"Welsh Highland Railway Developments & Progress"?

[Bomag]

I'm not interested in the politics of this but one thing did strike me from the various quotes from the WHHR in which they claim they are not allowed to run to Traeth Mawr even tho' the WHR isn't using it.

 

As that section hasn't yet been passed for passenger train use it seems to me to be playing with (or on?) words to say that they 'aren't allowed to use it'. Obviously they aren't, but then legally they can't - not because the FR/WHR is stopping them but because the railway cannot yet be used for passenger trains.

 

From what is reported on various websites it is clear that a lot of other work has gradually had to follow the track laying in order for the WHR to commission anything for passenger train use. And clearly their volunteer labour and paid staff & resources have been devoted (and apparently heavily committed) to gradually extending their operations, in stages, as far as Pont Croesor.

 

Although there have been some changes, the railway to Traeth Mawr is as the WHP built it and is effectively fit for passenger use, or at least being brought into use with little effort and certainly less effort than the FR/WH have spent setting up both temporary termini the level crossing. The argument with the Welsh NWTR agency has depleted resources (and may have effected the timetable for the Pont Croesor LC work ) but given the history of the WH64/FR I would believe a suggestion that FR was seeing this as an opportunity to exclude them.

 

Does anybody know the progress of the Porthmadoc bypass? There was a tree plating exercise in January but completion of the D&B contract is shown as being 2016. Given the economic pressures and the road schemes already cut or delayed it may be some time before the cross town route can be used for passengers.

[John M]

Although there have been some changes, the railway to Traeth Mawr is as the WHP built it and is effectively fit for passenger use, or at least being brought into use with little effort and certainly less effort than the FR/WH have spent setting up both temporary termini the level crossing. The argument with the Welsh NWTR agency has depleted resources (and may have effected the timetable for the Pont Croesor LC work ) but given the history of the WH64/FR I would believe a suggestion that FR was seeing this as an opportunity to exclude them.

 

Does anybody know the progress of the Porthmadoc bypass? There was a tree plating exercise in January but completion of the D&B contract is shown as being 2016. Given the economic pressures and the road schemes already cut or delayed it may be some time before the cross town route can be used for passengers.

 

 

The Portmadoc Bye Pass will cross over the two railways to the South of Pen-y-Mount Halt. Drainage works have commenced and the WHHR main line was diverted to facilitate the construction of a culvert http://whr.fotopic.net/p64542842.html a level crossing was also provided for construction traffic.

 

I understand that the culvert was completed in May and the main line reintated on its old allignment. The WHR Main Line and WHHR Wharf sidings will be lifted temporarily for the culvert works.

 

The Pen-y-Mount Traeth Mawr section was inspected and passed for passenger traffic by HMRI before the section was brought into use in 2007.

 

The WHHR was denied access at the end of the 2008 season and the line is currently treated as a worksite and there has been no traffic over the section apart from some engineers trains and stock transfers from Boston Lodge to Dinas.

 

Relations between the two companies effectively broke down in the Autumn of 2008 over future WHHR access with claims and counter claims and an implied threats of legal action.

 

Before the imapass a lot of the technical details for operating on the WHR had been agreed, both in relation to staff training and mechanical issues.

 

Russell is undergoing a heavy overhaul to FR standards, although the WHHR is an airbraked railway the coaching stock including two recently built replica corridor coaches and the Gladstone Car are in the process of conversion to FR compatible couplers and a dual braking system.

 

Revenue abstraction from the Festiniog appears to be a serious concern that in all probability prompted FR interest in acquiring the WHR Trackbed in the first place.

 

The draft operating plan for the Southern End of the line in 2009 basically envisaged rationing seating capacity on the Portmadoc-Bedgellert section by operating a limited service with FR an Heritage Stock.

 

In requiring WHHR Heritage trains to originate from Harbour Station the FR effectively dismisses the current WHHR operation as a source of fare revenue.

 

While issue of through running is something of a moot point at the moment, the sight of nature reclaiming the currently disused section North of Pen-y-Mount is galling to those that worked on or funded the Traeth Mawr section.

 

John

[coachmann]

In my lifetime I've seen the FR resurecting their own line back to Blaenau Ffestiniog, and overseeing the building the Caernarvon-Porthmadog 'WHR' line as well, both mammoth tasks by any standards. It is easy to take the Festiniog Railway Company for granted nowadays but I remember a time when the Snowdonian mountains were silent.

 

Those people down near the Porthmadog station have had their little line for years and so speaking as a mere cynic and member of the travelling public, my suspicion is they fancy cashing-in on the FR's success now the donkey work has been done.

 

If I want to see heritage WHR and a take a little trip up and down a tourist attraction I know which line to visit, but if I want to park my car and get somewhere for real, then the new WHR has it. I have no doubt the latter line will be run run a businesslike manner, indeed it is a necessity if it is to survive and pay a dividend. Amateur dramatics they don't need.

[The Stationmaster]

(snippet)

The Pen-y-Mount Traeth Mawr section was inspected and passed for passenger traffic by HMRI before the section was brought into use in 2007.

 

The WHHR was denied access at the end of the 2008 season and the line is currently treated as a worksite and there has been no traffic over the section apart from some engineers trains and stock transfers from Boston Lodge to Dinas.

 

John

 

 

But if my understanding from watching the progress of the works on the late Ben Fisher's site is correct some alterations occurred on that section when the WHR tracklaying extended through to Cae Pawb (and those have presumably not been inspected yet?). Equally when the original inspection was carried out there was no connection to anything else at Traeth Mawr. Thus alterations have taken place which, I agan presume, have not been inspected.

 

The fact that the route between Pont Croesor and Porthmadog is a worksite also poses some complications (not that they can't be solved - I have done exactly that, albeit under ROGS and not the old Inspection regime, on another line of slim gauge) but it still means added administrative work and complication.

 

I have no axe to grind for either party in this (in some respects) rather childish dispute but it is clear to me that costs would be incurred in reintroducing passenger train operations to Traeth Mawr and that someone would have to meet those costs.

 

In the meanwhile Coach has explained in his final paragraph above exactly what options are available to us potential customers of both concerns - they offer different things which attract us in different ways. Perhaps one day there will be something different on offer to us but it seems to me there will be a need to have a lot more clarity in the relationship between the two railways before that is likely to happen.

[John M]

I was writing from my own perspective as a WHRL member more to clarify that the bit in the middle the Pen-y-Mount Traeth Mawr section had been passed and approved for operation by HMRI in 2007.

 

The remaining works for opening through to Harbour Station mainly relate to the re-modelling of Harbour Station and the comissioning of signalling on the Cross Town Link and commissioning of the new signalling system on the Cambrian.

 

The dispute between the two Companies is based on serious financial concerns relating to the operation of WHHR Hertitage trains of the WHR.

 

Effectively the two companies have been unable to come to a mutually agreeable solution, the FR would prefer to hire Russell and the WHHR Heritage Train to operate on the WHR, the WHHR would prefer to operate a more regular service based on a fare sharing arrangement.

 

Going back to Coachmans point about the WHHR having done little and wanting to cash in on the FRs success.

 

While the investment by the WHHR in the WHR project is miniscule in the overall terms of the WHR project, for a small organisation like the WHRL investing somewhat in excess of £150,000 and expending goodness knows how many man hours in rebuilding a short section of the real WHR for little tangiable return is a very serious matter indeed.

 

 

 

 

John

 

 

 

 

But if my understanding from watching the progress of the works on the late Ben Fisher's site is correct some alterations occurred on that section when the WHR tracklaying extended through to Cae Pawb (and those have presumably not been inspected yet?). Equally when the original inspection was carried out there was no connection to anything else at Traeth Mawr. Thus alterations have taken place which, I agan presume, have not been inspected.

 

The fact that the route between Pont Croesor and Porthmadog is a worksite also poses some complications (not that they can't be solved - I have done exactly that, albeit under ROGS and not the old Inspection regime, on another line of slim gauge) but it still means added administrative work and complication.

 

I have no axe to grind for either party in this (in some respects) rather childish dispute but it is clear to me that costs would be incurred in reintroducing passenger train operations to Traeth Mawr and that someone would have to meet those costs.

 

In the meanwhile Coach has explained in his final paragraph above exactly what options are available to us potential customers of both concerns - they offer different things which attract us in different ways. Perhaps one day there will be something different on offer to us but it seems to me there will be a need to have a lot more clarity in the relationship between the two railways before that is likely to happen.

 

 

 

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

I was writing from my own perspective as a WHRL member more to clarify that the bit in the middle the Pen-y-Mount Traeth Mawr section had been passed and approved for operation by HMRI in 2007.

 

The remaining works for opening through to Harbour Station mainly relate to the re-modelling of Harbour Station and the comissioning of signalling on the Cross Town Link and commissioning of the new signalling system on the Cambrian.

 

John

 

I appreciate that John but my point is that since that Inspection the physical nature of the railway which was inspected in 2007 has been subject to change (and will, of necessity, be subject to further change before opening to through WHR passenger trains). Accordingly under the 'old regime' (i.e pre ROGS - but that is still the regime I understand the WHR works to be subject to) any changes are subject to Inspection before opening for passenger traffic. That Inspection might, or might not, be a formality (altho' I doubt it) but it still has to take place before passenger trains can run.

 

For example as the section is a worksite suitable arrangements have to be put in place and approved in order to separate the worksite from the live passenger railway and that is the responsibility of the infrastructure owner (i.e the WHR). And it is now clearly a worksite with, according to the Isengard website, a new tamping programme underway on the Porthmadog side of Pont Croesor. Obviously such a division is not difficult - it has happened, and is happening, as WHR train operations have crept towards the coast - but the necessary arrangements still need to be made and approved (probably with an Inspection).

[coachmann]

The old WHR has the trump card with 'Russell' and no doubt those aware of historical matters would love to see this loco working on the new WHR, at least as far as Bedgellert. Trouble is such a venture could be seen to be creaming off revenues, so I cannot see how the two companies can come together until such time as the new railway is confident it can turn a profit. In the current fiancial downturn, it remains to be seen how many people will travel the whole journey from Caernarfon to Porthmadog. Then of course the Festiniog Railway proper has yet to see if their own finances have been hit by revenues going to the new WHR, as has the old WHR.

 

In otherwords, it is early days for everybody.

[rhydddu009]

I am trying to remain neutral on this as I am an enthuiastic support of the FR and a minor volunteer when I can get the time. However I also have many friends at the WHHR and our kids love the 'experience' of their line too.

 

I would like to point out to readers of this thread that the FR is a major employer (unlike many heritage railways) of some 60+ staff and as such it must take commercial decisions to protect those employees (some of whom have already been made redundant by the closure of other industries in the area notably slate related industries). The FR has already had to make some serious and most unfortunate redundancies only 2 years ago due to the effects of the recession on traffic and revenue. Thankfully last year was much better, but the management must run the company(ies) as businesses otherwise real people will be out of real jobs.

 

I am also not convinced that we have heard the end of this discussion and I suspect there are ways to come to an amicable conclusion, but the current WHHR operations proposal which would give the FR about £1 for each passenger is not sustainable at all. The agreement (which the FR claim is dead and buried as it was broken anyway) is very clear about what would happen with revenues and costs, and the published WHHR proposal comes nowhere close to fulfilling that.

 

Regular WHHR trains to Pont Croesor must now been seen as highly unlikely, but 'ever so often' HERITAGE trains onto the WHR proper are still likely to happen in my view.

[The Stationmaster]

 

I am also not convinced that we have heard the end of this discussion and I suspect there are ways to come to an amicable conclusion, but the current WHHR operations proposal which would give the FR about £1 for each passenger is not sustainable at all. The agreement (which the FR claim is dead and buried as it was broken anyway) is very clear about what would happen with revenues and costs, and the published WHHR proposal comes nowhere close to fulfilling that.

 

Regular WHHR trains to Pont Croesor must now been seen as highly unlikely, but 'ever so often' HERITAGE trains onto the WHR proper are still likely to happen in my view.

 

I'm not sure if you have quoted the 'real' figure or just used the £1 as an 'illustrative amount' but if it has indeed been the figure on the table so to speak it strikes me as remarkably low.

[Guest Phil]

We have been through a lot of the emotional FR / WHHR conflict in the previous thread and I don't think it is in RMwebbers (or Andy's) interests for us to get hot under the collar over many of the same issues. Can I suggest we stick to any new issues of relevance but leave what has already been discussed, well alone. What has probably changed since that thread is the recession and the struggle for heritage railways to survive.

 

I'm not surprised about the delay to the CTRL being fully passed for passenger use. This is because surely if ERTMS is running seriously late on the Network Rail / WHR interface then the Cae Pawb crossing will also not be operational as planned. Is there a modus operandi for using the Cae Pawb crossing for passenger services prior to the introduction of ERTMS ?

[The Stationmaster]

 

I'm not surprised about the delay to the CTRL being fully passed for passenger use. This is because surely if ERTMS is running seriously late on the Network Rail / WHR interface then the Cae Pawb crossing will also not be operational as planned. Is there a modus operandi for using the Cae Pawb crossing for passenger services prior to the introduction of ERTMS ?

 

 

Information isn't so readily available since Ben Fisher's death and the end of his excellent website but I think there is far more to it than the matter of Cae Pawb.

 

First there was (and possibly still is?) the matter of cash availability to carry out the works needed to get the Porthmadog end of the route (excluding Cae Pawb crossing) up to standard. I understand that at one stage arrangements for the main level crossing were still not finally agreed (although - as so often - there seem to be two separate stories about that ), that works at the station had been pushed back because of cash shortage, and that whatever else was happening the signalling needed to be installed. Added to that there are now the bypass works underway.

 

I know there is some sort of separate system development for working the single line sections underway although I don't know to what extent its progress might or might not delay overall works (possibly saving money so work could go ahead sooner? But I'm not at liberty to say what it is as I might possibly have a minor 'external' role in its clearance for use).

 

Cae Pawb has, so I understand it, been (re)designed around the 'mainline' ERTMS installation and would, I presume, therefore be expensive to work any other way. Already some stock moves have returned to road haulage because of the expense of using Cae Pawb (presumably a possession?). But overall from the last truly comprehensive reports of what is happening works wise I have got the strong impression that Cae Pawb is but one (relatively minor) hurdle that has to be jumped.

[Bomag]

Information isn't so readily available since Ben Fisher's death and the end of his excellent website but I think there is far more to it than the matter of Cae Pawb.

 

First there was (and possibly still is?) the matter of cash availability to carry out the works needed to get the Porthmadog end of the route (excluding Cae Pawb crossing) up to standard. I understand that at one stage arrangements for the main level crossing were still not finally agreed (although - as so often - there seem to be two separate stories about that ), that works at the station had been pushed back because of cash shortage, and that whatever else was happening the signalling needed to be installed. Added to that there are now the bypass works underway.

 

I know there is some sort of separate system development for working the single line sections underway although I don't know to what extent its progress might or might not delay overall works (possibly saving money so work could go ahead sooner? But I'm not at liberty to say what it is as I might possibly have a minor 'external' role in its clearance for use).

 

Cae Pawb has, so I understand it, been (re)designed around the 'mainline' ERTMS installation and would, I presume, therefore be expensive to work any other way. Already some stock moves have returned to road haulage because of the expense of using Cae Pawb (presumably a possession?). But overall from the last truly comprehensive reports of what is happening works wise I have got the strong impression that Cae Pawb is but one (relatively minor) hurdle that has to be jumped.

 

 

Most of this cost could be saved by running into the WHHR station at Porthmadog Quite frankly I would rather be travelling from Pothmadog along the WHR than discussing inter-society politics.

 

It's not just the FR/WHR railway feeling the pinch it seems WAG roads budget is going to be squeezed. It could be that after the prelim work for the bypass is finished the actual construction could be re-phased to later in the contract period (which could be 2014-2016). Given that a lot of discussion has taken place about having to reduce traffic flows on the A470 outside harbour station before timetabled running is permitted it may be that there is plenty of time to find the funds for the final improvements.

[rhydddu009]

PS Ben's site is now back available, edited by a new team, here:

 

http://www.whrsoc.org.uk/WHRProject/index.htm

[The Stationmaster]

PS Ben's site is now back available, edited by a new team, here:

 

http://www.whrsoc.org.uk/WHRProject/index.htm

 

 

Many thanks for that

[Bomag]

You really have no idea what you're talking about, haven't you? The whole issue is the collaboration (better: lack there-of) between the FR/WHR and WHHR. There is an agreement from 1998 that has been broken by the WHHR before (failing to build the agreed section to Pont Croesor, then blaming the FR for only getting halfway) and with a operations proposal that didn't even came close to what was agreed in 1998 it was purely logical the FR replied with a firm No. To the proposal, not the WHHR itself!

 

As for the 2nd part: it just happened to be announced today that the push for Port will take place in the next months, aiming for obtaining HMRI approval in Sept. and hopefully a winter timetable this year!! Read on: http://www.isengard.co.uk/#News

 

If you think this issue is purely related to the interpretation of a single bit of paper from 1998 then you really don't know what you are talking about. This problem was caused by the historical animosity, or just dislike, of the the WH64 group (and successors) by some in the FR set-up - not helped by a reciprocal feeling in some. In most other inter-society disputes this has petered our as the 'awkward squad' has moved on.

 

Unless somebody can show me the figures I cannot see how the rebuilding the WHR into Harbour station is value for money. Given the constraints on Harbour station, the WHHR station next to the NR station is the more cost effective solution as well as being potentially more accessible. I have seen nothing which would alter my suspicions that the choice was not made on economics alone - and I don't mean the historic justification for choosing harbour station. It may be different if there was going to be significant through running.

 

As per the starting to run trains to harbour station before the bypass is complete, I can just go on a number of previous comments in print and other postings. While these could have been wild speculation or a convenient issue to justify the delay there did seem to be quite a few of them. Having spent many a happy hour in the last 35 years trying to get into, or out of Portmadoc on the A470, I don't think running through trains its going to be make it easier!

[Mod2]

You really have no idea what you're talking about, haven't you?

 

 

That's enough of that sort of retort, thanks. One poster has already been excluded from this topic, let's not make it more please.

[The Stationmaster]

At this stage it doesn't really matter whether it is value for money or not because the line is there although clearly considerable work remains to be done to get it to full operational standard for passenger trains - wherever they terminate in Portmadog.

 

Equally whether or not the Welsh assembly decides to audit the value it has received for its money - which obviously must go way beyond building a railway through the back streets of Porthmadog - is a matter for that Assembly, its voters, and the National Audit Office. I can see the economic sense of the FR having a rail link between the two parts of its network (and the FR is both a major tourist attraction and a substantial employer so the local economy gets more out of it than just a railway line and another reason for a traffic tail back entering the town). But all of that is a matter for the local people, their representatives etc, and Govt at its various levels.

 

Equally there is clearly some logic in having a link into the n.g. network from a station situated near the Network Rail station although I wonder how many visitors arrive in the area by rail nowadays. But such a link can only be arranged if the two organisations - or, seemingly, vocal elements involved 'somewhere' within or close to the two railways - stop bandying about claims, counter-claims and stuff & nonsense.

 

So perhaps we should just get on with enjoying, when the opportunity arise, what we have got - a new railway through a spectacular part of a fascinating country running decent size trains which can carry enough people to hopefully make the operating finances stand up?

[mcowgill]

Unless somebody can show me the figures I cannot see how the rebuilding the WHR into Harbour station is value for money. Given the constraints on Harbour station, the WHHR station next to the NR station is the more cost effective solution as well as being potentially more accessible.

 

If you were the FR management team would you be happy to see the trains run into the WHHR station to save the costs of crossing the Cambrian? I'm sure they would be more than happy to see all the passengers spend their money in the WHHR shop rather than the FR shop and buy refreshments in the Russell Cafe rather than Spooners?.

 

As has been said elsewhere, the FR is a commercial organisation, a significant employer in the area and it's contribution to the economy of the surrounding area by attracting visitors to both the FR & WHR may surprise you. It was calculated as part of a thesis at Bangor University in 2008 as £9m per annum.

 

The FR operated trains will terminate at Harbour station, there is no economic sense in them going anywhere else. Trains run by the WHHR with permission to operate along any part of the length of the restored WHR will terminate at Tremadog Road, I can't see any other possibility.

 

Martin

[Oldddudders]

So perhaps we should just get on with enjoying, when the opportunity arise, what we have got - a new railway through a spectacular part of a fascinating country running decent size trains which can carry enough people to hopefully make the operating finances stand up?[/i]

Thankyou Mike. A typically balanced view, seeing the bigger picture - which in this case is simply enormous, being the re-opening of 25 miles of narrow gauge railway dead for more than 70 years. The WHHR also has a lot to offer, including Russell, and all this in an area not famed for its affluence, but outstanding in its beauty. RMWeb has no locus in this deplorable dispute, but let us surely agree that a solution to provide the most opportunities for enthusiasts, families and other visitors to the area is now the only objective worth pursuing.

[Bomag]

If you were the FR management team would you be happy to see the trains run into the WHHR station to save the costs of crossing the Cambrian? I'm sure they would be more than happy to see all the passengers spend their money in the WHHR shop rather than the FR shop and buy refreshments in the Russell Cafe rather than Spooners?.

 

As has been said elsewhere, the FR is a commercial organisation, a significant employer in the area and it's contribution to the economy of the surrounding area by attracting visitors to both the FR & WHR may surprise you. It was calculated as part of a thesis at Bangor University in 2008 as £9m per annum.

 

The FR operated trains will terminate at Harbour station, there is no economic sense in them going anywhere else. Trains run by the WHHR with permission to operate along any part of the length of the restored WHR will terminate at Tremadog Road, I can't see any other possibility.

 

Martin

 

I am fully aware of the contribution a significant number of preserved railways have on their own areas. The number of grants to the movement, including the WHR, to improve tourist potential are indicators of this. While the operation of a number of the bigger railways is on commercial lines, apart from a couple, the aim of the organisation is railway preservation not profit. I had not realised the new WHR was now in the latter category.

 

I think you miss my point that if the FR had historically better relations with the WH64 etc then there would be no differentiation between revenue to WHHR and revenue to FR. The money would have gone to a single railway supported by, and for the benefit of, both societies. The last I heard the Cambrian trust/society have made up why can not WHR/FR?

[S.A.C Martin]

I think you miss my point that if the FR had historically better relations with the WH64 etc then there would be no differentiation between revenue to WHHR and revenue to FR. The money would have gone to a single railway supported by, and for the benefit of, both societies. The last I heard the Cambrian trust/society have made up why can not WHR/FR?

 

Now that, really, is the crux of the matter.

 

If this had been one single organization from the start of rebuilding the WHR - and the FR & WHHR had simply joined together, with a "one future, one aim" and buried the hatchet from times past, then a new company with all the volunteers together could have been made up, and the extensive collection of locomotives and rolling stock would be incredible - Russell alongside the Garratts and the Fairlies, and a Baldwin in the mix too.

 

The opportunity for making a uniquely heritage AND businesslike railway at the same time - with heritage trains involving Russell, Prince, the Fairlies, and the WHR trains involving the Garratts is, in hindsight, one of those missed opportunities in preservation history. Because, from what any one person can gather simply listening quietly to the mutterings of either side's workers and volunteers - the animosity is perpetuated and kept alive continuously by a select few people from either side.

 

One of preservation's biggest and greatest shames.

['CHARD]

Wise words Simon. To view this with an outsider's perspective, bearing in mind the big picture and what's at stake, it looks like a whole load of infantile squabbling. Non-railway or non-preservation types are given so much ammo here to fuel their nutter-weirdo perceptions, and simply think those guys need their heads banging together. And I'm not singling out the WHR here, there are plenty of others with a self-righteous 'it's my ba' and I'm playin' wi' it, not you' attitude to their hobby. Apologies to the author from whom I've borrowed that Borders quote, which I feel is appropriate in this context.

[The Stationmaster]

Wise words Simon. To view this with an outsider's perspective, bearing in mind the big picture and what's at stake, it looks like a whole load of infantile squabbling. Non-railway or non-preservation types are given so much ammo here to fuel their nutter-weirdo perceptions, and simply think those guys need their heads banging together. And I'm not singling out the WHR here, there are plenty of others with a self-righteous 'it's my ba' and I'm playin' wi' it, not you' attitude to their hobby. Apologies to the author from whom I've borrowed that Borders quote, which I feel is appropriate in this context.

 

You're quite right about the need to bang heads etc together but alas 'railway preservation' often seems to have been (and apparently continues to be) a hotbed of competing ideas, ideals, cliques, and small minded groups. Several of the 'major' railways have seen some fairly large bust-ups over the years - occasionally ending in court cases or other ways of airing their soiled linen in public.

 

The FR has - from my past experience - long been regarded by some folk in a very different way from other railways because of its style and managerial approach. As a result people have walked away or kept away from it and gone elsewhere to what they regard as something with a 'more relaxed' attitude. Equally the more business oriented folk in the leisure railway business have looked askance, and sometimes with disdain, at what they perceive as shambolic and amateurish efforts elsewhere or among some of their own volunteers.

 

The main reason for all of this is that we are all different and we seek many different things from involvement in preservation. I have for instance heard on several occasions on various railways the old chestnut 'I get told what to do at work, this is my hobby and I come here to enjoy myself and so & so is not going to tell me.......' Similarly some people - such as Michael Draper when he was GM of the SVR - who take a hard headed business approach to the railway they are running are sometimes referred to as 'accountants', or a similar sort of perceived insult, by those who don't appreciate that their 'hobby', which they often think they should control, is actually a fairly large business which not only has to make a profit to survive but has to manage numerous areas of potential financial and safety risk in accordance with reams of laws and regulations (and is liable to closure and/or prosecution if it doesn't).

 

This of course is why many lines now separate their management aspect from 'supporters' or 'volunteer' etc groups - it's been found a good way to make it work. Equally some lines find it easier to manage the business if it is largely staffed by paid employees, sometimes with carefully organised volunteer help, the mix often being a matter of 'horses for courses'. The trick in managing any sort of volunteer effort in these circumstances is not necessarily easily learned but is likely to be essential sooner or later. And the need for professional management skills, including 'buying-in' professionl advice, is also increasingly critical (but I would say that wouldn't I ).

 

But a real problem can come when organisations with different philosophies come up against each other and that, it appears to me, is probably one of the reasons for some of the difficulties between the FR and WHHR. But to get out of it they are going to have grow up and talk because only if they do that will they bring to their customers their combined 'best offer' (to use a marketing phrase). As for all the points and counter points of their disgreement - heard it all before; try something more conciliatory and positive now please chaps.

[Neil]

.... Equally whether or not the Welsh assembly decides to audit the value it has received for its money - which obviously must go way beyond building a railway through the back streets of Porthmadog - is a matter for that Assembly, its voters, and the National Audit Office. I can see the economic sense of the FR having a rail link between the two parts of its network (and the FR is both a major tourist attraction and a substantial employer so the local economy gets more out of it than just a railway line and another reason for a traffic tail back entering the town). But all of that is a matter for the local people, their representatives etc, and Govt at its various levels. ....

 

That's an interesting angle you've opened up. I could see an argument that the local economy would be better served by the WHR running into the WHHR station as passengers would have to pass through town with all the attendant opportunities for cash to be parted from enthusiast and family by the wider local economy. I seem to remember some very high figure being quoted as the benefit that the FR brought to Porthmadog; once through running happens I wonder how big a drop there will be.

 

.... I wonder how many visitors arrive in the area by rail nowadays. .....

 

A surprisingly large number in the summer time if my own experience is anything to go by. I'm a fairly frequent year round user of the Cambrian Coast line, and while it's quiet in the winter months it can be very busy in the summer.

 

So perhaps we should just get on with enjoying, when the opportunity arise, what we have got - a new railway through a spectacular part of a fascinating country running decent size trains which can carry enough people to hopefully make the operating finances stand up?

 

I'd agree, but the knowledge of all the machinations in the background and that corporate has prevailed at the expense of the amateur do take away somewhat from my enjoyment.

[John M]

The FR have recently announced that it is intended to complete work on the Pont Croesor-Harbour Station during the next three months to allow the "occasional" train to work through to Portmadoc principally a Subscribers Special in September. As yet there is nothing firm on the re-modelling of Harbour Station and the commencement of regular services.

 

The Portmadoc Bypass contractors have completed the culvert under the WHHR Line and an accomodation crossing for construction traffic, the next stage is to exted the culvert under the WHR Line. http://whr.fotopic.net/p65213139.html

 

While there is a certain element of a clash of philosophies the impass between the two companies relates primarly to money. The WHHR is basically of the belief that it is uneconomic to operate its Heritage train from Harbour Station under the terms offered by the FR, and the FR are of view that the WHHR proposal will result in a loss to the Festiniog.

 

Shop and cafe revenue are as important as establishing a fair rate for running costs or a revenue split.

 

 

John