• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

'Tramways Monthly' eMagazine - September 2012 edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,382
Location
JB/JP/JW
Hi everyone,

Just thought that some members may be interested to know that the September edition of my 'Tramways Monthly' e-magazine has now been released. It's completely free, in a PDF format, and can be downloaded from http://tramways-monthly.com.

Some of the big stories this time include the preparations underway for Crich Tramway Village's Glasgow 50 event, and the mass exodus of the Lancastrian Transport Trust's vehicles from Blackpool's Rigby Road Depot.

The latter story has proven highly controversial, provoking a lot of discussion from the enthusiast fraternity, particularly surrounding vehicles being stored outdoors in the open air.

What are people's opinions on this? Here's my view...

Tramways Monthly 35 said:
A Matter of Storage
One of the biggest stories this month concerns the relocation of the tram fleet of the Lancastrian Transport Trust from Blackpool Transport’s Rigby Road depot into outside storage - and it has provoked a lot of discussion amongst the enthusiast fraternity - both positive and negative.

The issue of where to store full-size tramcars is not a new one: it has been around as long as the preservation movement has been, with many vehicles leading nomadic existences during the early days prior to the establishment of tramway museums.

Even then, many cars still remained stored outoors for many years, until enough funds could be accumulated to afford the construction of basic covered shelter for these priceless artefacts. I am sure that many readers will have seen views from the early days of Crich with numerous trams stored in the open, at the hands of the often-harsh Derbyshire weather conditions.

Slowly, gradually, each of the priceless artefacts were placed into undercover storage - not just at Crich but across the country - and indeed we are covering one such journey made elsewhere in this edition of the magazine.

Now, though, with the mass clearout of Blackpool’s first generation tramcars, the issue of storage has arisen once more. Britain’s tramway museums are full with no space to accomodate further vehicles without the costly expenditure of constructing further covered accommodation.

Indeed, the Heaton Park tramway has been running an appeal for a number of years now to construct a new depot complex - with work expected to start imminently - whilst Crich has taken the opposite view of only accepting cars that it can fit undercover, following a failed appeal to construct a temporary structure to house trams.

Elsewhere, schemes are also underway in both the north east and the north west to create brand new tramway museums to house former Blackpool vehicles and, whilst each has its own aims and objectives, one common denominator is present across them all: the need for (hopefully temporary) outdoor storage whilst these plans come to fruition.

And let’s not forget the large number of Centenary cars that are exposed at caravan sites and other storage yards across the north west, ignored by the major players and instead acquired very much for further use rather than preservation - although it is worth noting that both 641 and 647 have been acquired by newcomers to the preservation scene.

But could the situation of outdoor storage have been avoided in the first place? With emotions running high throughout the movement following the move of the LTT’s fleet into outdoor storage, many are asking whether these groups could not have worked together to realise their ambitions, pooling resources to get cars undercover quicker than may happen with multiple, isolated schemes: there is only a finite amount of enthusiasts’ cash at the end of the day.
This, of course, also begs the question: Do we need to save every single Blackpool tramcar? The obvious answer - to me, at least - is no, we don’t, but ultimately it is those with the cash that will determine which cars will be saved - and everyone will have their favourites. As I see things, a representative example showcasing the major points of the Blackpool tramway would be far more appropriate, and could even have avoided the situation that we now find ourselves in of having numerous artefacts outdoors.

Whatever the future holds, though, I certainly hope that after going to the expense of saving and moving tramcars around the country, each of the schemes comes to fruition, and these trams are preserved for many more years for the enjoyment of both existing and the next generation of enthusiasts.
If you would like to share your views on the subject - or respond to any of mine - please don’t hesitate to get in touch: my email address is below and I’ll publish a selection next time.

Jack Gordon, 10/09/12 - [email protected]

Certainly one of the more interesting developments in recent months, at any rate.

Jack
(Thanks to the mods for allowing me to post this!)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Welshman

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
3,020
I'm afraid I just tried the link, and my Norton Security warned of a "Web Attack - Mass Injection website" - whatever that means.
 

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,382
Location
JB/JP/JW
Strange, nothing being thrown up by the various scanners installed on the site at all... Not the first time this has happened, Norton in particular seems to just not like the server... But I'll look into it some more, however, as I say, nothing being thrown up that's untoward... :/
 

34D

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2011
Messages
6,042
Location
Yorkshire
Hmmmm..... Possibly the LTT shouldn't have upset BTS by running rival bus services; don't bite the hand that feeds you etc.

Philip Higgs is one of a very small number of people whom I would use the C-word to describe, so yes I suspect a great deal of people are very happy at the breakup of the LTT collection and the start of the demise of the same.

And yes, we of course need one of each type at the max - one needs to be realistic here.
 

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,382
Location
JB/JP/JW
And yes, we of course need one of each type at the max - one needs to be realistic here.

Sadly - as I mentioned above - this seems to be an attitude that is lacking amongst enthusiasts, with everyone wanting to keep 'their' pet tram. By all means, if they've footed the bill to acquire and store the tram then that's excellent, but a great many haven't and it certainly seems like some groups have been pressured into taking cars. Others have caught 'Blackpool fever' and bought up as many trams as they can, and I certainly fear for the future of some of the more 'historical' ones.

That said - there really isn't much need to worry. Between Blackpool Transport and the National Tramway Museum, every class of Blackpool car is saved in some sort, so if we do 'lose' a private preservation scheme it wouldn't be such a great lost, in my opinion, at least.

Crich have a Jubilee (762), two Brushes (630, 298), a Balloon (249), a Boat (236), an OMO (5, in store) and several more historical classes (Standard, Toastrack, Dreadnought etc).

Blackpool are retaining a Centenary (648) and a Twin set (272+T2), also have a large number of Balloons, the open-top Balloon and other heritage cars, including a Coronation (660, not VAMBAC, though), Standard and Fleetwood Box (Although that is owned by Crich!), and the Illuminated cars.

The only other 'dispersed' cars that personally spring to mind for saving are the LTT's 'Rocket', Coronation 304 and OMO 8 (And possibly Standard 143), NEET's Centenary 647 and, if it can be, FHLT's Centenary 641, for reasons of all which may be apparent.

For those with a keen eye, I have mentioned two Coronations and two OMOs for saving as 304 is arguably more important than 660 due to its VAMBAC gear, whilst 8 is an operational car, as opposed to 5 which would need a full restoration. The multiple Centenaries are there purely because they are the three to choose the 'one' from (641 first, 647 last, 648 retains many 'original' features), whilst Standard 143 is there as they are robust, easy-to-maintain typically 'old' cars. Popular with visitors, I've heard it said by several tramways that they would happily have a fleet of them as they are very easy to maintain and overhaul (although, personally, I hate them!).

Each to their own, I guess...

J
(I'm not deliberately ignoring the comments about the LTT and those involved with it, I just have nothing to add other than what I've said above, in light of my involvement with various tramway societies and preservation groups, as well as the magazine itself. Okay, so it is deliberate!)
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
If your looking for a new magazine name Tramways Quarterly would cut your potential workload by two thirds, you could do 'seasonal' editions.
 

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,382
Location
JB/JP/JW
If your looking for a new magazine name Tramways Quarterly would cut your potential workload by two thirds, you could do 'seasonal' editions.

It's avenue I've thought about going down, only trouble then is things get quickly out of date and there's a lot more to fit into a manageable file size. A bimonthly would be perfect really, but that gives it a bit of a clumsy and slightly misleading (versus fortnightly) name!

Monthly is going well so far, so we'll see how things go. Ideally it would be to remove the 'Monthly' (or other period) altogether, but I'm just really not keen on 'Tramways'... (Not keen on it anyway, it's a headache for SEO when people search 'trams' all the time!)

J
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top