If one of the major preserved railways failed?

[william.martin]

The thing is with heritage is that we won't forever see steamies, one day there will probably be 390's and even 196's working heritage which seems mad but by all things dead or alive, train or not train, age at some point.

 

[Brush 4]

I think a failure is inevitable, we've already had a few small ones go down, Elsecar being one, although I think a relaunch is planned. Becoming a part of the network is increasingly essential. to give new life to smaller lines and increase the network itself. Too many operations adopt an insular attitude and progress is slow to non-existent. The 2 near Appleby should be linked, thereby actually using the bridge that was infilled then unfilled. A daily service should commence to Appleby with early and late through trains to Carlisle by reversing at Appleby. If the 2 lines won't do it, it should be imposed but, alongside any heritage services. As there aren't any, not really a problem.

This should happen nationwide. Swanage people have told me that there is no intention to run a winter service to Wareham yet, this was the whole point of reopening back in 1972. Old campaign adverts state this. I don't believe they want to run to Wareham at all in fact. So, impose a daily service either with the DMU's bought for the service or with 158/9's. Same with WSR, they are living on the edge, force them to run into Taunton, perhaps Bristol or, get someone else to do it. Competition is supposedly the mantra of the privatised railway so, let's see some, if the preserved lines won't do it themselves. Too much pulling up the drawbridges and too much of a siege mentality, even before Covid. Embrace change don't resist it.

 

[778]

I think the narrow gauge heritage lines will be ok, because you don't need so many volunteers to run them and less overheads.

The main thing I would be worried about if and when a heritage line does fail is the mental health of some of the volunteers. I volunteer at a heritage line (only a few times a year), and some of the volunteers I know, basically live for the railway and don't have much else in thier life.

Also what about coal supplies? That is going to become a very serious problem soon.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Its likely that the smaller heritage railways will merge with another neigbouring one to share the pool of volunteers, operation management and even catering.

One example is the Bluebell Railway and the Lavender Line - should Bluebell extend to Lewes could Copyhold Junction be built for a future extention to Isfield meaning that anything between Copyhold and Lewes would be operated jointly with the Lavender Line plus it would help the Isfield based operation since both heritage railways could at least share spares and even rolling stock.

Where as with the North York Moors I can see this being "Okehampton'd" (along with Wensleydale and even the West Somerset), in the sense of running a normal service on the existing line but extended south to Malton on a new alignment (bye bye Pickering Library and half of Lidl which would have to be demoed as its in the way).

 

[Trainlog]

I think the narrow gauge heritage lines will be ok, because you don't need so many volunteers to run them and less overheads.

The main thing I would be worried about if and when a heritage line does fail is the mental health of some of the volunteers. I volunteer at a heritage line (only a few times a year), and some of the volunteers I know, basically live for the railway and don't have much else in thier life.

Also what about coal supplies? That is going to become a very serious problem soon.

Your definitely right, the only thing that Narrow gauge has got to fear is finding volunteers to help with their lines as if you have enough cash and land you can build a private line. Coal isn't much of an issue for these lines as they can run on most things such as wood for example. The Sittingbourne and Kemsley said back in June that the only problems they face apart from the infrastructure maintenance is sourcing volunteers as they can transition onto a new fuel for their locos when the time is right.

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

If a railway goes under it may be impossible to resuscitate it. It all depends on which part of the line's corporate structure holds the Light Railway Order (or Transport and Works Order). Llangollen scraped by, for instance, because the LRO was in the name of the Society, not the bankrupt plc.
Pat

 

[Ashley Hill]

The thing is with heritage is that we won't forever see steamies, one day there will probably be 390's and even 196's working heritage which seems mad but by all things dead or alive, train or not train, age at some point.

To the public steam is the attraction on heritage lines. Most of them don’t know the difference between a Jubilee or a Manor or a Jinty from a Prairie,but at least it’s steam. Diesels are still seen as modern to them however old a loco might be. Apart from gala days steam is king and will always be to the non-enthusiast public.

 

[WAB]

The WHR(C) isn't particularly successful, though, I don't think it brings them in a fortune, and services are decidedly sparse. I wonder if they regret it? I'd not rule out that it might end up closing

Yes, it suffers from being long so you can only realistically get 1.5 runs out of a carriage set and have lots of track to maintain. The gradients on much of the line are such that you need serious locomotives for the job, and the costs associated with that. But for what it's worth, the full-line services were often fully booked days in advance last summer. Whilst that is partially down to them splitting the line at Beddgelert five days per week, it indicates the continuing success of the railway.

The WHR will probably survive because it was built as a basic railway. If times get tough, you could whittle staffing down to a station master at Caernarfon, gateman at Cae Pawb (not for much longer if rumoured plans go ahead), and a driver, fireman and guard for each train out. Not bad for a 25 mile railway! There are a lot of rich donors allied to the F&WHR, and the railway's management seem to have a decent amount of commercial nous, so I think at worst, the F&WHR would face more austerity rather than closure. It would be a bitter pill to swallow, closing the line, given trains only started running through just over a decade ago and £35 million was put into the rebuilding (much of which was public money and private donations).

As to regrets, I have no doubt that there are still some on the FR who regard the WHR as a a burden or a modern heretic railway. The final push and the first years of the full line came in the wake of the 2008 financial crash but it has still succeeded thus far. Rebuilding the WHR was probably one of the most significant and challenging achievements in railway preservation globally, so many people will have grown up with an attachment to the dream. The railway has a decent cadre of younger volunteers, and organisations like the Young Rail Professionals seem to have a close relationship with the railway. So all is not lost for the WHR, although the amount of travel required for volunteers puts the railways at a disadvantages. Additional interventions such as reduced (free for under-25s) hostel fees are being made to try and keep volunteers coming.

The WHHR at Gelerts Farm on the other end does seem to be suffering a little on the operating volunteers side, but has the benefit of being cheap and thus more attractive during these times. Then again, the tourist and second home tax, along with a shortage of hospitality staff and a perceived lack of welcome in Wales may keep the tourists away this year; we will just have to wait and see.

 

[LiftFan]

I have seen some bemoaning the end of the heritage operation operation there - but what is better a shuttle to Meldon Quarry on selected dates or a train every hour to Exeter 7 days a week? The associated society run a small museum and the station is now busier than it ever was in heritage days and nicely maintained with the buffet once again reopened.

To be fair- most of the Sprinters they're running on that line can't be getting far off the age the Mk1s started appearing on heritage lines

 

[Titfield]

To the public steam is the attraction on heritage lines. Most of them don’t know the difference between a Jubilee or a Manor or a Jinty from a Prairie,but at least it’s steam. Diesels are still seen as modern to them however old a loco might be. Apart from gala days steam is king and will always be to the non-enthusiast public.

Which is why I always shake my head in disbelief when groups of enthusiasts make statements such as "if only we had XXX class of locomotive on this line people will flock to see and travel behind it".

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2023 ==

Swanage people have told me that there is no intention to run a winter service to Wareham yet, this was the whole point of reopening back in 1972. Old campaign adverts state this. I don't believe they want to run to Wareham at all in fact. So, impose a daily service either with the DMU's bought for the service or with 158/9's.

That is the whole contradiction in so called Project Wareham. The general public naively believe or expect that restoring services to Wareham will mean a service 364 days a year from say 07:00 to 19:00 possibly even later with a frequency of every 2 hours or better. (It would have to be hourly to match the bus).

The reality is that Project Wareham would be 4 times a day from C10:30 - 16:30 5 days a week for 12/16/20 weeks of the year. The fares would be double if not treble the bus fares because the fares can not undermine the heritage rail operation. As a tourist attraction the Wareham service may just about cover its direct operating costs but would not cover its overhead costs or repay / give a return on the capital invested in the track / signalling system / mainline rolling stock.

The harsh reality is that either Swanage Railway give it up as a bad job or Dorset Council and other funding bodies will have to provide a significant subsidy which I doubt they would either have the resources or the motivation to do so given the very limited benefit it delivers. Much is talked about taking traffic off the roads but I believe that to be doubtful: (1) the most congested road in Purbeck is the road from the Bakers Arms Roundabout (A35) to Wareham (the A351). If passengers travel by car to join the train at Wareham this does not alleviate this. (2) ideally passengers would travel by train from XX to Wareham to connect. However the high fares on the national network especially when compared to the cost of petrol if it is 2 or more passengers travelling together make this unlikely to be the choice passengers make (3) arranging cheaper through fares is (a) something SWR are unlikely to agree to (b) would undermine the existing swanage railway fare structure.

As harsh as it will seem from the public transport point of view the ideal solution would be for SWR to take over the branch line (a la Barnstaple) and for Swanage Railway as a heritage railway to decamp elsewhere (Shillingstone for example). I do not see how the two can co-exist given the fare structure which would either bankrupt SRC or cause huge problems with customers. You cant say travel on the 158 it is £8 return to Wareham but travel on the steam train and it is £20 return. It would cause nothing but grief and angst.

 

[stuu]

You cant say travel on the 158 it is £8 return to Wareham but travel on the steam train and it is £20 return. It would cause nothing but grief and angst.

Why not? Isn't that exactly what happens with the Jacobite at Fort William? How does ticketing work on the NYMR to Whitby?

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

Which is why I always shake my head in disbelief when groups of enthusiasts make statements such as "if only we had XXX class of locomotive on this line people will flock to see and travel behind it".

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2023 ==



That is the whole contradiction in so called Project Wareham. The general public naively believe or expect that restoring services to Wareham will mean a service 364 days a year from say 07:00 to 19:00 possibly even later with a frequency of every 2 hours or better. (It would have to be hourly to match the bus).

The reality is that Project Wareham would be 4 times a day from C10:30 - 16:30 5 days a week for 12/16/20 weeks of the year. The fares would be double if not treble the bus fares because the fares can not undermine the heritage rail operation. As a tourist attraction the Wareham service may just about cover its direct operating costs but would not cover its overhead costs or repay / give a return on the capital invested in the track / signalling system / mainline rolling stock.

The harsh reality is that either Swanage Railway give it up as a bad job or Dorset Council and other funding bodies will have to provide a significant subsidy which I doubt they would either have the resources or the motivation to do so given the very limited benefit it delivers. Much is talked about taking traffic off the roads but I believe that to be doubtful: (1) the most congested road in Purbeck is the road from the Bakers Arms Roundabout (A35) to Wareham (the A351). If passengers travel by car to join the train at Wareham this does not alleviate this. (2) ideally passengers would travel by train from XX to Wareham to connect. However the high fares on the national network especially when compared to the cost of petrol if it is 2 or more passengers travelling together make this unlikely to be the choice passengers make (3) arranging cheaper through fares is (a) something SWR are unlikely to agree to (b) would undermine the existing swanage railway fare structure.

As harsh as it will seem from the public transport point of view the ideal solution would be for SWR to take over the branch line (a la Barnstaple) and for Swanage Railway as a heritage railway to decamp elsewhere (Shillingstone for example). I do not see how the two can co-exist given the fare structure which would either bankrupt SRC or cause huge problems with customers. You cant say travel on the 158 it is £8 return to Wareham but travel on the steam train and it is £20 return. It would cause nothing but grief and angst.

Absolutely so!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why can't you say that? Doesn't that exact situation exist with the Jacobite?

 

[Titfield]

Why not? Isn't that exactly what happens with the Jacobite at Fort William? How does ticketing work on the NYMR to Whitby?

The Jacobite is a premium product operating only twice a day with prebooked seats and no intermediate stops. Services along the Swanage branch line are / were every 40/45 minutes with intermediate stops at Herston Halt, Harmans Cross and Corfe Castle. Much more opportunity for confusion and difficult to manage. You cant even print "valid only on steam trains" on the SRC tickets because the SRC uses DMUs and Class 33 loco hauled carriages from time to time.

Not sure how the NYMR manage on the Whitby but again I think the frequency is a lot lower and thus the opportunity for confusion.

 

[paul1609]

Why can't you say that? Doesn't that exact situation exist with the Jacobite?

It does and the publicity that the Jacobite generates also has generated a "cut price Jacobite" boom for the Scotrail Mallaig services which in season are often loaded with coach parties. The Scotrail staff seem to be keen to encourage this business, my last trip out to Arisaig we were treated to warning announcements on the approach to Glenfinan Viaduct and invitation to step on the platform to watch the steam train pass.

 

[philthetube]

The Jacobite would not run had Harry Potter not been around.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Jacobite would not run had Harry Potter not been around.

It's existed for years. It's not a Harry Potter thing, though I'm sure it has brought extra business.

 

[trebor79]

The Jacobite would not run had Harry Potter not been around.

It's existed for years. It's not a Harry Potter thing, though I'm sure it has brought extra business.

Decades! There was a whole episode of "The Train Now Departing" dedicated to it in the 1980's (although I don't think it was called "The Jacobite" then, but it was a seasonal steam service operated by K4 The Great Marquess).

 

[Falcon1200]

Also what about coal supplies? That is going to become a very serious problem soon.

Agree. Also, IMHO, it is only a matter of time before the environmentalists turn their attention to the pollution produced by heritage railways, not just from steam locos but diesels too; Which is one reason why I am uneasy about the delight some enthusiasts show in diesel locos producing huge amounts of 'clag'; There are even DVDs on the subject!

Why not? Isn't that exactly what happens with the Jacobite at Fort William? How does ticketing work on the NYMR to Whitby?

They are very different operations from the national rail services over the routes; The Jacobite does not provide the local service between Mallaig and Fort William, neither does the NYMR between Whitby and Grosmont; Both are purely tourist operations.

 

[A0]

Swanage I'd put in the same bracket as Okehampton - it needs reopening as a "proper" branch line to reduce the number of cars through Corfe Castle.

Except it won't - the markets are fundamentally different. In the case of Okehampton it's about people in the area heading *out* and it gives them better access to Exeter and beyond.

Whereas Swanage has things like Corfe Castle - if you seriously think putting the Swanage railway back on the mainline map will deter tourists from driving to Corfe Castle then you need to give your head a wobble. People aren't going to drop their car at Poole or Dorchester and then take the train in - especially if they're holidaying it the area so have arrived by car to begin with.

Off season that bit of Dorset is fairly quiet - it's only in the holiday season things get busy - and that's why the P&R from Nordern actually made the most sense as an approach.

The WHR(C) isn't particularly successful, though, I don't think it brings them in a fortune, and services are decidedly sparse. I wonder if they regret it? I'd not rule out that it might end up closing, though I'd love to see more done with it for actual public transport, a DMU or even BEMU shuttle service of some kind linked into the Sherpa'r Wyddfa service would be quite good - remember plenty of people will use trains who won't use buses, and Beddgelert isn't great with cars.

It's a real pity Snowdon Ranger isn't the main path up the mountain (nor a particularly interesting one) - if they had a station at Pen y Pass (I know the practicality issues!) they'd take a fortune by running hiker's services.

You're having a laugh - there's nowhere near enough traffic to make a viable rail service on that corridor as a 'non tourist' thing. You're the one who makes the point closing the Conwy Valley and replacing it with a bus would make more sense - if the WHR (C) were to close, then again a bus would be the only sensible / viable alternative - and indeed is the only practical option if you're looking to provide a public transport service. The station at Beddgelert is on the edge of the village, Rhyd Ddu and Waunfaur are in the middle of nowhere and Dinas has a regular bus service by virtue of being on the old A487.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agree. Also, IMHO, it is only a matter of time before the environmentalists turn their attention to the pollution produced by heritage railways, not just from steam locos but diesels too; Which is one reason why I am uneasy about the delight some enthusiasts show in diesel locos producing huge amounts of 'clag'; There are even DVDs on the subject!

Yes, I do think this is a big threat - at some point (a while off yet), burning fossil fuels is likely to be banned completely, I reckon. Scout campfires are probably the other thing that will be affected, particularly on those sites located in or near towns.

 

[birchesgreen]

Can't wait till Greta turns up at the SVR Diesel Gala shouting how dare you at the visiting Tractor.

 

[Dai Corner]

Yes, I do think this is a big threat - at some point (a while off yet), burning fossil fuels is likely to be banned completely, I reckon. Scout campfires are probably the other thing that will be affected, particularly on those sites located in or near towns.

Even before any ban on burning fossil fuels I can envisage some potential visitors deciding not to support attractions which do.

Would a hydrogen-burning steam loco or a battery electric one in a heritage diesel bodyshell have the same draw as the real thing for enthusiasts and general visitors?

 

[Titfield]

Yes, I do think this is a big threat - at some point (a while off yet), burning fossil fuels is likely to be banned completely, I reckon. Scout campfires are probably the other thing that will be affected, particularly on those sites located in or near towns.

I tend to think that operating old diesels is more likely to cause "trouble" than the use of coal. Take away coal and the purpose of heritage railways is lost. The All Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Railways has effectively said that the amount of coal burnt by heritage railways / traction engines is de minimis in the grand scheme of things and the group recognises the value of such tourism attractions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even before any ban on burning fossil fuels I can envisage some potential visitors deciding not to support attractions which do.

Would a hydrogen-burning steam loco or a battery electric one in a heritage diesel bodyshell have the same draw as the real thing for enthusiasts and general visitors?

I reckon you'd get away with a clean steam loco (e.g. hydrogen or battery - all you need is something that will boil the metaphorical kettle) as long as there was still steam coming out of it. You'd lose the lovely smoky smell, but most people would probably not really notice as it'd still hiss, emit steam and something would come out of the chimney.

I'd agree the clag-seeking diesel enthusiast market would probably die, but could we see more EMU and electric loco preservation by way of adding batteries which would appeal to a different group? Hard to imagine a battery powered 350 tootling up and down a fake version of the St Albans branch in LM green now, but then it was probably hard to imagine a steam loco doing so in 1950!

It might I suppose be that some heritage diesel operation can continue using biofuels and with filters fitted to the exhausts. This would normally cause too much loss of performance on an old engine, but we're talking about vehicles designed to do at least 75mph barely reaching 25.

 

[TAS]

The other possibility on the fossil fuel point would be an exemption for heritage purposes (particularly for coal), which could probably be justified given the relatively low amounts involved. I would expect the sector to lobby for this and such a campaign to achieve a decent level of media and political buy-in.

However, I could certainly see such any such exemption being accompanied by a requirement to offset the resulting emissions in some way. This would make continued fossil fuel usage even more costly, adding the costs of compliance with an offsetting regime to the increased cost of using what would now be a very specialist resource.

 

[wce]

Decades! There was a whole episode of "The Train Now Departing" dedicated to it in the 1980's (although I don't think it was called "The Jacobite" then, but it was a seasonal steam service operated by K4 The Great Marquess).

It Started in 1984 under Scotrail originally running as “The West Higlander” (as it was at the time of the train now departing program) and later “The Lochaber”.

In 1995, due to privatisation, WCR applied for and was awarded the paths of the steam operation which it has continued to run ever since as “The Jacobite”.

 

[Titfield]

The other possibility on the fossil fuel point would be an exemption for heritage purposes (particularly for coal), which could probably be justified given the relatively low amounts involved. I would expect the sector to lobby for this and such a campaign to achieve a decent level of media and political buy-in.

However, I could certainly see such any such exemption being accompanied by a requirement to offset the resulting emissions in some way. This would make continued fossil fuel usage even more costly, adding the costs of compliance with an offsetting regime to the increased cost of using what would now be a very specialist resource.

To respond to the first point I think an exemption is what the House of Commons All Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Railways and the Heritage Railway Association either have in mind or are working towards.

Coal will be more costly but like the price of petrol / diesel how much this is driven by demand and how much by market manipulation / the imagined effects of world events.

I do think that Heritage Railways could do more to reduce emissions / their carbon footprint. I have listed some ideas in the past (e.g. low voltage / led bulbs / more efficient heating systems in offices, better building insulation, car share schemes, more focus on promoting public transport to get to / from the heritage railway, rainwater collection systems etc etc). I know some railways do some of this but I think it would be fair to say many have barely made a start on this.

 

[eldomtom2]

I highly doubt combustible fuel will be banned any time soon. The larger problem is finding a suitable alternative to coal as it becomes ever more expensive, though progress seems to be being made on that front.

 

[E27007]

I attended a meeting of a preserved railway, a sub-branch of the railway support society, the chair addressed the members present with the news that costs of routine repairs of steam locos are 40% more than a couple of years ago.

Not the news we want to hear