6023 dream over?

[jjb1970]

Most of the people who get all dewy eyed over Flying Scotsman probably never get on a train from one year to the next so I fail to see what benefit they bring, like it or not (me personally, I dont like it) the railways are a business and that business is shifting lots of people efficiently and effectively and making a profit from doing it!

 

Indeed, but those people who never use a train will still be paying taxes which are used to subsidies the railway system for those people that do use trains. If a few runs of glamorous kettles generates goodwill for the railways and puts railways in the limelight for positive reasons then that in itself is of value to the rail industry. People are not creatures of pure logic, things that some might dismiss as a cheap appeal to nostalgia or kitsch are what make life enjoyable to others. I notice that whenever my train to/from work passes a steam engine in the sidings around Willesden or Wembley people look at it and like it. Hence why I think a certain amount of steam and nostalgia is a useful halo type product for the railways.

[Reorte]

If you want an example of why to run steam, look at the effect of the Tornado runs on the Settle-Carlisle (admittedly at a time and place where there wasn't a great deal to conflict with). It was heavily on the news, with a lot of smiles, when normally the only times the railway is on the news is when it's bad news. Whilst you can't measure the benefit of that easily it's definitely there.

 

And in any case it's usually the non-practical things that make life worth living and I'm glad they're there, and I'm sure you could find examples of things I'm not at all interested in that can cause an inconvenience that I'd say the same about. Only caring about things that can be measured or conform to some concept of maximum practicality leads to a very sterile existence.

[Clearwater]

Who have paid a lot of money for 'the railway' to get them from A to B on time, something that would have happened if a Charter Train hadnt failed!

 

My point might be narrow bot is very relevant.

 

Most of the people who get all dewy eyed over Flying Scotsman probably never get on a train from one year to the next so I fail to see what benefit they bring, like it or not (me personally, I dont like it) the railways are a business and that business is shifting lots of people efficiently and effectively and making a profit from doing it!

I never said you're narrow point wasn't relevant - its part of the broader consideration that NR's senior management will take as they assess the risk of such operations.

 

On your other points, the rail system is only "profitable" due to the c£5bn of grants paid to it by HMT. WIthout those grants, it would not be profitable. The fact that certain operations can be carved out and made profitable to individual shareholders is not wholly relevant. In any event, those operations are often only profitable because they are not actually charged the true economic cost of the infrastructure. By way of example, the Channel Tunnel Rail link cost c£5.2bn to build. When it was privatised in 2010, investors were prepared to pay c £2.25bn (it sold again earlier this year for around £2.5bn). I.e. With based on the revenues and track access charges paid for by Eurostar, the operation generates £3bn less than it cost to build. The same is true of the Freight OPerators and Train OPerators although there is a less direct comparison to the cost of the infrastructure available. I'd doubt the collective value of the freight operators is more than £1bn in total. Small beer in the context of the UK economy.

 

As such, with £5bn of public grants, every tax payer in the country is entitled to their view whether they are regular users or not.

 

As you rightly point out, business is about profit. Profit is also about recognising that your ability to operate is contingent on the management of your stakeholders. That's why most large companies have an active Corporate and Social Responsibility team. Those teams often run programmes that seem at odds with the company's primary purpose of making cash. After all, CSR is a pure cost to the business. But the management and shareholders recognise that running such programmes, and I think charter steam comes under that category, helps with the wider perception of the business. As an aside, on a quick skim through NR's report, I've found at least one photo of Scotsman. Clearly they think it has some value.

 

If you are on the shop floor of an organisation and see the cost/downsides of such CSR obligations (personally I've often always hated being sent on days out to collect litter/paint buildings/read in schools etc) but those higher up have a different perspective on the value of those activities. Merely because you cannot see the benefit from your perspective, that doesn't mean that the benefit does not exist and does not accrue, in this case to the rail sector more broadly.

 

I think you could guarantee a steam ban on the network would lead to considerable pressure from outside stakeholders on DfT/NR management from 'dewy eyed individuals'. Take Jeremy Hosking. OWns a stable of trains. Provides some excellent apprenticeships etc. He's also a donor to the Tory Party. Do you think he lobbies for sensibly run main line steam? I don't know but I'm willing to bet 10p he does and I bet he can get a call into NR senior management, the PM's office and Chris Grayling rather quickly and I bet they'd take it. Do you think he matters in UK rail? There'll be others like him who are less prominent but no less influential.

 

David

[Clearwater]

If you want an example of why to run steam, look at the effect of the Tornado runs on the Settle-Carlisle (admittedly at a time and place where there wasn't a great deal to conflict with). It was heavily on the news, with a lot of smiles, when normally the only times the railway is on the news is when it's bad news. Whilst you can't measure the benefit of that easily it's definitely there.

 

And in any case it's usually the non-practical things that make life worth living and I'm glad they're there, and I'm sure you could find examples of things I'm not at all interested in that can cause an inconvenience that I'd say the same about. Only caring about things that can be measured or conform to some concept of maximum practicality leads to a very sterile existence.

Ditto the reopening of the Waverley line.

[RANGERS]

Who have paid a lot of money for 'the railway' to get them from A to B on time, something that would have happened if a Charter Train hadnt failed!

 

My point might be narrow bot is very relevant.

 

Most of the people who get all dewy eyed over Flying Scotsman probably never get on a train from one year to the next so I fail to see what benefit they bring, like it or not (me personally, I dont like it) the railways are a business and that business is shifting lots of people efficiently and effectively and making a profit from doing it!

 

I'd have to agree that there should be a level playing field, there's little justification for offering the ad-hoc charter ops preferential access terms, but on the reliability point, I don't think there's much evidence to suggest that steam or other charter traction failures cause any more in the way of delays than the mainstream franchise holders rolling stock cause.

[roythebus]

I can vouch that there is indeed a difference between the handling of air and vacuum braked trains, having driven both over the years, and EP braked stock (even better) and straight Westinghouse air braked stock. 3 apps with that and you run out of air.

 

Someone mentioned earlier one of the charter groups looking to fit vac brakes to Mk3 stock. Is that indeed possible with disc braked vehicles? I'd suggest not as I don't believe the vac brake could be configured to work with the wheelslide protection equipment fitted.

 

As for the air supply needing to come from the front, on most of the "proper" SR EMU and DEMU stock it came from the middle of the train or the other end! And isn't there a steam-driven vane type compressor available?

 

Providing the stock is twin piped air brake, there's no reason why the diesel on the back can't provide air for the train brakes. Where des the air come from for a 91 with DVT on the other end? Probably not the DVT, but the 91. But then I wouldn't know, I've not been trained on 91s or DVTs.

 

Dual braking a steam loco for main line running gives it maximum flexibility and maximises earning potential.

[phil-b259]

Suggest you reread my post. My point is it needs managing appropriately but to ignore the benefits heritage charters bring is shortsighted. When you see the reaction, the smiles, the excitement when a steam train is sighted, the benefit is incalculable. Your point is a narrow one on specific passengers on a specific train.

 

Senior management is paid to make those trade offs between the risk of delays and the other wider benefits. Don’t forget the rail system needs a huge chunk of public money to keep going at all. Without courting public opinion (and it’s not just 60+ men who like steam trains), the railways would risk being in a far worse place than they are.

 

And that is the nub of the issue.

 

Managing steam 'appropriately' is allowing it where it fits (gauging wise) and where paths can be had (which will significantly depend on the performance of the loco in question) - its not maintaining extra large clearances necessary for regular operation forever and a day just in case someone wants to bring a particular engine on the mainline every so often or risking the punctuality of regular service trains just so a steamer can be allowed out without an assisting diesel, or with vacuum brakes, etc

 

Tornado, Flying Scotsman, Clan Line are / were all regulars on the mainline because they (i) are a far better fit nationally gauging wise and (ii) are operated by folk who very rarely cause NR any problems. As such NR is usually quite happy to facilitate their requests, by contrast West Coast Railways nearly got booted off the national network for good because of their inability to run their operations safely

 

Ultimately however (and to bring this thread back round to its topic title) if the owners of 6023 want to ensure it becomes a regular mainline performer in the long term, then they will have to do something about the cylinder width and fit it with air braking. NR quite correctly is under no obligation to maintain enhanced clearances (over and above what may be necessary for regular TOCs / FOCs) for a steam loco (which was heavily route restricted when it was in revenue service) just in case someone wants to have a play on the main line with it occasionally.

[Paul.Uni]

Tornado, Flying Scotsman, Clan Line are / were all regulars on the mainline because they (i) are a far better fit nationally gauging wise and (ii) are operated by folk who very rarely cause NR any problems. As such NR is usually quite happy to facilitate their requests, by contrast West Coast Railways nearly got booted off the national network for good because of their inability to run their operations safely

With one exception all of the Flying Scotsman railtours have been WCRC operated.

 

EDIT: Looking at UKSteams list of steam railtours in 2017 shows that West Coast operates all the railtours on Network Rail apart from the Belmond Pullman, Tobay Express, any other tours hauled by Clan Line or Tornado and the North Yorkshire Moors Railway & North Norfolk Railway services to Whitby and Cromer respectively. Obviously this will change when Locomotive Services Limited and Vintage Trains start operating as their own Train Operating Company.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Paul.Uni

[royaloak]

Just in case anyone thinks I am against steam on the main lines I most definitely am not, I enjoy seeing a big steamer at speed on the main line as much as the next enthusiast, I just want them to do everything they can to fit in with what is already running and play by the same set of rules, I will allow them some leeway  but the way it is at the moment is stacked far too much in their favour .

 

I just think that, because they havent got to pay the full (or more of the) delay costs, some of them dont bother doing everything they can to prevent failures or delays, please note the word some, not all because I think most of them would be fine if they were liable for the full (or more of the) costs because they do everything they can to prevent delays and failures, its the others who are the problem.

With one exception all of the Flying Scotsman railtours have been WCRC operated.

WCR are not responsible for maintaining the loco though are they!

[phil-b259]

With one exception all of the Flying Scotsman railtours have been WCRC operated.

 

However the engine itself is operated and maintained by Riley & Son under a 2 year contract with the NRM (which expires next year) and as such is nothing to to with WCR. They may have provided the stock, crew and operated the loco for specific charters but as I understand it they have nothing to do with Flying Scotsman itself.

[Mark Saunders]

 

Someone mentioned earlier one of the charter groups looking to fit vac brakes to Mk3 stock. Is that indeed possible with disc braked vehicles? I'd suggest not as I don't believe the vac brake could be configured to work with the wheelslide protection equipment fitted.

 

There is no reason why you cant have a Disc brake operated by Vacuum Cylinders as Covhops had them fitted from new!

[Dava]

The main issue is clearances rather than brakes as I understand it. The King class have had clearance problems since KGV started mainline running in 1974 or so. Without new outside cylinders it just will not run within gauge. Alternatively 6023 runs just fine on the GCR and this loco's future may well be best on preserved lines.

 

Dava

[Clearwater]

The main issue is clearances rather than brakes as I understand it. The King class have had clearance problems since KGV started mainline running in 1974 or so. Without new outside cylinders it just will not run within gauge. Alternatively 6023 runs just fine on the GCR and this loco's future may well be best on preserved lines.

 

Dava

Steam returned in 1971. The Kings always has issues hence the limited double red restriction on the Gwr routes and the routes they ran in the 1948 loco trials. Swindon often looked to make use of the legacy of the broader clearances afforded by broad gaige

[caradoc]

I'd see some steam operation as the equivalent of a halo product for the railways. Many companies produce halo products which maybe make a nominal profit but the development of which could not be justified in normal financial terms. And it is not unusual for companies to carry these products at quite a hefty loss and effectively subsidise those consumers fortunate enough to buy them. The gain in terms of boost to corporate image, technology development and trickle down etc means whatever the immediate rate of return might be, it is worth it. And this isn't just about misty eyed enthusiasts in chunky sweaters dreaming up excuses to justify their pet ideas, high volume Asian consumer electronics outfits routinely indulge themselves by developing very high end ultra niche products that sell in trivial quantities and which won't set their accounts on fire but they clearly see the effort as worthwhile, Sony being a good example. So, I do think there is a place for some preserved steam operation regardless of some of the logical arguments. I guess the key word there is "some", it is a small niche. 

 

An interesting point about the halo products, however the companies making these are bearing the full cost themselves, whereas rail charter operators do not bear the full cost if they cause serious disruption. This does not just have to be from train failures or faults; The trespass issues affecting Flying Scotsman are well known, and delays from such events are attributed to Network Rail. Lineside fires with potential damage to equipment are another issue; From my own experience, the Mallaig branch has on occasion had to be blocked to allow large scale heather fires (after the passage of the Jacobite) to be extinguished.

 

Having said all that, I agree fully that running steam excursions are a major and positive publicity boost for the railways, but they have to be carefully, sensibly, and above all safely, planned, managed and operated. 

[Suzie]

I am sure that if operators had to pay the full bill for any delays they would be able to insure against it happening - and the premium would reflect the amount of work put in place to mitgate the chance of a delay. It would probably be a good driver to improving the perception of preserved train operators in the industry.

 

I suspect that customers at the premium end will like to be riding in ETS and air brake fitted Mk3s with a steam engine at the front with all services powered from a special Mk3 'support' coach fitted with a head end power unit. If the air pump has to be on the loco I guess it can be a nice compact and quiet electric one supplied by the head end power.

 

Let the preserved locos do what they were built for and make the smll adjustments required to allow it - or just shove them in a museum. There really is little room for compromise on a congested network. If steam locos were still with us today in front line service they would not be using vacuum brakes.

[IamDaniel]

Who have paid a lot of money for 'the railway' to get them from A to B on time, something that would have happened if a Charter Train hadnt failed!

 

My point might be narrow bot is very relevant.

 

Most of the people who get all dewy eyed over Flying Scotsman probably never get on a train from one year to the next so I fail to see what benefit they bring, like it or not (me personally, I dont like it) the railways are a business and that business is shifting lots of people efficiently and effectively and making a profit from doing it!

 

I've been on several steam-hauled charters this year which have been delayed by late-running service trains and signalling issues; it isn't always steam that causes delays. If I could, I'd put in several delay repay claims into GWR for making 'my' charter late.

 

Saying that 'all steam locomotives on the main line break down and cause chaos' (or at least infering it), is silly.

[Zomboid]

No one has said that. The point has been that charter trains (presumably diesel and electric hauled too) are shielded from their liabilities if and when things do go wrong.

[APOLLO]

Here's Britannia causing Chaos !!!!!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVQPqd3n13c

 

Brit15

Edited November 6, 2017 by APOLLO

[LMS2968]

Sorry Apollo, I'm not a big fan of Bitannias, but they do make a lovely noise!

[royaloak]

Saying that 'all steam locomotives on the main line break down and cause chaos' (or at least infering it), is silly.

Please point me to where I wrote that (or inferred it) please!

 

Or are you simply trying to make a point?

 

Air braked steamer breaks down so any air braked loco can rescue it/clear the line, A vacuum braked steamer breaks down and its job stopped for hours.

Can you please explain why the second one shouldnt be liable for all the delay costs simply because they refuse to modernise and want to pretend its 1962?

Edited November 6, 2017 by royaloak

[Dava]

Steam returned in 1971. The Kings always has issues hence the limited double red restriction on the Gwr routes and the routes they ran in the 1948 loco trials. Swindon often looked to make use of the legacy of the broader clearances afforded by broad gaige

 

You're correct of course, KGV broke the 'steam ban'. I just remembered 1974 as thats when it hit a bridge on the WR and broke its chimney. Obviously not the chimney in your icon. That seemed to be when the clearance problems in preservation started. One mainline 'King' in slimline/cutdown profile is probably enough to find work for and 6023 is more likely to be a preserved line/Didcot based display loco.

 

Dava

[TEDDYBEAR D9521]

I've been on several steam-hauled charters this year which have been delayed by late-running service trains and signalling issues; it isn't always steam that causes delays. If I could, I'd put in several delay repay claims into GWR for making 'my' charter late.

 

Saying that 'all steam locomotives on the main line break down and cause chaos' (or at least infering it), is silly.

Charter company’s can’t claim any payments against Main Line TOC,s just like Network Rail can only claim a max £5000 in delays compensation off the the Charter company if when out on the Main Line there is late running of trains Charter services will take back seat over Main Line TOC,s.

 

You pay your money and take your chance.

[jjb1970]

An interesting point about the halo products, however the companies making these are bearing the full cost themselves, whereas rail charter operators do not bear the full cost if they cause serious disruption. This does not just have to be from train failures or faults; The trespass issues affecting Flying Scotsman are well known, and delays from such events are attributed to Network Rail. Lineside fires with potential damage to equipment are another issue; From my own experience, the Mallaig branch has on occasion had to be blocked to allow large scale heather fires (after the passage of the Jacobite) to be extinguished.

 

Having said all that, I agree fully that running steam excursions are a major and positive publicity boost for the railways, but they have to be carefully, sensibly, and above all safely, planned, managed and operated. 

 

Any analogy breaks down on closer inspection. In this case I think the railways need to look at this in terms of Railways plc as it is the industry that benefits in terms of goodwill and the political value generated from this goodwill. Whilst rail charter companies may not bear the full cost of disruption, it is also true that NR and TOCs are not bearing the full cost of operating the railway system, being heavily dependent on government subsidies. Since a large part of the population never, or rarely, travel by train there are plenty of people that see no benefit from such subsidy and would probably happily withdraw it if it'd save them money. Some of them will appreciate that it is not that simple, that even if you never use the train there is a major economic benefit to UK plc from having a good rail system and also the numbers of people carried by rail are critical in keeping sufficient people off the roads to allow urban roads to function in busy periods but if the sight of steam trains helps to garner support for maintaining railways in this country then it is the industry as a whole that benefits. Hence why I see it as a sort of halo product for rail transport. 

[brack]

I think a certain amount of steam and nostalgia is a useful halo type product for the railways.

Indeed, hence (for example) the RhB and SBB keeping a few steam locos and old electrics in working order, or the effort Union Pacific are making with the big boy - it's either a sentimental waste of money, or a vast amount of goodwill and positive PR for a lot less than an advertising campaign and with a more pervasive impact.

[Zomboid]

Though UP, SBB and RhB won't insist on fitting an obsolete braking system...

Presumably they'll use 4014 like they did the challenger and haul massive freight trains with it.