British Service Steam: A Discussion

[sem34090]

Hello!

 

A thought has been going through my head of late about the practicalities of steam ever returning to regular services in the UK.

 

So, a few of my thoughts. I know they're written as questions, but this is more about starting a discussion than seeking a definitive answer (hence my posting here!).

 

- WCRC and Belmond Run semi-regular steam hauled services throughout the year, and at times I'm sure the number of steam locos at Carlisle can outnumber those of other traction. However, these are not 'service' trains - they are run for enthusiasts and tourists, and charge a premium fare.

 

- Steam as an alternative traction to diesel (not electric, I shouldn't think!) has been floated as an idea in the past (5AT, etc...), so is there any chance of these ideas becoming more widely accepted.

 

- My idea that has been fermenting formulating in my mind is that, on a (very) occassional basis, steam locos and heritage stock could be employed on some service workings that may recieve extra patronage as a result of their being steam-hauled (Much in the same way the Cumbrian Coast Line has seen an increase in patronage due to the use of Class 37's). I suppose the use of heritage DMU's could have a similar effect, but steam would be a major draw for enthusiasts and even non-enthusiasts. I suppose this came about from me seeing an image of a T9, U or M7 sat at Worthing with a rake of green coaches (Presumably MK1's or Mk2's in this day and age...) on a local working from Littlehampton to Brighton. It's unlikely to happen, but it set my mind thinking as to whether there may be a case for using the likes of the railmotor or a few Panniers on some of the smaller Cornish lines (How was 93 run on the Looe Branch? Was it in service use, or specials only?) in between DMU's during the summer, which may increase their profitability. 

 

There's a lot of practicalities that would need to be thought out, but it was another mad an idea that came into my head that I thought it may be interesting to hear opinions on. It's probably highly impractical, and I'm not saying it would work, but I like the idea in concept of a regular steam-hauled service  on non-heritage lines.

 

 

[iands]

Hello!

 

A thought has been going through my head of late about the practicalities of steam ever returning to regular services in the UK.

 

So, a few of my thoughts. I know they're written as questions, but this is more about starting a discussion than seeking a definitive answer (hence my posting here!).

 

- WCRC and Belmond Run semi-regular steam hauled services throughout the year, and at times I'm sure the number of steam locos at Carlisle can outnumber those of other traction. However, these are not 'service' trains - they are run for enthusiasts and tourists, and charge a premium fare.

 

- Steam as an alternative traction to diesel (not electric, I shouldn't think!) has been floated as an idea in the past (5AT, etc...), so is there any chance of these ideas becoming more widely accepted.

 

- My idea that has been fermenting formulating in my mind is that, on a (very) occassional basis, steam locos and heritage stock could be employed on some service workings that may recieve extra patronage as a result of their being steam-hauled (Much in the same way the Cumbrian Coast Line has seen an increase in patronage due to the use of Class 37's). I suppose the use of heritage DMU's could have a similar effect, but steam would be a major draw for enthusiasts and even non-enthusiasts. I suppose this came about from me seeing an image of a T9, U or M7 sat at Worthing with a rake of green coaches (Presumably MK1's or Mk2's in this day and age...) on a local working from Littlehampton to Brighton. It's unlikely to happen, but it set my mind thinking as to whether there may be a case for using the likes of the railmotor or a few Panniers on some of the smaller Cornish lines (How was 93 run on the Looe Branch? Was it in service use, or specials only?) in between DMU's during the summer, which may increase their profitability. 

 

There's a lot of practicalities that would need to be thought out, but it was another mad an idea that came into my head that I thought it may be interesting to hear opinions on. It's probably highly impractical, and I'm not saying it would work, but I like the idea in concept of a regular steam-hauled service  on non-heritage lines.

As much as I like the idea, I don't see this happening. For starters, most (if not quite all) infrastructure required for steam engine running (two basic but essential ones being water cranes and coaling stages) have long since disappeared. I just don't think the practical logistics of such a scenario would be possible in today's "modern railway" environment. Not least with some of the technical issues required for a modern railway as discussed in another thread "Freight services being updated".

 

Regards, Ian.

[sem34090]

I can't see it happening, except perhaps on the Looe branch (It's been done before... steam can run on it!), Falmouth (Hmmm...) or St Ives (Bit more like it!), but I thought it'd be fun to theorise how it could be made possible and executed. 

 

The other, parallel discussion is using alternative, modern, forms of steam traction to displace diesels.

[EddieB]

What you're describing sounds very much like the German "plandampf" events, where steam is allocated to regular passenger and freight workings and full timetable details are released to enthusiasts for a modest

payment.

 

It might work - replacing diesel hauled loco sets in Norfolk for instance, but I can't really see it happening here.

[sem34090]

I did have Germany in mind it seems...

 

Sounds roughly like what I was proposing, but I don't think there's enough freight left that could be steam hauled.

[iands]

I did have Germany in mind it seems...

 

Sounds roughly like what I was proposing, but I don't think there's enough freight left that could be steam hauled.

Plus the freight rolling stock these days is air braked and not vacuum braked.

 

Regards, Ian.

[Edwin_m]

Plus the freight rolling stock these days is air braked and not vacuum braked.

 

Regards, Ian.

Several main line cleared steam locos have air brake equipment and Tornado had it fitted from new.  But a steam loco on a rake of modern wagons isn't particularly authentic. 

[iands]

Several main line cleared steam locos have air brake equipment and Tornado had it fitted from new.  But a steam loco on a rake of modern wagons isn't particularly authentic. 

I'm not sure that "authenticity" would be high on the agenda if reintroduction of steam traction were to be even considered as a practical and valid option.

 

Regards, Ian.

[009 micro modeller]

Another problem which didn't matter for the railmotor but would for most steam workings is the removal of run round loops from the sort of branch lines where this could otherwise be possible. I'm not sure if push-pull for steam railtours etc would be allowed.

[sem34090]

Oooo... 1450 and a pair of autocoaches on the St Ives branch.... that MUST happen someday!

[Nearholmer]

Leaving aside all the other multiple difficulties, modern freight trains are b heavy, and b fast compared with what went before, and most steam locos, up to and including a 9F are b feeble in comparison with, say, a Class 66.

 

My guess is that run running modern freight services, to current timetables, with retro steam traction would be impractical, because it would require something like a doubleheader with Duchesses to obtain the necessary starting tractive effort and (the bit an 9F can't do) the power and mechanical design features necessary for sustained running at 60-80mph.

 

The speed of modern passenger services is far higher than their predecessors, with high power/weight ratios, too, so one would probably need surprisingly big locos on them too.

 

It's easy to forget how installed power, and hence speed, has climbed since the days of steam, and the 1950s diesel and trains that aped steam performance by using 175hp/car to 200hp/car.

 

So, any Plandampf would probably need to be on a branch line, with fairly modest trains, and it would be a serious nightmare to organise, because all the frilly bits, like run round loops and watering facilities etc, have been removed.

 

For motive power, I suggest three or four 4MT 2-6-4T, BR or Fairburn/Stanier. Very powerful, practical engines, don't need a turntable etc, or go for the Looe branch out of season with an auto-train.

 

Study TfL's Steam on the Met for further elucidation of what can be done on a modern railway given the presence of highly supportive Directors and Managers. Then ask yourself whether or not the national rail combine would have the will to find a way (The Chairman of NR would be persuadable, but everyone else?).

[Bernard Lamb]

A route like Waverley-Tweedbank might work.

Hang on, they are running steam trains.

However the fare is about 3 1/2 times the normal fare and they only run on certain days and at certain times of the year.

Is that sustainable?

Are locomotives and qualified crew always available?

Who will subsidize who?

A good idea but some major problems to sort out first before it becomes viable as a daily offering.

Bernard

[St. Simon]

Then ask yourself whether or not the national rail combine would have the will to find a way (The Chairman of NR would be persuadable, but everyone else?).

 

Hi,

 

There are many people that I have met in the Industry, both in high and low positions, which have the view that Steam should be confined to Heritage Railways (although they are enthusiastic that Steam should be maintained, just not on the Modern Mainline).

 

I share that view, particularly after the Wotton Bassett Incident. Steam currently is simply not fit for purpose on the Modern Railway.

 

Simon

Edited January 18, 2018 by St. Simon

[Wheatley]

Assuming we're talking about using the assets currently available rather than building new steam locos, then there is no regulatory or statutory reason why a TOC could not run timetabled steam services. There are however a number of commercial, contractual, resourcing and financial reasons why they would not want to.

 

A one-off like Tornado on the S&C was reasonably straightforward if quite heavy in terms of management time arranging it. It was effectively a charter train which just happened to be running in the path of a timetabled service so provided the 'turn up and go' ticketing option was still available (which in theory it was) then the DfT was happy that the franchised service was being delivered and the only ORR interest was in whose operating licence it was operating under (TOC's or charter operator's - doesn't really matter which as long as one of them is formally responsible for managing the risks arising). The loco, stock and crew were all hired in.

 

But if you were operating for a longer period you really want the traincrew resources in house where you can manage them effectively, not only in terms of their competency (Wooton Bassett) but also in terms of guaranteed availability. On the Cumbrian Coast it is relatively easy, a DMU driver can be trained to drive a 37 fairly quickly, everything is just bigger, heavier, dirtier, faffier and takes longer. But driving a steam loco is a completely different skill set - it's the difference between being allowed to drive a 7.5 ton Ford Cargo on your car licence, and taking a horse on the road. The The Ford Cargo controls are the same as the car, just bigger and laid out differently, but although taking your horse on the road involves the same rules (Highway Code) steering and braking on the horse is totally different and a Ford Cargo isn't scared of cars/lorries/birds/plastic bags/tufts of grass blowing in the wind etc. 

 

If you take driving in house that poses a training and competence issue which even BR ICSTU struggled with in the 1990s when everyone was working for the same firm and ex-steam men were still around to ask. If you take on the additional task of managing steam competence then your driver managers need to be steam competent too or you need to hire that specialism in.  If you hire in drivers then you have the additional problem of managing your supplier to make sure their drivers are competent/sober/healthy can stand unaided etc.

 

Your traction resource is transient - the pool of available locomotives goes in and out of boiler ticket all the time and is largely maintained by third party volunteers. They all need to be individually licenced too whereas for vehicle acceptance purposes one Class 158 is very much like another.  

 

Don't assume that 'unusual' = 'popular' either, or at least 'popular with the people the DfT are paying you to run the servivce for'. The 37s on the Cumbrian Coast are attracting traction cranks from far and wide but the regular passengers for whom it was provided (essentially Sellafield workers) are all car pooling because the 37s are unreliable. If your Plandampf services are too full of gricers then your core travellers/voters/constituents/council tax payers will get vocal and the DfT/Transport Scotland/Rail North will start asking questions about core services. There's a reason Tornado was on off-peak services out of season on a lightly used route, north of the bits which directly affect the Leeds/Bradford commuter services and only for three days in half term.

 

It can be done (assuming there's nothing in your franchise agreement which says it can't) but whether it would be commercially sane to do it is another matter.

[LNER4479]

Assuming we're talking about using the assets currently available rather than building new steam locos, then there is no regulatory or statutory reason why a TOC could not run timetabled steam services.

There is a fundamental regulatory obstacle, as follows:

 

The two key regulations, ROGS(safety) and RIR(interoperability) both define heritage as 'non mainline' for the purpose of the Regs. Steam is (naturally) regarded as heritage and, as 'non mainline', is exempted from mandatory compliance with current standards on the basis that it is used for heritage operations only with an annual mileage limitation.

 

If it were to be used for regular services then it would be classed as 'mainline' and would have to comply with current standards, which is as good as impossible for a steam loco ( bulk and location of boiler limiting signal sighting for one thing).

 

Occasional, 'plandampf' events are possible, as has been proven, on a case-by-case risk-based approach.

[Wheatley]

I stand corrected, thank you.

 

Ok, as well as the fact that there is a fundamental regulatory obstacle, there however a number of commercial, contractual, resourcing and financial reasons why they would not want to. :-)

[iands]

I stand corrected, thank you.

 

Ok, as well as the fact that there is a fundamental regulatory obstacle, there however a number of commercial, contractual, resourcing and financial reasons why they would not want to. :-)

And not to forget the technical issue mentioned previously.

 

Regards, Ian.

[Rivercider]

Oooo... 1450 and a pair of autocoaches on the St Ives branch.... that MUST happen someday!

The St Ives branch is run to very tight turn rounds to enable the half hourly service to operate, and, due to the park and ride aspect, is very well loaded during the tourist season. I suspect a steam service simply could not cope.

I would suggest the Looe branch might be more suitable, with a more relaxed timetable and lighter loadings.

 

cheers 

[The Stationmaster]

As much as I like the idea, I don't see this happening. For starters, most (if not quite all) infrastructure required for steam engine running (two basic but essential ones being water cranes and coaling stages) have long since disappeared. I just don't think the practical logistics of such a scenario would be possible in today's "modern railway" environment. Not least with some of the technical issues required for a modern railway as discussed in another thread "Freight services being updated".

 

Regards, Ian.

 

And not just those facilities - which in reality can be fairly easily provided (at a cost) just about anywhere there is road access - but there are far more serious hurdles to leap over.  The biggest problem is lack of infrastructure - loops on which to run round, sidings to stable engines and stock out of the way for servicing, and indeed somewhere for engiens to stand for coaling and watering let alone pits for oiling round and pits fr fire cleaning/dropping.

 

Then there is the problem of manning which requires suitably trained crews who have to come from somewhere and that might well include training and the cost of doing it.  Regulatory issues might be a problem especially if someone wants to prevent regular steam operation happening.

 

Overall - and speaking from past involvement in mainline steam running I reckon the OP was voicing a pipe-dream and the practicalities of doing it, let alone the commercial implications, make it a non-starter.  All great fun but something of a diversion from the railway getting on with what it ought to be doing.

[Mark Saunders]

Several main line cleared steam locos have air brake equipment and Tornado had it fitted from new.  But a steam loco on a rake of modern wagons isn't particularly authentic. 

 

Tornado is newer than most main line locomotives!

[sem34090]

I understood it would be unlikely to happen, but thought it would be interesting to see the various practicality issues (and economic ones!) with doing this.

 

Still, I think Looe has promise with an auto train and the railmotor: that line seems almost like a heritage line to me anyway! Running the railmotor in between the DMU service, or an auto-tank and coach is more feasible than some of my other ideas.

 

Still, I'd love to see steam on the South Coast... never going to happen though. I'd suggest the best South Coast candidate would be the Bognor - Barnham/Littlehampton shuttles using either a couple of locos or a push-pull. The reason I say this is that they're short runs with fairly long dwell times at each end. If frequency needs to be maintained, then perhaps steam and heritage EMU? I can't remember off-hand the frequency of the above services. It'd also save Southern a few more units to cover for supposed 'failures' which seem to affect the same working for days at a time... but the reason changes each day between 'Staff Unavailability', 'Signalling Fault' and 'Fault on this train'. Sometimes the reason can change within minutes!

[Nearholmer]

A few 2-BILs would bring about a massive improvement in the quality of local train rolling stock on the south coast.

 

They were a bit bumpy and noisy, but much cosier than the modern Formica and fluorescent trains.

[009 micro modeller]

Closest thing I can think of at the moment is the NYMR extension over Network Rail track to Whitby. I found out the other day that this now includes all their services (pretty much), and apparently ticket selling at Whitby is now in the hands of the NYMR even for Northern Rail tickets, although I'm not sure how this works out of season when the NYMR isn't running. I assume that tickets are checked on board the heritage trains to prevent people using them on cheaper National Rail tickets. Getting slightly off topic but I would be interested if anyone does know: I remember reading somewhere that the locos/stock run with a safety case which only covers the end of the Esk Valley line, not NR generally as for railtours. Is it the same for the train crew or do they have to be trained to the same level as crews on mainline railtours (and not volunteers)?

 

A point here as well is that even on the section served the NYMR is not really providing the same service. The trains run non stop between Whitby and Grosmont (as I understand) and not all year. They do serve Whitby more frequently than Northern (only 4 trains per day I think) though.

 

Edit: Didn't Southern develop a computer program recently to randomise the excuse they use for poor service?

Edited January 18, 2018 by 009 micro modeller

[sem34090]

A few 2-BILs would bring about a massive improvement in the quality of local train rolling stock on the south coast.

 

They were a bit bumpy and noisy, but much cosier than the modern Formica and fluorescent trains.

Indeed it would!

[darrel]

The Fort William to mallaig jacobite service is a timetabled working 2 return trips a day. Admittedly not run by Scotrail but by WCR.

The other question is though although a regular steam working on say the Cumbrian coast line, the settle Carlisle, or Glasgow to Oban would definitely bring in extra customers. It would also cost more to run. Extra paths required for running round, light engine movements, extra staff costs as you will need to pay for a fireman, driver training, guards would need to be trained on loco hauled stock. Longer turn round times at stations, longer dwell times at stations.

The question is would the extra revenue be enough to cover the extra operating costs.