28XX Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/thequeen/the-queen-saves-the-royal-train-from-its-demise-76705 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 "The train is currently homed at the railway depot in Buckinghamshire, but with the possibility of the redevelopment of the land, a new home will have to be considered. Buckingham Palace, Network Rail and St Modwen are all on the table." Well, I for one am pleased that we've got that cleared up. St Modwen depot is in the next Cornish village to where Doc Martin has his surgery, and the area is certainly looking for job creation in engineering trades, and Buckingham Palace TMD needs some third party income since the Strategic Reserve was moved out to Castle Howard by the last Labour Government. I've not come across Network Rail - anyone else? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 "The train is currently homed at the railway depot in Buckinghamshire, but with the possibility of the redevelopment of the land, a new home will have to be considered. Buckingham Palace, Network Rail and St Modwen are all on the table." That's an expletive deleted big table! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Is it DOO? Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted February 19, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 19, 2017 Is it DOO? Bernard No - it's DEE - driver each end. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Is it DOO? Bernard They certainly won't be passenger operated doors. I don't think the passengers on this train are renowned for opening any, never mind carriage, doors themselves! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Probably DEE-CIC driver each end, Charles in the cab. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danim Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Wonder if when referring to the train being stored at Buckingham Palace the are meaning London Victoria station Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Wonder if when referring to the train being stored at Buckingham Palace the are meaning London Victoria station Quite possibly! Mind you, they could equally efficiently store it halfway up HS1, across Euston station throat or on Welwyn viaduct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Peculiar style of writing for a 'professional' journo - "Approximately the train makes 15 trips a year...". I wonder what language it was written in originally before they Google-translated it ? Anyway. St Mowden is the developer for Wolverton, presumably they, Buck House and Network Rail are the parties at the table rather than the proposals on the table. English like what she is spoke. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted February 20, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2017 One wishes one's train to be kept. One is aware that one's children may soon be the senior generation and may wish to make even more use of it that they already do. We are not amused at the possibility of it being decommissioned. We have not yet become accustomed to losing one's yacht. My husband and I feel sure that it would be the wish of our people, those whom we have dedicated our lives to serve, that ones' little train still appears unannounced on some rural by-way overnight. One is aware that this brings much delight to certain sections of our society who rush about frothing and waving their arms in the air. One is mildly amused and also bemused by this. In one's later years such small pleasures are to be cherished as one is aware of the finite nature of one's reign. God Save The Queen Train Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 It's understandable that Charles is reluctant to lose the train. At least until he's scooped all the Warskips. Besides, his private secretary has been instructed to purchase a new hi-lighter and have "Ones Quail at the ready" for the Ordsall curve. Not forgetting as Duke of Cornwall, he is duty-bound to bellow "DEEEAATHH!" at least once on every visit to the Duchy. He'd look ridiculous doing that out the window of a limousine FFS! C6T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D854_Tiger Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 There was a debate about withdrawing the Royal Train a few years back but what made everyone concerned reconsider was the Queen's Jubille tour of the nation. Someone sat down and worked out what the cost of that tour might have been, without using the train, and it was huge. Security is the really expensive nightmare, especially any hotels that might have been used, remembering the the Brighton Hotel bomb had been planted a good month before it exploded. With the Royal Train, they just find a suitable siding somewhere, location kept secret and usually in the middle of nowhere, the police turn up shortly before the train, set up a Portakabin for themselves, then the train arrives - job done. As no one knows when and where the train is going to spend the night, it's virtually impossible to plan any gunpoder, treason or plot. Used to see it myself ocaasionally, early morning parked up at Berkswell station in the short siding there, the only remains of the Keniworth direct route. The key to keeping the train cost efficient would be for minor Royals to make more use of it and maybe some of our elected representatives as well but, for some reason, that sort of thing just attracts all the wrong headlines, even if it us saving the taxpayer purse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2017 The usage does seem to have dropped off considerably. I'm not sure how each trip is charged nowadays but I expect that it doesn't bear over much resemblance to the way it was charged into the early 1970s (mileage loaded, mileage empty - at two different rates but based in any event on the number of vehicles used in any particular formation; catering billed separately by Travellers Fare; and various sundries charged separately at cost - e.g. newspapers). The permanent train staff has always been relatively small and has both maintained the train and various of them have accompanied on its workings so while they are a cost they are also an asset and are kept more or less fully employed just dealing with the train. The overhead cost per mile would obviously reduce with far greater use and it - or rather various vehicles from the total fleet - were quite heavily used in the past by other family members undertaking official duties including for example the Duchess of Kent as well immediate members of the Queen's family. What did surprise was the low usage by the Prince of wales who in the past has been a keen used of the train. I'm not in favour of the train being used by politicians although i see no problem in them travelling as guests in other than the Royal saloons (which happen to contain items directly associated with or in the past presented to members of the Royal Family) and in any case judging by some of those I have come across I reckon some of them would expect to receive far greater servility and 'bowing & scraping' from the staff than members of the Royal Family expect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrushVeteran Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 Perhaps using a redundant DVT or DBSO would help to lower operational costs........................the police would then not need a portacabin.....................just a few deckchairs! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 catering billed separately by Travellers Fare Pass the hot butter Phil !!!!!!!!!!!! And have a laugh at this rubbish report. Class 67's ready for the scrapyard !!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4239342/Queen-s-favourite-royal-train-saved-scrapheap.html Long may HRH & co have use of "our" Royal train. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 And have a laugh at this rubbish report. Class 67's ready for the scrapyard !!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4239342/Queen-s-favourite-royal-train-saved-scrapheap.html Well at least they've tidied up the bizarre grammar in the original load of cobblers before regurgitating it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivegreen Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 Ah, the Daily Wail at its incompetent best: I'm delighted to read that a class 67 and (what I presume are based on) Mk 3 carriages are "still in perfect working order after 120 years" ! Edited to add… note the use of the present tense when the article refers to HMY Britannia, which was paid off…how many years ago? Journalism gets worse by the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted February 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2017 Pass the hot butter Phil !!!!!!!!!!!! And have a laugh at this rubbish report. Class 67's ready for the scrapyard !!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4239342/Queen-s-favourite-royal-train-saved-scrapheap.html Long may HRH & co have use of "our" Royal train. Brit15 Interesting that the DM's impeccably high standard of research and fact checking is once again vindicated with the hitherto undiscovered and quite astonishing fact that they were making Mk3 coaches 120 years ago, and that Victorian Railways (aren't they an Australian firm) have a depot in Buckinghamshire... I, too, am delighted that this 120 year old equipment is still in perfect working order! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Riley Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 Ah, the Daily Wail at its incompetent best: I'm delighted to read that a class 67 and (what I presume are based on) Mk 3 carriages are "still in perfect working order after 120 years" ! Edited to add… note the use of the present tense when the article refers to HMY Britannia, which was paid off…how many years ago? Journalism gets worse by the day. No, they said that Britannia was scrapped. While I believe it is still afloat somewhere in the Firth of Forth. But that is a long way from the London office of the Mail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium JDW Posted February 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 21, 2017 And twice they refer to the train as "Britannia" - have I been missing something all these years? (Although to be fair to them, The Johnster is getting carried away above, they did correctly say a Victorian rail depot not a Victorian Rail depot, sorry!). As for "the locomotive", why is that so difficult for people to grasp, locomotive = engine = for puling trains - in fact, the locomotive is entirely irrelevant here, as they aren't part of the Royal Train anyway, just a specially liveried DB 67... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 ...so, like, the paint on the locomotives is, like, 120 years old? #amazingpaint. C6T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivegreen Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 No, they said that Britannia was scrapped. While I believe it is still afloat somewhere in the Firth of Forth. But that is a long way from the London office of the Mail. Hmmm… yes and no: quote "The Britannia is said to be the Queen's preferred method of transport" . Hence my comment on the present tense, and why I said 'paid off', which does not equal 'scrapped'! How foolish of me to have thought that the Wail might have been referring to the former Royal Yacht of that name and not to the royal train, which the so-called journalist had decided to christen 'Britannia'…. unless, like JDW (see above), I have missed something over the years, which is entirely possible. One wonders what Mr T. across the pond might have made of such inaccurate, if not exactly false, news. But that would be political, wouldn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted February 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 21, 2017 Hmmm… yes and no: quote "The Britannia is said to be the Queen's preferred method of transport" . Hence my comment on the present tense, and why I said 'paid off', which does not equal 'scrapped'! Hmm, has the Royal Train ever been hauled by a Brit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 21, 2017 Hmm, has the Royal Train ever been hauled by a Brit? Yes according to a couple of 'net sources as 70000 hauled King George VI's funeral train for part (maybe all?) of its journey from Norfolk to London and that would technically have been a Royal Train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.