Preserved Railways: Cashflow Issues

[swanhill41]

I was reading today the monthly newsletter from the Yorkshire Dales Railway..The major article was how well the Santa's had gone,taking into account the problems with Covid.
What I found surprising was the fact that they are going to be able to weather then next 3 months ,without going bust.They have in fact got cash in hand and virtually no
outstanding bills to pay.

This was a surprise to me as it is evident that some of the Preserved lines have cash issues,some lets say near terminal in accounting terms.

It will be interesting to see what the 2021 brings in terms of changes

 

[alexl92]

That's really good to hear.
I know they're currently goig through a major program of overhauling their coach fleet (much overdue) and they're also hiring Austerity Cumbria from the Furness Railway Trust and hired in Welsh Guardsman from the SVR for Christmas. Credit to them.

With regard to other railways' cashflow issues... The Embsay & Bolton Abbey Steam Railway is a relatively short (4 miles) line with a fairly small operating fleet of industrial tank engines*. Their overheads would be very different to somewhere like the West Somerset Railway which largely operates larger mainline locomotives over 22 miles of permanent way. It's a lot harder to cover all your costs with more infrastructure, more stations, more stock and bigger, more complex engine!

On the subject of the E&BASR, given that in recent years they've hired in Austerities and a GWR 56XX because the likes of Illingworth & Beatrice aren't powerful enough for the heaviest trains, it seems odd to me that the next engine they'll be finishing is an Andrew Barclay 0-4-0ST. I'd have thought it wouldn't be powerful enough? But I guess their operating department will know best!

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Multiple heading is a good flexible autonomous possibility

 

[geoffk]

Many heritage railways have of course had to lay off paid staff, despite Government grants and fund raising. Effectively they have had three winters in a row and have faced the extra costs of cleaning and planning for social distancing at stations/on board trains. No doubt they are all banking on being able to run some kind of service over Easter.

 

[Titfield]

Swanage Railway made 8 staff redundant (= approximately 20% of their workforce.) at the end of October.

It will be interesting to see if they can reduce their other costs of operating especially locomotive hire and restoration costs especially as they have the three Bunch locos only one of which has actually run in revenue service. Given they also hire from Southern Locos and have their own T3 project one wonders if there are more locos being paid for in one form or another (running or not) than the railway can actually justify.

Time will tell.

 

[alexl92]

Swanage Railway made 8 staff redundant (= approximately 20% of their workforce.) at the end of October.

It will be interesting to see if they can reduce their other costs of operating especially locomotive hire and restoration costs especially as they have the three Bunch locos only one of which has actually run in revenue service. Given they also hire from Southern Locos and have their own T3 project one wonders if there are more locos being paid for in one form or another (running or not) than the railway can actually justify.

Time will tell.

What's the deal with John Bunch? Was it the Mid Hants Railway that evicted him and his engines?

I know Swanage have told SLL that they won't need any further locos aside from the two (?) I think they're currently hiring. I guess if the loco belongs to an owning group such as SLL, then that group bears the brunt of the overhaul costs rather than the railway. But you make a very valid point. Plus, who paid for the renovation work on the two DMUs that have been overhauled to mainline standard for Wareham services?

 

[Titfield]

I dont know the full details of the Bunch deal but afaik it is a 25 year deal including restoring the two not in service Moguls and overhauling the third (in service) when it becomes due. Yes it was Mid Hants he was involved in but that ended in legal action. Not sure what the outcome was.

Swanage Railway has a relationship with SLL. It appears that work is carried out by both SR and SLL staff at the works at Herston.

There was a grant of £1.4M from the Coastal Communities Fund to restore the class 117 and 121 DMUs to mainline standards. I believe the works are almost complete but do to crashworthiness issues it is unlikely that the ORR will grant derogation for them to be used on the mainline except the very short stretch between Worgret Junction (with the Swanage branch) and Wareham.

It does seem as if with 3 Moguls, 2 SLL (not sure if period hire or pay by the day) 1 T3 (eventually) plus the 2 X DMU, 2 X Class 33 it is a lot of locos to be paying for whether that is period hire, pay by the day and some restoration costs on top.

Not sure that paying both hire fees and restoration fees for a loco is actually a sound business proposition. Restore one you own or hire one that is restored but dont pay twice!

 

[alexl92]

I'm just looking at the stock list on wikipedia. Assuming it's up to date, as far as I can tell the only steam locomotives actually owned by the Swanage Railway are the M7 and the T3. The rest are all NRM, SLL or Bunch.

 

[Titfield]

I thought the M7 was owned by Drummond Locomotives Ltd.

As I said in my post hiring is one thing, restoring a loco is another but paying for both......

 

[paul1609]

Many heritage railways have of course had to lay off paid staff, despite Government grants and fund raising. Effectively they have had three winters in a row and have faced the extra costs of cleaning and planning for social distancing at stations/on board trains. No doubt they are all banking on being able to run some kind of service over Easter.

At the K&ESR we have also had to lay off staff. Our Santa season was cancelled as a result of Kent being placed in tier 3 after the second lockdown.
We don't intend running any public trains until Easter Weekend at the earliest, a decision will be made in Mid-March.
When services do return initially it will be as last summers covid service, basically book in advance 2 to 3 trains per day, return journeys only.
We are not running any events during 2021 until the Santa season. Our finances were given a huge short term boost by 35% of last years Santa special passengers pushing forward the booking to 2021. We didn't launch a covid appeal in 2020 but are considering one now because of the duration of the crisis.

 

[randyrippley]

If railways are suffering cash flow problems, perhaps it will incentivise some to sell off the rusting piles of scrap which infest so many lines. There's money in all that old iron and steel

 

[Chris125]

There was a grant of £1.4M from the Coastal Communities Fund to restore the class 117 and 121 DMUs to mainline standards. I believe the works are almost complete but do to crashworthiness issues it is unlikely that the ORR will grant derogation for them to be used on the mainline except the very short stretch between Worgret Junction (with the Swanage branch) and Wareham.

Crashworthiness issues? IIRC they are not regarded as mk1s so those restrictions aren't applicable.

 

[Titfield]

I understand that crashworthiness does apply hence a consultants report has been required outlining mitigation to enable them to run on the mainline.

 

[paul1609]

With hindsight it might have been easier to go for some Pacers!

 

[Titfield]

The DMUs were acquired many years ago and the restoration programme started (I think) in 2014. There have been very significant problems with axles, wheelsets, engines.

My concern has always been that spending such a large amount of money (irrespective of the source) was foolhardy given that there were alternatives that could have been used for the trial. Surely it would have been better to hire in for a two year trial and see what the outcome / learnings were before committing to spending such a large amount of money. In fact it is hard to see what economic justification there can possibly be for spending £1.4M on 2 DMUs.

 

[Ralph Ayres]

...and DMUs that have no particular heritage relevance for the line in question. An SR DEMU or a Class 33/73 and 4TC set would have made rather more sense.

 

[47434]

I believe we all owe it to our Preserved Railways to support them wholeheartedly as we emerge from lockdown - heck they will need it.

 

[Titfield]

...and DMUs that have no particular heritage relevance for the line in question. An SR DEMU or a Class 33/73 and 4TC set would have made rather more sense.

There are two Class 33 resident at Swanage (privately owned) - one of which is mainlined and work is progressing on a 4TC set.

What can one say? It was described as the five shovel solution: one shovel for every day use, a second shovel in case the first breaks down, a third shovel in case the first two break down, a fourth shovel in a different colour (to keep the volunteers happy) and a fifth shovel because it was offered at very reasonable terms and only need a minor repair.

 

[theironroad]

I understand that crashworthiness does apply hence a consultants report has been required outlining mitigation to enable them to run on the mainline.

Is this an issue that's arisen recently?

The DMU Swanage to Wareham programme must be getting on for five years old soon and would have thought crashworthiness would be an early consideration?

 

[paul1609]

...and DMUs that have no particular heritage relevance for the line in question. An SR DEMU or a Class 33/73 and 4TC set would have made rather more sense.

On the K&ESR we've operated both a Hastings Unit and Class 108 there is a lot of resistance to Diesel services from our largely family/ normals/coach party customer base. However the 108 is deemed as much more acceptable because of the better forwards and rear views. Yes there is a market for the enthusiast who wants the right stock on the right line but its frankly tiny. Im a Diesel Enthusiast myself and Ive travelled to a lot of Diesel Galas up and down the country, you can guarantee that a large numbers of the passengers you will recognise from other Galas.

Is this an issue that's arisen recently?

The DMU Swanage to Wareham programme must be getting on for five years old soon and would have thought crashworthiness would be an early consideration?

I suspect that its because its taken so long that its now an issue. 10 years ago you would have the precedent of the Chiltern and Welsh Bubble Cars still being in use on the national network. Nowdays somebodies being asked to sign off on a new proposal that could see a 1960s DMMU collide head on with a main line unit at 100+? mph. Think the only heritage multiple unit in use on the mainline is the Hastings Unit and that doesn't have passengers in the front half or back of the ends because of the power cars.

 

[6Gman]

Multiple heading is a good flexible autonomous possibility

If you're suggesting double-heading using smaller locos that does rather depend on having additional traincrew available.

(Kettles are rubbish at operating in multiple!)

 

[fgwrich]

There are two Class 33 resident at Swanage (privately owned) - one of which is mainlined and work is progressing on a 4TC set.

What can one say? It was described as the five shovel solution: one shovel for every day use, a second shovel in case the first breaks down, a third shovel in case the first two break down, a fourth shovel in a different colour (to keep the volunteers happy) and a fifth shovel because it was offered at very reasonable terms and only need a minor repair.

The only catch is that the mainline ready 33 wont easily be able to work with the TC - You need the 33 - Owned by the Class 33/1 Preservation Co's loco to be mainline fitted as that has the necessary push pull equipment fitted to work with the TC.

I will admit, a small part of me wonder's how much longer 150001/002 have left - Compliant, better than a Pacer, could be painted back into the original Sprinter livery. Yes, not ideal to some, but a fairly heritage DMU with more mainline accessibility than some units (and better than a pacer!)

 

[Titfield]

Is this an issue that's arisen recently?

The DMU Swanage to Wareham programme must be getting on for five years old soon and would have thought crashworthiness would be an early consideration?

The DMU programme has been ongoing for much longer than that but iirc actual work on the DMUs started 2014.

I was told that before the DMUs were bought the DfT gave SR and DCC some form of comfort that this issue could be resolved but that was many years ago now and as we all know "times (and views / opinions) change".

When SR runs diesel / steam alternating services (green timetable) a significant proportion of passengers will wait for a steam service as thats what they want.

 

[43096]

The only catch is that the mainline ready 33 wont easily be able to work with the TC - You need the 33 - Owned by the Class 33/1 Preservation Co's loco to be mainline fitted as that has the necessary push pull equipment fitted to work with the TC.

I will admit, a small part of me wonder's how much longer 150001/002 have left - Compliant, better than a Pacer, could be painted back into the original Sprinter livery. Yes, not ideal to some, but a fairly heritage DMU with more mainline accessibility than some units (and better than a pacer!)

There will be 153s likely available sooner than those two, and some of the Welsh ones are being made PRM compliant.

An NSE liveried Sprinter, anyone?

 

[paul1609]

The only catch is that the mainline ready 33 wont easily be able to work with the TC - You need the 33 - Owned by the Class 33/1 Preservation Co's loco to be mainline fitted as that has the necessary push pull equipment fitted to work with the TC.

I don't think its the only catch. I don't think there's precedent on the main line for a 4TC working in push pull mode with passengers since the MK1 ban. Crash worthiness risk assessment would appear to be a nightmare.

 

[Titfield]

One has to ask whether Swanage wishing to offer mainline services will be more costly (in all terms, cash costs, time costs, complexity, risk) than revenue. If a subsidy has to be required surely it would be better to subsidise SWR who could offer the full range of services expected by "mainline" passengers.

 

[paul1609]

One has to ask whether Swanage wishing to offer mainline services will be more costly (in all terms, cash costs, time costs, complexity, risk) than revenue. If a subsidy has to be required surely it would be better to subsidise SWR who could offer the full range of services expected by "mainline" passengers.

I think that's what the 2 year trial is supposed to prove and that there are different views within the Swanage Hierarchy. The first trail period with the hired in stock was a financial disaster I understand

 

[Titfield]

Well it lost £70K over the 60 day / 12 week trial but this was partly caused by the cost of hiring in WCR and mainline carriages. However it would also be worthy of note that there was some (how much open to debate) patronage solely because it was a chance to travel on the "new section of the line" and thus regular patronage may be less. The 60 day trial was in the high season and thus the day to day average would be lower if the season was extended.

If Swanage had its own stock then the operating costs would be reduced but of course from a slightly cynical point of view spending £1.4M on the DMU refurbishment represents a a very large capital investment indeed - it is equivalent to some 20 years of losses / subsidy required based on the first years trial data. There is only so much grant money around and arguably needs to be spent wisely as it might not come around again in the next few years.

Wareham has its limitations (station not in centre of town, little natural point to point traffic between swanage and wareham, limited car parking at station) and its true value would be in mainline access. However how many prospective passengers will pay to travel from a mainline station to wareham and then sr to Swanage. It makes a family day out very expensive compared to say driving to Norden and then SR or even Swanage over the ferry and then a reverse journey to Corfe Castle? Not forgetting of course that the wareham to norden /corfe castle part of a journey would be on a dmu and not steam as the vast majority of passengers want and expect.

I dont wish to be a pessimist but cant help but feel that the odds are stacked against it: lots of little things rather than one big show stopper.

 

[theironroad]

Well it lost £70K over the 60 day / 12 week trial but this was partly caused by the cost of hiring in WCR and mainline carriages. However it would also be worthy of note that there was some (how much open to debate) patronage solely because it was a chance to travel on the "new section of the line" and thus regular patronage may be less. The 60 day trial was in the high season and thus the day to day average would be lower if the season was extended.

If Swanage had its own stock then the operating costs would be reduced but of course from a slightly cynical point of view spending £1.4M on the DMU refurbishment represents a a very large capital investment indeed - it is equivalent to some 20 years of losses / subsidy required based on the first years trial data. There is only so much grant money around and arguably needs to be spent wisely as it might not come around again in the next few years.

Wareham has its limitations (station not in centre of town, little natural point to point traffic between swanage and wareham, limited car parking at station) and its true value would be in mainline access. However how many prospective passengers will pay to travel from a mainline station to wareham and then sr to Swanage. It makes a family day out very expensive compared to say driving to Norden and then SR or even Swanage over the ferry and then a reverse journey to Corfe Castle? Not forgetting of course that the wareham to norden /corfe castle part of a journey would be on a dmu and not steam as the vast majority of passengers want and expect.

I dont wish to be a pessimist but cant help but feel that the odds are stacked against it: lots of little things rather than one big show stopper.

I can fully understand the wishes of SR that this is their project, a project they fought for since the early 1970s and want to see it to fruition.

However, one of the reasons for the project was getting traffic off crowded roads and providing a decent alternative to the ferry for people commuting in and out of Swanage and Purbeck.

I believe SWT wanted to take it on for a trial, with appropriate support, but SR didn't want to progress it that way. Like many railway branch lines that weren't profitable, some level of cross subsidy from profitable routes would help. Obviously rail economics are in the gutter at the moment.

I'm not sure the exact 158/9 stock position, but I'd imagine 2 or 3 2-car 158s could run a hourly service from Swanage through to Bournemouth and back.
Are there surplus 158s or other DMUs at GWR that could be loaned?

The other big barrier to getting people off the roads to commute/shop/leisure in a post vaccine world is increasing line speed and whatever other infrastructure issues might be needed.

I guess a whole host of other questions then arise about whether SR would want to provide signallers and response staff as well as who then does maintenance and renewals?

 

[Titfield]

As with all things this is more complicated than would seem at first.

The ferry service normally operates every 20 minutes from 7am to 11pm seven days a week throughout the year. SR operates about 260 days of the year with the first service ex Swanage usually at 10am and the last back from Norden varies between 1600 and 1800. Frequency every 40/80/ 120 minutes. SR is not able to deliver a traditional commuter service and quite frankly the staffing resources required would be immense.

The busiest road in Purbeck* is the A351 from the Bakers Arms Roundabout (A35) to Wareham. Providing a service between Wareham and Swanage takes no traffic off this road unless the passengers first use the mainline service to Wareham. * I have been told but havent been able to verify this is the busiest single carriageway road in Dorset.

The travel time from Bmth to Wareham (mainline) and then Wareham to Swanage (SRC) is uncompetitive with car over the ferry or even the bus. The bus literally takes 1 hour Bmth Rail Station to Swanage Rail Station.

The bus is incredibly busy in the summer on sunny days packed with those entitled to the National Concessionary Bus Pass. Its a hard sell if the train takes longer, some of it is by diesel train, involves a change en route and costs money compared to a quicker, direct (no change) free bus service.

I cant help but feel that SRC would be better off focusing on the heritage steam service between Norden / Corfe Castle and Swanage allowing SWR to operate the service between Wareham and Swanage (or possibly Corfe Castle) with some form of track access fee paid by SWR (to SRC) and some form of revenue share for passengers carried on the common section.

Whoever operates Wareham to Swanage, passengers will expect the standard level of service / facilities provided by mainline TOCS and that will include for example passenger assistance for passengers with needs (mobility impaired etc), delay repay, on train wifi, accessible toilets, appropriately trained staff, departure screens at all stations, TVMs. Would SRC be able to deliver all of this?

Addition: Accept National RailCards, Period Return Tickets (current SRC returns are day returns)