Bluebell Railway General Discussion

While I can agree with your point in part, surely that's more on a case by case basis isn't it? After all, some lines are particularly longer in length then others, so if we went by your logic, would you suggest we cut back the running length of our railways?

The WSR, GWSR, NYMR, their all long in length, using a lot of resources to maintain because of that, so maybe they should cut their lengths down to a more manageable size...

 

It can be, though much depends on where the extension is from and to.

My point is not that either East Grinstead or the Saloon is somehow "better", but that the Bluebell was able to make a choice about its priorities and then stick to it.

Real "wouldn't it be nice" thinking would have been to try to manage both, and Operation Undercover without sufficient focus on any one of them, such that none succeeded.

For what is worth I do believe that the Bluebell have given too little priority to this saloon. However, a vehicle like that is like a Class 7 or 8 on a railway like the Bluebell - magnificent but also over the top for what is really needed. And like the large locos, it can offer that little something that lifts the ordinary to something more.

 

Paul, I understand your negative viewpoint with extensions, but it is emphatically not something that can be applied everywhere. On the basis that railways that started with absolutely nothing like the GWSR or Swanage have always been extending, should they have built a carriage shed before starting at all? No of course not. Get to a point where you feel you are comfortable with money coming in and then look at "nice to haves" like a carriage shed. That point is different for each railway, depending on the geography of the area. For example Bluebell has probably now reached that point now that it has reached East Grinstead. And that's exactly what it's done, now that the sensible extensions have been completed such that they are comfortable, they can look at a carriage shed.

 

Carriage storage is more than a "nice to have". One recalls the instance of the Cavan & Leitrim where, in order to avoid the payment of property rates the carriage sheds were demolished! Result the stock rapidly became utterly decrepit. As a C&W person you can hardly like a situation where something you have slaved over deteriorates more rapidly than it need, very possibly inhibiting your ability to rescue something else.

It seems a remarkably difficult lesson for people to grasp. Once established, consolidate before expanding. Consolidation includes covered storage.

Paul

 

But the point at which you have become "established" is different for different railways. If we tried getting a carriage shed before we'd even, say, got to Winchcombe, I doubt we'd be in as good a place we are today. Similarly, I think the Bluebell was right to prioritise East Grinstead and then get a carriage shed.

 

Completely agree that covered storage is critical, but you do need to be able to afford such things. Even in terms of grant money you need to show a track record and raise substantial funds yourself so income is vital.

 

Agreed, and sustantial income is difficult without any track to run on...

 

IMHO the Bluebell should have obtained a carriage shed before going beyond Horsted Keynes but they were one of the very first standard gauge tourist railway schemes and had less experience to go by. Later schemes have no such excuse.

I suspect a number of "heritage" railways do not really realise that they are in competition for business with zoos, theme parks, country houses and similar. Whereas the average enthusiast may overlook weatherstained carriages with paint peeling off and windows which are difficult to see out of, other users will be less impressed.

Others are less impressed as well. The English Tourist Board run a quality assessment scheme for tourist attractions. Quite a number of steam railways belong and the assessors who visit are tough professionals who look at everything from condition of car parks to the sort of welcome given and the ease of using the website. I read one where the assessor hinted strongly that he was underwhelmed by the general standards of "heritage" railways. It ought to be of concern that only one steam railway was held to be worthy of the top "gold" accolade.

Paul H

 

The first carriage shed went up in 1970, just by the time the railway started moving towards EG it was no longer big enough.

David R

 

Indeed, but you are stretching the elastic to breaking point to justify your views on this thread. These decisions are trade offs, and different railways will have different constraints to consider. The intelligent ones should and doubtless will be considering what their peers are doing, and what is bringing success.

 

I suppose the real lesson is that they are never ever big enough!!

Paul

 

A carriage shed does not provide any additional income, what it does is slow down the rate of weathering and deterioration in rolling stock. If it was a choice of an extension to a mainline station or a carriage shed its a no brainer commercially for the extension.

 

Again the world of the railway enthusiast being somewhat different to the rest of the population. In most instances the great majority of people visit by car and those coming by train are supplementary. A useful supplement but a comparatively small one. No amount of wishful thinking will influence this.

 

Are you really sure about that? I was planning on visiting the Bluebell soon and I will come by train (I have a car) I know that a lot of visitors to the MHR come via the Alton connection.

 

The only one I am absolutely certain of is the IOWSR where far fewer join at Smallbrook than would be anticipated, not helped by the irregular service pattern on the electric line. I would have expected more to have arrived by train than do nevertheless. Away from the Island I cannot imagine many with access to private transport being deterred from travelling simply by the absence of a direct connection. There will be those without personal transport for whom this is useful but how significant the numbers are would be very difficult to assess.

The question is whether enough extra business after the initial flush of excitement has worn off will be generated to justify the cost. No-one will ever admit it if it does not!

Paul H

 

Not really, quite easy to ask passengers how they got to the railway with some sort of survey/feedback form.

 

I think the IoW is a very odd case though, for reasons that have been debated at length on another thread - I'm not sure it is a good analogue of mainland heritage railways, particularly not mainland railways with a direct, sub 1 hr, connection to London.

Tom

 

You know if the general public and the English Tourist Board really aren't impressed with most heritage railway as you'd claim they are, then clearly something must be amiss here, as the numbers don't reflect that. Heritage Railway generally are one of if not the biggest attractions in the country, drawing in thousands every year, generating millions of pounds in their respective areas.

Also, if we have to frankly honest, who actually looks at what English Tourist Board recommends before they select a place to visit...? For many, they just want to see a steam engine, ride behind, have a comfy ride through nice, that's it. And pretty much all heritage lines can offer that. Steam is the biggest attractor here, that's the biggest draw as far as the general public is concerned, and for the most part they'd consider little else as equally important to their visit.

 

You can hardly interview people who are not there when deciding whether to build a mainline connection or not!

PH

 

As far as I am aware there are no mystery shopper reports - only TripAdvsior (which is very favourable)

I do agree that we need to look at Heritage Railways from a visitor's viewpoint (which will be very different to the average NP poster). This is one of the reasons why I beleive the elephant van (aka "The Cicus Play Van) project is so good. It will provide on the outside a restored Southern Van and on the inside a play area for younger visitors with a distinct circus theme, honouring it's history. That it is funded mainly by an external grant and is a (relatively) quick restoration are also plus points. It will add to the heritage experience and provide improved visitor facilities. Hence why I believe it is a very worthwhile project.

There are many aspects to this, but I do believe that Heritage Railways can present both a heritage aspect and appeal to the Tourist market (the IOWSR is an outstanding example of this IMO). To my thinking, Tourist Railway and Heritage Railway should not be incompatible terms. It's just a matter of balance. Add in Commercial awareness and I can appreciate (but still regret) why the Brighton Directors Saloon has taken a lower priority than many on here feel it should have received.

David R