early finish. Much as I agree with the idea that the general paying public visit for steam haulage, having experienced that the opportunity to make otherwise unavailable journies, for instance, having time to stop off en route, have less worry about when the infrequent train is, and have the opportunity of a later last train are definitely going to see the benefit of that. The railway therefore controls it's operating costs when improving its timetable.

Yeah, it's true that having a DMU available to run the early morning service when patronage is low allows for a longer running day without too much impact on revenue, as well as being useful as a "working" train. The one we run at the GCR is often used by staff members and for bringing supplies in too, before the "proper" trains start running. The diesel rake then complements the steam services throughout the day, but it tends to be lightly-loaded except at special events. Most people who come to the railway are more than willing to spend 30 extra minutes or so at the station to get their steam train ride. We have been running a "full" loco-hauled diesel service first thing over the summer to cope with additional loadings, but last time I was there the 31 failed on its second run and the DMU had to stand-in. :roll:

The only way I can see diesels becoming more popular going forward would be if passengers paid less to ride them - case in point, the Snowdon operate a surcharge for the privilege of riding a steam service. It would have to be done right though - it needs to be clearly marketed as a discount from existing fares, rather than making passengers pay more for steam. On lines where diesels are the exception rather than the rule, I don't see why it couldn't be done.

 

[Tomnick]

Some people see it as relaxing, but 25 mph is a relic from light railway order days in the 1890's, or may be a little later.
I do not see why it could not be raised to 35 mph on standard gauge single track where no other train could be involved if there was a derailment. Mr Grayling could allow that at the stroke of a ministerial pen & those railways that did not want the extra speed could stick to 25 mph.

In many cases, under ROGS, I don't think that Mr Grayling would even need to be involved, those which don't have a maximum speed specified in the legislation that they operate under. It'd be up to individual railways to assess the risks and mitigate as appropriate. The arguments against a higher speed are usually the expense of providing AWS/TPWS/OTMR/CDL (why would any of these be necessary at, say, 40mph vice 25mph?) and the increased maintenance costs (however, a railway doesn't *have* to operate at the higher speeds at all times!). The potential (commercial) benefits are rarely mentioned though - a better recreation of the experience, especially for those railways that portray themselves as a main line, maybe even saving a diagram to run a regular-interval service.

 

[edwin_m]

The requirement for central door locking and TPWS (or equivalent) is a piece of legislation not a standard. I'm pretty sure the exemptions allowed by this law are conditional on a 25mph maximum speed. Most preserved railways would see a higher speed as requiring a lot more hoops to be jumped through, and the result being a lot of dissatisfied punters because their train trip doesn't take so long!

In any case nearly all our preserved railways (with a handful of exceptions such as the GCR) were former branches or minor main lines where historic speeds would rarely have got much above 25mph anyway. For those that want a run at speed behind a big loco there is the main line excursion.

 

[mushroomchow]

The requirement for central door locking and TPWS (or equivalent) is a piece of legislation not a standard. I'm pretty sure the exemptions allowed by this law are conditional on a 25mph maximum speed. Most preserved railways would see a higher speed as requiring a lot more hoops to be jumped through, and the result being a lot of dissatisfied punters because their train trip doesn't take so long!

In any case nearly all our preserved railways (with a handful of exceptions such as the GCR) were former branches or minor main lines where historic speeds would rarely have got much above 25mph anyway. For those that want a run at speed behind a big loco there is the main line excursion.

There was an interesting point raised on the thread about the crisis at the Wensleydale Line, which was that it is the shorter lines that tend to have the most revenue relative to the services they run. Perhaps a line speed increase on a longer line with less going for it could combat that somewhat? It's a fine balance - punters want their steam train ride, but the longer a line is the more you need to do to keep riders interested.

I'm thinking lines like the West Somerset, which could feasibly operate at faster speeds, especially on unremarkable straight sections (such as Blue Anchor to Minehead) to allow greater timetable flexibility and ensuring that journey times don't get too long for their own good. I distinctly remember dragging my Dad onto the WSR when I was younger, only to have him fall asleep on the 90 minute trundle out of sheer boredom. As much as I love that part of the world, the scenery on the route isn't really that remarkable, and a sped-up service wouldn't go amiss, especially since it's a line seriously considering through services to the national network.

The Light Railway Order is an archaic piece of legislation from a time when Branch Line locomotives would struggle to hit 25mph as it was - it was 60 years later that the Titfield Thunderbolt managed to not breach its own only thanks to delays en-route to Mallingford!

On the legislation side of things, there would have to be a clearly-targeted expression of demand for reform of LROs shown to the DfT. It's not on the radar at the moment due to there not seeming to be any real demand for it from the HRA and individual railways, but if a case could be put forward highlighting potential operational and commercial benefits, while acknowledging and addressing safety concerns, I don't doubt it could gain traction, though the trade-off as mentioned would probably be greater scrutiny from the DfT and more stringent safety procedures.

 

[XDM]

Edwin m reckons central door locking & TPWS will have to be installed if speeds go above 25 mph. The Loughborough Leicester railway proves him wrong most weekends. I am told they can run at 60 mph. No TPWS or door locking there. How often when on a heritage railway do you hear youngsters, who were initially very excited, saying after 10 minutes 'when are we getting there' ? Quite often. How often do you see older people snoozing after the first 20 minutes? Quite often. As an earlier poster said, a burst at 40 mph on a dull stretch would wake up the flagging & excite even more the rest of us. Mr Grayling get your pen out. HRA get lobbying. At least it will get publicity for the heritage movement in the media.

 

[edwin_m]

Edwin m reckons central door locking & TPWS will have to be installed if speeds go above 25 mph. The Loughborough Leicester railway proves him wrong most weekends. I am told they can run at 60 mph. No TPWS or door locking there. How often when on a heritage railway do you hear youngsters, who were initially very excited, saying after 10 minutes 'when are we getting there' ? Quite often. How often do you see older people snoozing after the first 20 minutes? Quite often. As an earlier poster said, a burst at 40 mph on a dull stretch would wake up the flagging & excite even more the rest of us. Mr Grayling get your pen out. HRA get lobbying. At least it will get publicity for the heritage movement in the media.

A higher speed is allowed for non-passenger running (they do testing for the industry from time to time) but I'm pretty sure the passenger trains don't exceed 25mph. If they do then I'd be interested to hear what legal basis they operate under.

 

[Monty]

Edwin m reckons central door locking & TPWS will have to be installed if speeds go above 25 mph. The Loughborough Leicester railway proves him wrong most weekends. I am told they can run at 60 mph. No TPWS or door locking there. How often when on a heritage railway do you hear youngsters, who were initially very excited, saying after 10 minutes 'when are we getting there' ? Quite often. How often do you see older people snoozing after the first 20 minutes? Quite often. As an earlier poster said, a burst at 40 mph on a dull stretch would wake up the flagging & excite even more the rest of us. Mr Grayling get your pen out. HRA get lobbying. At least it will get publicity for the heritage movement in the media.

Edwin is right, during normal service days passenger trains at the GCR are limited to 25mph. To my knowledge the only private test trains and demonstration trains (like their TPO) are allowed at higher speeds. Lets get serious though for a minute, the main reason most preserved railways would not be interested in higher running speeds is because of the increased cost that comes with it while giving no tangible benefit. It's increases the wear and tear and it's the last thing most railways need or want. It's only really something that may appeal to the longer railways such as the West Somerset or North Yorkshire Moors, though that would purely be for operational reasons (ie run more trains) rather than providing a more exciting/interesting environment.

The thing that amuses me about this thread is that some would have it that the preservation movement is at risk of dying while on a whole it's never been stronger, look over the last 2 decades and see what's been achieved all over the country, it's nothing short of remarkable.

 

[Calthrop]

The “longer or shorter run” issue, as touched on in recent posts; invites pondering on, as regards the difficulty – likely impossibility – of pleasing everybody in this matter. Certainly, under a 25-mph-limit constraint, longer rides will not universally bring delight to the nostalgic-train-trip-sampling public; though for many enthusiasts, and I would think anyway some of the public, it’s a case of “the longer the better”. (I personally – regardless of speed – would be very regretful if there came only to be relatively short preserved lines operating in the UK.)

I do however find salutary to remember, a conversation some three decades ago. This happened on a visit to one of the UK’s better-established standard-gauge preserved lines. Said outfit’s line is some seven miles long. At the time which is being looked back to, it would have seemed physically quite possible to relay track and extend along a further five or six miles of its route – which section had (as with the operational-under-preservation part) remained in commercial use until a relatively late date. Extending thus, would additionally give the line a quality which I tend to value: of transforming it from running “somewhere-to-nowhere”; into “somewhere-to-somewhere”.

In a quiet spell after travelling over the railway, I made a remark along these lines to a couple of friendly volunteer staff whom I happened to encounter. These guys opined in their turn, that the majority of the “punters” who paid to travel on the line preferred their steam-train experience to be “short and sweet”; and that what said folk valued and appreciated above all about a preserved railway which they visited, was “good car-parking facilities; clean and well-appointed toilets; and courtesy on the part of the railway staff with whom they interact”.

I initially felt this, as a bit like a metaphorical bucket of cold water being dumped over my head; and my first (snobbish and condescending) thoughts were to the effect of, what Philistines the preserved-railway-visiting average Joe and Jane were – not so much “boring preservation movement”, as “boring real-people customers of that movement”: but on reflection it has come across as, instead, a sobering dose of reality. Certainly re length of run – for very many “punters”, “short is preferable” (and how much fares for the journey cost, also comes into play); regardless of how long the enthusiast would ideally wish his session of delight, to last.

A personal thing, maybe relevant – I would in fact hate a preservation scene which involved exclusively, “gricers playing trains”: the fact that a thing vital for preserved lines’ survival is fares from people who are not railway enthusiasts – albeit the purpose of their journey is to sample a nostalgic curiosity – is to me a tenuous link to what railways used to be, and IMO ideally should be, about: a commercial undertaking which just happened to be, in itself, something delightful.

 

[Cowley]

Very much in agreement with Monty and Mr Calthrops above posts. It is absolutely remarkable what has been achieved in the railway preservation movement over the last couple of decades and there's no doubt that as a movement it is stronger than ever, continually adapting, growing and evolving.
I feel less worried about its future now than I did ten years ago. There is new blood coming into it. But also importantly, people with new ideas that have helped with the way some railways run the business side of things, which in the long run will ensure their survival.
Some railways will I'm fairly certain fall by the wayside, their useful assets probably then being purchased, or just donated to the established ones.

Even if this country only contained the top 25 of the existing preserved railways (including the narrow gauge ones) we'd still be one of the best countries in the world for heritage lines (I can think of at least 5 just in Devon), and it's been anything but boring over the last few decades.

I do quite like the thought of running at 40 mph occasionally on some of the longer railways during galas perhaps, but I'm blown away by what's been achieved in my lifetime that if it ever happened it would just be another bonus.

Some of the older railways have a long and interesting history now that isn't always appreciated. It's a new history and it's interesting to think of these lines celebrating their 70th, 80th etc birthdays of being saved in a few decades time. Perhaps some of them will be operating commuter services by then? I'd hope so if they were given the help to do so.
What other forms of transport from the 1960s and earlier are people able to easily access in most parts of the country (I know that there's boats and buses, but I mean as easily)?
In a couple of decades none of the grandparents in existence will remember BR steam, yet probably most of them will have memories of travelling behind steam locomotives from their childhood (which will be ancient history to their grandchildren). I think that's something to celebrate.

 

[Calthrop]

The thing that amuses me about this thread is that some would have it that the preservation movement is at risk of dying while on a whole it's never been stronger, look over the last 2 decades and see what's been achieved all over the country, it's nothing short of remarkable.

Very much in agreement with Monty and Mr Calthrops above posts. It is absolutely remarkable what has been achieved in the railway preservation movement over the last couple of decades and there's no doubt that as a movement it is stronger than ever, continually adapting, growing and evolving.
I feel less worried about its future now than I did ten years ago. There is new blood coming into it. But also importantly, people with new ideas that have helped with the way some railways run the business side of things, which in the long run will ensure their survival.

New blood coming in, would seem to me to be the vital thing. Some enthusiasts of my (“last to know BR steam in plenty”) generation, fear that as that generation dies out / becomes too aged for physical work in preservation: too few people from succeeding generations, which never knew “real” steam, will be captivated by the glamour of steam locomotion and thus be ready to work and learn, to keep steam going under preservation. However, general picture seems to be that that’s too gloomy a prognosis. Obviously, there’ll be fewer dedicated steam fans. Still: such of those, that there will be; plus the probability that for very many of the public “consuming the preserved lines’ wares”, steam will continue to be exotic and attractive – hence a commercial reason to keep steam going in some way or shape – would give some grounds for optimism.

Some railways will I'm fairly certain fall by the wayside, their useful assets probably then being purchased, or just donated to the established ones.

Would concur: it would seem certain that some lines will perish in the times ahead. There's a thread going on at present in this sub-forum; general drift of which suggests to me anyway, that -- regrettably -- the (quite near, thence for keeps) future of the line which is its topic, looks far from bright.

Even if this country only contained the top 25 of the existing preserved railways (including the narrow gauge ones) we'd still be one of the best countries in the world for heritage lines (I can think of at least 5 just in Devon), and it's been anything but boring over the last few decades.

Maybe best to refrain from having people set out lists of their personal "top 25" -- the risk of bloodshed ensuing, might be too great !

Some of the older railways have a long and interesting history now that isn't always appreciated. It's a new history and it's interesting to think of these lines celebrating their 70th, 80th etc birthdays of being saved in a few decades time. Perhaps some of them will be operating commuter services by then? I'd hope so if they were given the help to do so.
What other forms of transport from the 1960s and earlier are people able to easily access in most parts of the country (I know that there's boats and buses, but I mean as easily)?

One wonders -- what will be the first preserved line to (excluding freakish circumstances) have run longer under preservation, than as a commercial concern?

In a couple of decades none of the grandparents in existence will remember BR steam, yet probably most of them will have memories of travelling behind steam locomotives from their childhood (which will be ancient history to their grandchildren). I think that's something to celebrate.

Admittedly "topic-drifting" from your thoughts here: something which I think I've mentioned in the past on RailUKforums -- getting a bit morbid, one might wonder how long will last, the final person to have coherent memories of BR steam. There's an enthusiast I used to know, who I see as a potential candidate -- born 1962, he had a clear and definite memory of seeing steam at London Waterloo, presumably in the very much latter times of steam working on the Bournemouth route; including being lifted onto the footplate of a Bulleid Pacific. If this chap were to live to the age of 106 (not unheard-of) and to keep his mental "marbles" to the very end (again, not totally unheard-of); he could see the hundredth anniversary of the end of BR steam, and tell of his experiencing BR steam at first hand.