Steaming back into Ryde?

I think we've already established that PaulHitch is fond of using sweeping generalisations to make his point - his contention that preservationists went for the glamour engines from Barry was rather knocked into a cocked hat by a graph showing that in reality it was generally the smaller engines went first, followed by the medium sized ones. Similarly, his contention that all lines should aspire to running trains of lightweight wooden-bodied stock overlooks the major problem of availabilty, and that it is not a question of gricer-ish selectivity, but actually hard headed business!

In fairness, he is correct to point out that for most heritage lines the most appropriate coaching stock would be non-corridor, but the unfortunate fact is that it was precisely this type of carriage that was displaced by the DMU onslaught, and hence most of it was lost relatively early on. Much of the pre-nationalisation corridor stock went before the preservation era really got going, too. We only have much of the LMS and GW stock that is in original interior condtion because of the survival of the Derby and Swindon tests trains; most of the remaining stuff came via Departmental use and had interiors that were often heavily stripped, so that many LNER restorations in particular involve almost complete interior reconstruction from scratch. Even non-corridor Mk 1s had a very short working life and the last few only survived until the electrification of Kings Cross services, by which time the maintenance problems associated with them were well manifested.

The IoWSR has been in a privileged position because of the number of coaches recycled for use as holidays on the island, there are few parts of the country where there has been a suitable pool of feedstock for long term restoration. Had LNER activists got their act together 25 years ago there might have been the opportunity in north east Scotland, but that is all but gone now.

We are thus left with the fact that heritage railways have been more or less faced with Hobson's choice in their search for rolling stock that required little or no attention to put it into service, the corridor Mk 1, whether they would have preferred something more interesting or not. We need to recognise that this was a situation forced upon the movement and be grateful for the fact that gradually the number of pre-BR coaches in traffic is increasing year on year. The alternative would have been far fewer railways and I think one would have to be pretty radical to bemoan the fact that we can enjoy the variety that that is currently available to us.

 

Good post but I'm not sure I agree that he most appropriate stock is non corridor - from the general public's viewpoint at least.

 

Funny, I remember something very similar being said in the 1970's when it was proposed to take on the Minehead branch, and in the early 1980's when the WSR was at its financial nadir....

'Wooly gricer romanticism' seems to have achieved a lot over the years....

Kind regards and compliments of the season

Robin White

 

Ah, but we all know the Minehead branch is about fifteen miles too long: the issue is whether you should cut fifteen miles off the Minehead end or the Bishops Lydeard end!

Tom

 

To be fair, the Minehead branch is too long, that's why it needs paid staff. I think there was an article written a while ago about the ideal length of a heritage railway being about 12 miles, any more and it is a really serious undertaking.

 

The whole point is that the West Somerset is a really serious undertaking. More than any other preserved line (possible exception of the Paignton and Dartmouth line), it provides transport from A to B, and lots of places in between. Long may it continue to do so.

Compliments of the season,

John

 

Absolutely, but for most organisations that kind of length would be unsustainable.

 

Sorry if this is a low blow but what it seems to have achieved is internecine strife beyond imagining. Like the four principal Welsh narrow gauge lines the IOWSR is a unified organisation where one body owns and controls everything, which is obviously advantageous for strife avoidance. Far too few standard gauge lines have achieved this.

Returning to our muttons, Ryde to Shanklin is a year round transport organisation which earns about one quarter of its outgoings . It is in need of serious investment. The expertise of the IOWSR, which operates only at times when it anticipates a reasonable income, is in totally different things like restoring century old equipment and arranging bird of prey demonstrations. Reminds me of the old pub notice "We have an arrangement with the bank. We don't cash cheques and they don't serve beer".

Paul H.

 

When I said non-corridor stock is the most appropriate for most lines, I meant of course that it was what was used in BR days, not that it is necessarily what is best for modern circumstances. The overriding difference between then and now is that back then people were for the most part travelling out of necessity on the backwaters that are now our heritage railways. Nowadays they are travelling for pleasure and their expectations for the level of comfort are different!

 

The whole point is that the West Somerset is a really serious undertaking. More than any other preserved line (possible exception of the Paignton and Dartmouth line), it provides transport from A to B, and lots of places in between. Long may it continue to do so.

It is stretching a point to call the WSR a serious transport undertaking when it does not run daily for a significant part of the year. People cannot rely on it if, for example, they have no car. What are they supposed to do in winter, hibernate? There are many lines that are used bu locals when it is convenient (e.g. villages in Fairbourne, who use the Fairbourne Railway to connect with the Barmouth Ferry) but that doesn't make them serious transport undertakings, just a seasonal alternative to the bus or car.

 

At a guess I'd imagine it would have something.to do with the doors. You still haven't answered that problem at all Paul...

 

If that is true, fair enough. But not as a guess.

Actually I see more corridor than non- corridor stock around with doors sealed off as unserviceable but this is very likely on account of their preponderance.

PH

 

Quite. The fact that you see any corridor stock at all with doors sealed off should tell you that presented with more doors it would be even more unworkable.

 

The following quote from the Bluebell's carriage fleet review may be germane:

"The Bluebell's first Mk.I coaches were the three 1950s' ex-King's Cross suburban non-corridors which carried many of our passengers in the 1970s. This allowed the Carriage & Wagon department to concentrate on the overhauls of our older Maunsell and Bulleid stock. However, by the early '80s they were showing their age. With the main weakness in Mk.I design being the door and door-frame structure, the maintenance of such coaches with many doors (and small, leaky, windows) per side was found to be beyond our ability. Their earlier design of windows also left much to be desired. (See article in Bluebell News Vol 28 No 3.) These three coaches were sold in 1986, and we should congratulate the North Tyneside Railway, since the recent restoration to traffic of CL No 43010 means that they have now completed the overhaul of all three of these coaches."

(My emphasis)

Source: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/CarRev7_Mk1.html

Tom

 

Many years ago their were some at the IOWSR who advocated Mk1 non- corridor stock, happily the decision was overruled in favour of restoring grounded bodies. They take much longer to restore to traffic but once in traffic have proved to be very durable. They still have multiple doors but without the steel and wood mix of the MK1

 

If there was any universal truth in this why is the GWSR extending to Broadway??

 

Not all the doors you see sealed off may be unservicable. On the NYMR the centre doors on the MK 1s are locked off due to the platform curvature at Pickering, which makes for a large gap, but it also represents a maintenance saving. One TSO has now had the door removed and plated over, though to my mind this is a step too far!

There were other reasons for the NYMR preferring Mk 1 TSOs, one being the better all round visibility from them and another being accessibility along the train for catering sales and ticket inspection, plus the fact that most trains are longer than the plaforms at the intermediate stations (and, for a long time, the two terminii). We did have two ex-Kings Cross suburbans in the very early days of the NYMR but like most of this type the 16 doors per coach were in poor condition with rampant corrosion and hence were fairly quickly disposed of. I wish one had been kept as it was a type used on the line in BR days, but at the time hard headed commercialism ruled.

 

Because it will only take us slightly past the 12 mile mark and a major tourist hotspot. After Broadway I can assure you I will be a lot more critical on any future extension (and there are plans for them). As it is it will stretch us anyway.

 

There are a number of preserved railways, often of a similar nature to the West Somerset, where large numbers of passengers don't just travel "for the ride" but during a day out that includes a desire to visit the location at the far end of the line. However, as in every case driving to that location would be quicker and cheaper (if more stressful!), the actual "transport" in the normal sense element of their usage is limited and the desire to enjoy the steam train ride a major factor in the decision to travel.. This is "tourist transport" and actually I suspect there are quite a few passengers on various network lines (including Island line) who travel "for the ride" as well as to get where they are going.

An extension from Smallbrook to Ryde would seem to assist the IOWSR in tapping into to "Tourist Travel" - why not park up at Havenstreet and use the Edwardian Steam Train to make a visit to Ryde?

Steven