rogerzilla

I just looked up the ticket pricing strategy.  That's moronic.  How many visitors will be there on holiday for a week and only want one day on the railway?  They won't come, but the locals will buy a ticket and ride ten times, generating no revenue.  Did they do a survey first, or any basic modelling?

SVR was giving free return trips last year but the maximum risk they took was one non-paying visit per full price ticket sold, and the free trip couldn't be used for galas.

GWSR has a spectacularly low ratio of paid staff to volunteers.  How do they do it?  I know it's a rich part of the country, possibly with more early retirees, but I doubt they're all interested in trains.

While I think there is probably much truth in the rant copied above, the sums of money involved, and the wafer-thin difference between profit and loss, mean you need to run it like a business as well as a charity.  The problem is that people get imported to run these railways for their track record in PR or fundraising, not their sector-specific knowledge.

On 21/03/2024 at 16:30, County of Yorkshire said:

The Durham wheel slip was in October 1994 and it was repaired within 18 months, back in service 1996. She worked mainline again until 2001 and on the NYMR until 2002. 

 

Its also a Peppercorn designed Pacific, not a Thompson. 
 

Definitely good to see her back, though. 

An Peppercorn A2 is based on Thompson's rebuild of the Gresley P2, so it's got a bit of all three in it.

Why has the number of employees increased so much?  SVR had the same learning experience a couple of years ago - replace volunteers with paid staff, and go into the red.  The current SVR administration has stopped that, although my recent experience as a visitor suggests that catering volunteers aren't always available.

The one interesting thing I took from the otherwise execrable video was that Heljan had very much taken their TT ball home.  I imagine they would love to see TT fail, followed by Hornby.

It's put the Daily Mail into meltdown, which is funny.  I don't think the names are particularly snappy, though.  It's basically KHAAAAAN! having a bit of fun.

On 29/01/2024 at 13:48, DCB said:

The gangwayed bogie coach was an unmitigated disaster for railway economics, suddenly the tare weight per passenger just about doubled plus you had  to have catering coaches more dead weight.  The new coaches rapidly killed off many old "Singles" some of which lived on as parts of shunting engines and ushered in the Big engine policy spearheaded by the L&Y Atlantics. 

I can see the advantage of running long distance trains non stop to avoid passengers joining and leaving (possibly with other passengers belongings) en route  but really it only made sense on the ECML for day trains. It wasn't until Spencer measured up the GWR Castles valve gear and persuaded Gresley to  alter an A1 to long travel  that non stop running to Edinburgh became possible.      With Royal Scots capable of running London to Carlisle when new what the LMS needed was Colletts /  Swindon's expertise in detail design  which Stanier brought with new piston valve rings and axleboxes.  Just the rings transformed Claughtons and Hughes Dreadnaught 4-6-0s  just at a time they were being withdrawn.  But Stanier was no Churchward, he missed a trick with not insisting on GWR Safety valves, so lots of badly needed steam was wasted as Ross Pop valves don't reseat when they get down to rated pressure but often drop it 10 to 20 PSI, GWR crews ran at 225 lbs psi pressure, LMS 210 on a 225 pressure boiler .  All other things being equal you need  lot bigger superheater for max efficiency with the lower pressure,

Which the Patriot had and the Jubilee lacked hence the Jubilee's early problems.  Luckily the black 5 didn't as In the 1950s they tested a Crab at Rugby, it didn't steam too well but its thermodynamic performance was excellent, better than the Black 5 which was better than  the std 5..
I think the Coronations were a bit of a mistake,
The trouble was when the PR department wanted a 120mph loco to compete with the LNER (and New York Central PR wise) and haul trains non stop for 400 miles when there are no trains to run non stop for 400 miles and no way to change crews ,   I have no doubt 6220 could have hit 120,had the LMS used the Midland through Ashchurch to Cheltemham,  it was generally the fastest bit of the LMS but no  some genius decided the run in to Crewe was a good idea. 
What Stanier did, following Churchwrds example was prove the Midlands clearance issues were largely mythical which allowed his engines over much of the Midland when the 1924 Crab design, very similar to the Stanier Mogul had been banned and had to be bodged with raised cylinders (You can see the bodgery on 13000 at the NRM (If its still there) .     I suppose with the Coronation Stanier pushed and hit the limits of loco size in the UK,  Exceeded the capacity of most firemen,  But then again why different boilers for Jubilee, Black 5 and 8F and then keep tinkering with throatplates etc.   Maybe the LMS should have just got North British Loco co to design their locos.

Cox says that the civil engineer's department tried to block the Stanier mogul as being out of gauge, so they sent a Crab out on the network with lead "feelers" where the new mogul cylinders were going to be, plus two inches.  The feelers mostly only clipped platforms where the new mogul would have been prohibited anyway for weight or other reasons, so Stanier got his way and the few affected platforms were modified, not the loco design.

Rapido has done them all in brass except for the railtour preserved livery.  I can believe this is correct but there will be few colour photos to prove it!  Red comes out very dark on older ortho b/w film but on pan film it will be hard to tell from brass.

4 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The sea-change was a couple of decades before the grouping, and it was the Midland that started it; gangwayed bogie coaches eliminated the need for refreshment/comfort stops because there were now toilets and catering facilities on the long-distance trains. Through workings (of stock, not locos) led to Joint Stock on the WCML and ECML before the grouping.  
 

But a long-distance non stop service between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh with one locomotive working the train throughout was clearly not possible until after the grouping, and presented it’s own challenges.  The LMS ‘cheated’ with a brief stop to change crews at Upperby, and the LNER used corridor tenders for the same purpose, which reduced the tender capacity when it was needed most.  
 

But this had to be limited to the prestige named services, which had to be non-stop to prevent them being filled by shorter-haul passengers; it was also not desirable to have too many workings that tied your most expensive locos and experienced crews down to a 48 hour return trip from the home shed, not to mention the added cost of lodging allowances on double-home turns.  

Famously, GWR trains still stopped at Swindon for an enforced break, long after gangwayed coaches were introduced, because they were tied into an old contract with the builder/operator of the refreshment facilities.

Am I right in thinking the lurid red-painted injectors were only on the GNR preserved version, and only when it was specially bulled-up for a railtour?  Hornby decided to use red plastic for all liveries!

1 hour ago, pH said:

The Hughes mogul (“Crab”) was based on a Caledonian design by Pickersgill, drawn up just before the Grouping. The Caledonian design had large horizontal cylinders, which were out of gauge on some of the English railways included in the LMS. Inclining the cylinders dealt with that problem. The original Caledonian design also specified 180psi boiler pressure, which fitted with Hughes’s ideas.

 

(Sources: Locomotives Illustrated vol 22 “The LMS Moguls” and Steam Days #172, December 2003 “The Horwich ‘Crab’”.)

This is true, but the Horwich mogul (the LMS weren't keen on "Crab"!) went through many iterations on the Horwich drawing board - it wasn't a Caley design that was anywhere near ready to go.

Maunsell was, like Churchward, very good at standardisation and far better at serviceability.  E S Cox, who was largely responsible for the BR Standards, was a huge fan of the N class.  The only reason his own Crab didn't look much like an N class was because Hughes set a maximum boiler pressure of 180psi, hence the huge cylinders.  The high running plate remained.

I always think Collett is underrated.  You can argue that he didn't go far enough beyond Churchward (e.g. superheat stayed low in the GWR, although that was justifiable given that higher boiler pressure gave similar efficiency).  But Churchward never made a Hall.

1 hour ago, newbryford said:

 

The 66 is there for traction as a single 73/9 isn't up to the task of traction and heat. As Jim says, the 73/9 is to provide an electric train supply.

 

Similarly, it will have been a 92 on the Euston leg.

66s cannot provide electric train supply.

Yes, the 16 coach leg is pulled by a 92 but I think they use a 66 to bring it into the platform.  I suppose there isn't a dedicated station pilot these days, with most trains being double-ended.

5 hours ago, big jim said:

the 73 has to be on the train to provide the ETH so you’ll defiantly get one on there, I think the fort William service is normally a 66/73 combo 

What's the 66 for?  To avoid a runaround at Fort William?  I know they use a 66 or similar to bring the outbound train into Euston.

We're going on the sleeper to Fort William at the start of November.  Hoping for a 73/9 on the last leg; GBRf often put a shed on if a 73 isn't available, and it won't be in midnight teal either!

3 hours ago, BachelorBoy said:

A Beatles trick missed by Hornby. It was, after all, the LIVERPOOL and Manchester Railway

 

They'd have been a popular string quartet, bookable for debutante balls and soirées.

5 hours ago, ColinB said:

Whatever you call those windows on the cab facing forwards

Spectacle plates.  Technically that refers to the cab fronts rather than the actual windows, which would be the spectacles, but the windows are often called the same thing, e.g. "looking ahead through the spectacle plates".

The same term is used for the red, blue, or yellow glass assembly in semaphore signals.

The problem with Railroad steam models, at least Era 3 and later, is that they omit cab glazing, and this is really obvious.  I'm sure it saves only pennies but pushes people to the main range instead.  There should be a good market for easy glazing kits.

23 hours ago, Brocp said:

Even the big gaming studios are struggling, Insomniac, who made Spiderman 2 for the PS5, need to sell 6-7million units before they break even. The development cost for it was $350 million US (according to the massive leak that happened around Christmas). Plus they have to give nearly 30% of each sale to Disney/Marvel for licencing. Without game prices increasing its simply not sustainable. Throw in the fact games are taking longer to make and get on the shelves (sort of like what's happening with rtr stuff) it's becoming a pretty risky business for game companies now, Sony losing COD from 2027 onwards could be the final nail in the coffin for at least Sony unless they change things massively.

I know we're drifting off topic but, when id Software released Doom in 1993, it was profitable after ONE DAY, such was its popularity.  Not surprising that the developers went out and bought Ferraris!

On 30/11/2023 at 15:05, maico said:

 

On 11/01/2024 at 20:53, palmsticks said:

Hadn't seen these images before. Presumably renders rather than "photographs". From TMC:

https://www.themodelcentre.com/r30136-21

https://www.themodelcentre.com/r30137-21

 

 

They look great!  Is the removal of the valances prototypical?  They only existed for a very short time as streamlined BR locos, although I guess (as with the A4) the valances were removed by the LNER during WW2.

As Charlie points (sorry!) out in the video linked above, DCC control of points is all very well until you run a train into a trailing point that has been set incorrectly.  Then the loco shorts out the track and the layout stops.  With separate switching you can move the point to clear the short and restart the train (s).  With DCC you have to push the loco back by hand.  Whether this is a real problem depends on your point of view, snd on how likely you are to set the road accurately.

Presumably Warley was organised through a limited company to avoid individuals taking the financial risk.  Even so, the amount of money involved must have been terrifying.  If they were aiming to break even, or turn a small profit, that's the difference between two very large income and expenditure numbers.  Bad weather or train strikes could easily tip it into the red by tens of thousands.  You can't operate an exbibition like a crowdfunded model, selling tickets and then cancelling if you don't get enough interest.

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

I think the modern "world of work" militates against younger people getting involved at organisational/management level in our club structure.

 

There's a lot of talk about "flexibility" but, in many cases it only seems to cut one way.

 

A predictable retirement age, let alone an early one, is also rapidly becoming a thing of the past, as are final salary pensions. 

 

So, any new blood entering the highly active segment of the hobby, which drives the exhibition scene, isn't as new as it used to be.....

 

John

Even if you can afford it, retirement on an occupational pension was shifted from 50 to 55 a few years ago - that's a big jump.  It'll be 57 in 2028.  I'm off on my 55th birthday - been working for 39 years!

1 hour ago, vikingsmb said:

Hornby pls pls make motors you can service, how about reintroducing the lima pancake for the railroad models?. which will make it cheaper and give youngsters engineering experience from servicing it

And the thrill of throwing the loco against the wall when that fails!