Will there ever be any slam-door EMU rail tours?

[yorksrob]

Well, If it's unrealistic to put a CIG back on the mainline, I can't see how a VEP's going to be any easier. Particularly with all those doors which will doubtless be required to have central locking or some such nonsense.

 

[NSEFAN]

I have seen extra locking fitted to the doors of a MK2 on a railtour (a sliding lock which can be operated by the user in an emergency). Could these not be fitted instead? Central door locking is ideal for a public use train, but using it for a railtour is a slightly different matter.

 

[Metadyneman]

I really dont understand people complaining that Bruce didnt spend his money the way they wanted. 1881 was not unique, what made it special was the chance that it was owned by someone who had the money to put it back on the mainline - ultimately that ambition was unrealistic, and he sold it to recoup his losses.

Asking the relatively small number of enthusiasts willing to put their hands in their pockets for Mk1 EMU's to either outbid the 5BEL trust, or get it on the mainline, would have only served to make the likely appeal for 3417's mainline return at best a lot more difficult and most likely impossible.

Chris

I don't think it's a question of people complaining in the way you describe to be honest. Ultimately to preserve something is an ongoing process. The initial outlay admittedly is usually by a financially privileged person or group of persons or even the enthusiasts themselves by donation with the explicit intent of restoring for preservation what has been acquired. The ongoing preservation of any train usually requires a constant stream of money of which a fair part comes from the enthusiast who is grateful to be able to travel in, photograph and enjoy the preserved artefact. What price I wonder will be placed on the prospective rider of the 5-BEL when it eventually appears. I suspect it will be well above the wallets of your average enthusiast and as such a CIG would probably have brought in a bit more money over a longer period because it was a train that ran from as far east as Ramsgate to as far west as Weymouth. I doubt a BEL went that far as there were onlt 3 5-BEL units!

Nice as it is to see the "Belle" being restored it's a sad fact that i will now think a lot less of it because of the destruction of 1881 to get it going.

When someone announces in such a way as Knights Rail did when they bought 1881 as to excite and give some hope the very people who would have travelled for money in the preserved train, and then go on to sell it for what is essentially scrap without announcement or providing the chance for someone else to perhaps preserve it then I think such actions in the world of preservation should be brought to question by the enthusaist. It is not a question of complaint but more of perhaps asking questions as I have in an effort to ensure such actions by so called preservationists are avoided again. My other question which was what happened about the other two EMUs Kniights Rail bought with 1881 which were towed with 1881 to
Eastleigh at the same time. No one has yet answered the question as to why these were not sold to the 5BEL trust instead of sacrificing 1881 which was in perfect working order.

It should also once again be noted 3417 is NOT owned by Knights rail it is owned by the Bluebell Railway and is in safe (we hope) store at Eastleigh.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think it's a question of people complaining in the way you describe to be honest. Ultimately to preserve something is an ongoing process. The initial outlay admittedly is usually by a financially privileged person or group of persons or even the enthusiasts themselves by donation with the explicit intent of restoring for preservation what has been acquired. The ongoing preservation of any train usually requires a constant stream of money of which a fair part comes from the enthusiast who is grateful to be able to travel in, photograph and enjoy the preserved artefact. What price I wonder will be placed on the prospective rider of the 5-BEL when it eventually appears. I suspect it will be well above the wallets of your average enthusiast and as such a CIG would probably have brought in a bit more money over a longer period because it was a train that ran from as far east as Ramsgate to as far west as Weymouth. I doubt a BEL went that far as there were onlt 3 5-BEL units!

Nice as it is to see the "Belle" being restored it's a sad fact that i will now think a lot less of it because of the destruction of 1881 to get it going.

When someone announces in such a way as Knights Rail did when they bought 1881 as to excite and give some hope the very people who would have travelled for money in the preserved train, and then go on to sell it for what is essentially scrap without announcement or providing the chance for someone else to perhaps preserve it then I think such actions in the world of preservation should be brought to question by the enthusaist. It is not a question of complaint but more of perhaps asking questions as I have in an effort to ensure such actions by so called preservationists are avoided again. My other question which was what happened about the other two EMUs Kniights Rail bought with 1881 which were towed with 1881 to
Eastleigh at the same time. No one has yet answered the question as to why these were not sold to the 5BEL trust instead of sacrificing 1881 which was in perfect working order.

It should also once again be noted 3417 is NOT owned by Knights rail it is owned by the Bluebell Railway and is in safe (we hope) store at Eastleigh.

Here here,

couldn't have put it better myself !

 

[Christopher125]

The other units were scrapped some time ago for spares. Its these spares, as well as 1881, which make it attractive for the 5BEL.

No one likes 1881 being scrapped, but there is a greater good being served here as opposed to it just rusting away outside on a siding. Now, if i thought it had a future away from Eastleigh then i might have a different opinion, but you have to be realistic about both the funding required and the business case; without Bruce it had neither.

It should also once again be noted 3417 is NOT owned by Knights rail it is owned by the Bluebell Railway and is in safe (we hope) store at Eastleigh.

I dont think it could be in any safer hands; kept in the warm and dry by Bruce, with access to the 'juice', and looked after by a group of enthusiasts making positive noises about its future.

Chris

 

[yorksrob]

Thanks for the link.

I will certainly pay to go on an authentic VEP if it makes it onto the mainline.

 

[Metadyneman]

Thank you for the link and also the info on the other two EMUs Chris.

I was not aware they also had met the scrapmans axe. It seems then what we have left to hope for on the main line is a 4-VEP in store and a couple of
3-CIGs that are to stop working in public use from the start of the May timetable on the Lymington branch.

It does beg the question (observe,.. not complaint ) ... if a 5-BEL built in the 1930s can be brought up to main line standards to satisfy HSE and Network rail standards.. then is it surely not possible to do the same with any other EMU given the right support and enthusiasm. I notice that the 5-BEL trust have also preserved a 2-car de icing unit made up from 2 heavily modified 4-SUB driving Motor coaches. I can't honestly see that bringing in any revenue for them to be honest as their resemblance to a 4-SUB is almost non existant and it has no provision for carrying anyone as a passenger!

 

[CCF23]

I fell that the demand for a Cig tour is much greater and there is much more interest for one than for the 5-BEL unit which many enthusiasts like myself wouldn't remember unlike slammers like 1881 which i would love to go on a railtour on and i and I'm sure other enthusiasts could relate to more.

 

[GearJammer]

I fell that the demand for a Cig tour is much greater and there is much more interest for one than for the 5-BEL unit which many enthusiasts like myself wouldn't remember unlike slammers like 1881 which i would love to go on a railtour on and i and I'm sure other enthusiasts could relate to more.

Not just yourself and other enthusiasts either, the general public could more likely relate to a slammer, im sure many members of the public if they seen one could say 'wow i remember when i used to catch them to work etc' but when they see a 5-BEL are probably not gonna know what it is exactly. I think any slammer on the mainline would be more worth while than a 5-BEL, i think the BEL will be to pricey for most, if only due to its limited number of seats? Im assuming the seating layout is similar to a normal pullman car? If Bruce night had gone ahead with his plans then 1881 & 3417 paired up would have had lots of bums on seats and i think attracted a larger following, but if a slammer is someday to get back on the mainline i think idealy, to make it pay for itself (and keep ticket prices down) you would need 2 or 3 units to make an 8 or 12 car train.

As for Bruce Night selling 1881, thats his choice and i don't think its fair to critisize the man, ok its disapointing 1881 will be broken up but he has preserved 73119, hes got 07007 (D2991) and let the Bluebell keep 3417 at Eastliegh works, plus there were plenty of locos that moved there when Old Oak Common closed (50026, 37308 & D1015 spring to mind), the man has done quite a fair bit for railway enthusiasts when at the end of the day he is running a buisness, and while i may be wrong on this i think he is the main man that we have to thank for Eastleigh Works still being there at all, and that i'd rather see than ANY heritage train on the mainline!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I love the CIGs, and understand peoples points, but how about if the Lymington CIGs go into preservation? That way we can have a 5BEL and CIGs together.

 

[Christopher125]

I cant agree that a CIG would be more successful on the mainline - most railtours are dependent on 'normals', not enthusiasts and they dont travel on trains because they 'relate' to them but the experience they offer; that, after all, is why the VSOE can afford to offer regular trips all year. While perhaps there will be a sense of nostalgia about slammers in the future outside of a particular enthusiast niche, i suspect thats some way away.

When it comes to selling railtours you've also got to remember the branding; 'slammers' have a dreadful reputation whereas the 'Brighton Belle' is well known name full of nostalgia even now. As well as charters it is just the right size both for hauled operation on preserved lines and for corporate/private hire on the mainline both of which offer lucrative year-round work. I suspect however that it will spend most of its time on the mainline offering a first class rather than full pullman service so as not to directly compete with VSOE - that would be interesting to find out.

IMO, when you take into the account the Belle's ability to make money, and the trust's aims which arent limited to the 5BEL but to other units and a sorely-needed museum as well, i think on balance the project is good for 3rd rail preservation as a whole regardless of the loss of 1881.

Chris

 

[NSEFAN]

Hopefully both Lymington CIGs will be preserved. As they're still intact, they can be easily preserved for mainline running. With 3417, they could make a 10 car train for railtours.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I cant agree that a CIG would be more successful on the mainline - most railtours are dependent on 'normals', not enthusiasts and they dont travel on trains because they 'relate' to them but the experience they offer; that, after all, is why the VSOE can afford to offer regular trips all year. While perhaps there will be a sense of nostalgia about slammers in the future outside of a particular enthusiast niche, i suspect thats some way away.

When it comes to selling railtours you've also got to remember the branding; 'slammers' have a dreadful reputation whereas the 'Brighton Belle' is well known name full of nostalgia even now. As well as charters it is just the right size both for hauled operation on preserved lines and for corporate/private hire on the mainline both of which offer lucrative year-round work. I suspect however that it will spend most of its time on the mainline offering a first class rather than full pullman service so as not to directly compete with VSOE - that would be interesting to find out.

IMO, when you take into the account the Belle's ability to make money, and the trust's aims which arent limited to the 5BEL but to other units and a sorely-needed museum as well, i think on balance the project is good for 3rd rail preservation as a whole regardless of the loss of 1881.

Chris

Agreed.

 

[yorksrob]

I cant agree that a CIG would be more successful on the mainline - most railtours are dependent on 'normals', not enthusiasts and they dont travel on trains because they 'relate' to them but the experience they offer; that, after all, is why the VSOE can afford to offer regular trips all year. While perhaps there will be a sense of nostalgia about slammers in the future outside of a particular enthusiast niche, i suspect thats some way away.

When it comes to selling railtours you've also got to remember the branding; 'slammers' have a dreadful reputation whereas the 'Brighton Belle' is well known name full of nostalgia even now. As well as charters it is just the right size both for hauled operation on preserved lines and for corporate/private hire on the mainline both of which offer lucrative year-round work. I suspect however that it will spend most of its time on the mainline offering a first class rather than full pullman service so as not to directly compete with VSOE - that would be interesting to find out.

IMO, when you take into the account the Belle's ability to make money, and the trust's aims which arent limited to the 5BEL but to other units and a sorely-needed museum as well, i think on balance the project is good for 3rd rail preservation as a whole regardless of the loss of 1881.

Chris

Well, I'm sure nobody would have objected if the Belle trust gone for some sort of push-pull operation, maybe using a 73 or something - least of all the "normals" paying to travel on it. Would have avoided breaking up 1881, which, however remote it's chances of making it back onto the mainline, must surely be worse after a trip to the cutters yard.

 

[Metadyneman]

Well I think it is now safe to say that we have effectively lost 1881 as a complete unit destined for preservation as it is. It is a sad fact that EMUs have never attracted a huge amount of interest when it comes to getting them up and running again mainly due to the fact that this country is still devoid of a privately run preserved electrified line to run them on. Any that do make it into proper preservation must now pass stringent testing and comply with so many regulations that it becomes a nightmare to even think about starting. It is obviously something that Bruce Knight must have looked at thoroughly and I sincerely hope he is as disappointed as we all are that he has had to let 1881 go.

On the bright side I suppose we do still have the "Belle" to look forward to and in a way you could say it's going to end up a 5-BELCIG! with all the bits from 1881 stuck on it! I wonder if it will have the air compressors too... we can then all shut our eyes and at least hear a CIG even if it isn't one!

 

[Christopher125]

Well, I'm sure nobody would have objected if the Belle trust gone for some sort of push-pull operation, maybe using a 73 or something - least of all the "normals" paying to travel on it. Would have avoided breaking up 1881, which, however remote it's chances of making it back onto the mainline, must surely be worse after a trip to the cutters yard.

You might not object, and most 'normals' might not be so bothered, but it needs enthusiasts to pay for it - and without its EMU selling point its basically just a set of pullman carriages which arent going to create the same level of interest. There's no doubt the project is ambitious, but to raise money it needs to be.

Chris

 

[yorksrob]

Well, I hope the Lymington CIG's make it onto the mainline at some stage. I love travelling around on VEP's myself but I suspect some CIG accomodation would prove helpful in attracting the general public to any future slammer railtours.

 

[Metadyneman]

If it was a CIG/VEP combination.. I always headed for the CIG! VEPs were far less comfy than a Phase 1 CIG... still the phase 1's never did stray too far from the central division so I guess I was spoiled living near Brighton where most Phase 1s were based.

 

[Class 33]

With the recent news that a lot of silly health and safety rules and regulations are to be scrapped or relaxed at least, I wonder if one that gets the axe is this silly mk1 slam door mainline ban? And the increased chance that there will one day be one more at least, mainline slammer EMU tour? Still too good to be true though.

 

[ChampsRacing]

Lets hope so. With regards to 1881 i went to barrow hill not to long ago for the model rail live show and all four coaches are still there so even to keep it as TC's would be better than scrapping them all together in my opinion

 

[yorksrob]

With the recent news that a lot of silly health and safety rules and regulations are to be scrapped or relaxed at least, I wonder if one that gets the axe is this silly mk1 slam door mainline ban? And the increased chance that there will one day be one more at least, mainline slammer EMU tour? Still too good to be true though.

I'd certainly love it if it happened (albeit about six years too late IMO ).

 

[SouthEastern-465]

Lymington CIG 1497 has been preserved, but does anyone know what happened to 1498? I am getting rather concerned for its welfare!

 

[Metadyneman]

Lymington CIG 1497 has been preserved, but does anyone know what happened to 1498? I am getting rather concerned for its welfare!

1497 has indeed gone for preservation but in Norfolk??? Still i suppose it's better than nothing.

1881 is still in one piece at Barrow hill but I don't think it will stay that way for much longer judging by the latest newsletter I received from the 5BEL trust

 

[fgwrich]

With the recent news that a lot of silly health and safety rules and regulations are to be scrapped or relaxed at least, I wonder if one that gets the axe is this silly mk1 slam door mainline ban? And the increased chance that there will one day be one more at least, mainline slammer EMU tour? Still too good to be true though.

Although i love the idea - i do doubt that there will be many Southern 3rd Rail tours in the future, unless it was being acceptably push pulled by a 33/1 or 73 - largely as a result of various modern safety requirments of OTMR & CDL, and yet when you think about, what are the only remaining CDL / OTMR Fitted Southern units left now?

1497 & 1498

1497 has indeed gone for preservation but in Norfolk??? Still i suppose it's better than nothing.

1881 is still in one piece at Barrow hill but I don't think it will stay that way for much longer judging by the latest newsletter I received from the 5BEL trust

Sadly 1881 Won't be around for much longer im afraid

The 5 BEL trust brought 1881 for the traction motors & associated electrical equipment, despite the amount of spares left over from already scrapped units... As to what happens next to 1881, God knows...But sadly it's looking like the end of out last remaining 4 car CIG left, unless a miracle happens and someone takes on 1881, minus traction equip.

All for the return of Brighton Belle - Am i in favour of this, i would be if it was being restored over a longer period of time and included the saving of 1881, but my feelings still stand at a No, Not at all.

What im also interested in, is how the 5 Belle trust will get the motor bogies & associated traction equipment onto the BEL? When, for a start, the motor bogies of the VEP/CIG/REP Fleets stand that bit taller than the original motor bogies of the Belle...

 

[ChampsRacing]

Lymington CIG 1497 has been preserved, but does anyone know what happened to 1498? I am getting rather concerned for its welfare!

I asked fleet the other day as i work for swt and some people have enquired but not put in a solid bid for the unit yet

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I asked fleet the other day as i work for swt and some people have enquired but not put in a solid bid for the unit yet

Thanks for the info.

To be honest 1498 is perfect for perservation it already comes in BR Green!

Although i love the idea - i do doubt that there will be many Southern 3rd Rail tours in the future, unless it was being acceptably push pulled by a 33/1 or 73 - largely as a result of various modern safety requirments of OTMR & CDL, and yet when you think about, what are the only remaining CDL / OTMR Fitted Southern units left now?

1497 & 1498




Sadly 1881 Won't be around for much longer im afraid

The 5 BEL trust brought 1881 for the traction motors & associated electrical equipment, despite the amount of spares left over from already scrapped units... As to what happens next to 1881, God knows...But sadly it's looking like the end of out last remaining 4 car CIG left, unless a miracle happens and someone takes on 1881, minus traction equip.

All for the return of Brighton Belle - Am i in favour of this, i would be if it was being restored over a longer period of time and included the saving of 1881, but my feelings still stand at a No, Not at all.

What im also interested in, is how the 5 Belle trust will get the motor bogies & associated traction equipment onto the BEL? When, for a start, the motor bogies of the VEP/CIG/REP Fleets stand that bit taller than the original motor bogies of the Belle...

If theres a spare MK1 EMU coach from 1881 left over coundn't this be put into 3CIG 1399 currently stored at Eastleigh and reform it to make a 4CIG again?

 

[Metadyneman]

Although i love the idea - i do doubt that there will be many Southern 3rd Rail tours in the future, unless it was being acceptably push pulled by a 33/1 or 73 - largely as a result of various modern safety requirments of OTMR & CDL, and yet when you think about, what are the only remaining CDL / OTMR Fitted Southern units left now?

1497 & 1498




Sadly 1881 Won't be around for much longer im afraid

The 5 BEL trust brought 1881 for the traction motors & associated electrical equipment, despite the amount of spares left over from already scrapped units... As to what happens next to 1881, God knows...But sadly it's looking like the end of out last remaining 4 car CIG left, unless a miracle happens and someone takes on 1881, minus traction equip.

All for the return of Brighton Belle - Am i in favour of this, i would be if it was being restored over a longer period of time and included the saving of 1881, but my feelings still stand at a No, Not at all.

What im also interested in, is how the 5 Belle trust will get the motor bogies & associated traction equipment onto the BEL? When, for a start, the motor bogies of the VEP/CIG/REP Fleets stand that bit taller than the original motor bogies of the Belle...

When you say 1881 is the last remaining complete 4-car 4-CIG left.. haven't you forgotten about 1753 which is still very much intact and in need of our help in keeping it that way? OK it's not on the rail network at present but it could be with a bit of money and some hard work.

I too am dismayed at the way the 5-BEL is being restored. By the time it is completed it won't look (or sound) like the original thing. As I understand it, all of it's bogies (including the motor bogies) are being replaced with the ones from 1881 and the other spare bogies they have acquired.. I suppose the upshot of that is at least if you shut your eyes it might sound like a 4-CIG!!

In addition to this though.. seeing as a seat on the VSOE costs a minimum of about £180 a go for a quick jolly round Kent behind a "skip" and a 4 course lunch.. how much I wonder will a seat on the "Belle" cost and how many of us will have the wallets big enough to have a ride on it!

I certainly agree... 1881 should have been preserved for the many who would willingly have paid £40 or more for a ride in her. Not only that she could have carried more in her than a Pullman carriage! The Belle should have stayed as a museum piece as it is and left the real enthusisats to have a train of their own cheap enough to ride on! Maybe we can do it by concentrating now on 1753 and get her back on the rails instead.

 

[ChampsRacing]

Either way i think that 1881 shouldnt of been sold of like it was. End of the day it was a business decision but it still does make me sad that thats a 4cig that i will never ride on again

 

[SouthEastern-465]

To be honest, I think the 5BEL was a good decision.

I was genuinely upset hearing the news that 1881 was being sacrificed, but I also think its a step forward for 3rd rail preservation, and may give other 3rd rail preservationists the motivation that it can be done with alot of hard work.

I also feel if the 5BEL group succeed they can help all 3rd rail preservationists, and give them advice so we can see more 'Slamdoor EMUs on the mainline in the future.

 

[Metadyneman]

That's fair comment and I can see the logic in your thinking. However, what I'm more concerned about is that the "Belle" was, and is, no ordinary run of the mill EMU. It ran more or less solely on the Brighton Line for all of it's career (apart from the war years) and is of little interest to the rest of EMU enthusiasts in the greater south, east and west who probably never saw it in service. However most if not all of said enthusiasts did at some point in their lives ride on a 4-CIG and would probably have preferred to see one of those running rather than a train restricted to a minority who can afford to ride in it. For the likes of us mere minions in society, with the greatest of respect to those who can afford it, we are unlikely to ever be able to pay for a ride on the unit if the price is likely to be anything like that of a ride in the VSOE. It's a lovely train and likely to succeed in preservation but only because the price to place a bum on one of it's seats is enough to pay for it's keep and make a profit!