Is there such a thing as too many heritage railways?

I regret to say that there is much truth in your comment. My children are all over 21 now and they will not experience the pension schemes of my generation and they will not have the same NHS as we do; already some sort of ID proof is being mooted for NHS treatment (this is not a criticism btw) and things are unlikely to improve. The sort of people who are currently (thank goodness) throwing money at some of our heritage railways are unlikely to be around in years to come. However, established tourist lines will probably survive as the "magic" of railways seems to transcend the generations. Nostalgia isn't the sole factor of course, curiosity also plays a part- very few people for example, ever saw a Gresley P2 in original condition, but, attending a presentation on the A1 and P2 last night, I was amazed at the support these locos have and progress on the P2 has been almost meteoric (that said, the people building it do have some experience in these things!)

 

Is there any evidence that the heritage movement's workforce is ageing? I mean, is the actual average age getting older, suggesting that there are fewer younger volunteers? From what I've seen - first-hand and photos from heritage railways - there seem to be a lot of middle-aged/younger volunteers involved in both operating and maintenance.

 

Not sure that some railways have become off-putting to younger volunteers. My experience as far back as the early 70s was that even then there was a group who were actively hostile to young incomers - "don't bother picking up that shovel, there's no way you are getting on the footplate."

 

You can say that about a good many heritage railways. They are primarily there for those volunteers to enjoy themselves and the passengers help them to do just that.

 

If you like to see narrow gauge diesels in action then this line did have some heritage interest. But the point is that some operations - heritage or otherwise - are dependent on a small number of benefactors. They are not self-sufficient in their own right.

 

Probably very few are entirely self-sufficient.

On the other hand ... Pretty much every museum and art gallery in the country operates likewise. They have core income from visitors, but supplement it with some kind of "friends" group (not dissimilar to the members of a Railway Society) who provide funds (through subscriptions) and possibly volunteer labour; and in addition they then rely on voluntary donations - large and small - to fund development, for example in the context of an art gallery, appeals to build a new wing, or to purchase a particular work of art that is beyond their core revenue raising ability.

So while I think you are right that many railways rely on sources of altruistic income beyond their core revenue operation, so do pretty much every heritage attraction in the country! At which point, I become a bit more sanguine about how sustainable such a model is. The key point then becomes liaison with your benefactors (and in particular, working out what their motivations are for donations); coupled with ensuring that your donor base is sufficiently broad that it isn't overly reliant on a small number of key individuals. Either that, or get Lord Sainsbury interested in railways ...

Tom

 

I wonder how many railways could scale back to the point where income was sufficient to operate indefinitely?

 

As I have said before, I think you are starting from a common but incorrect assumption that 'scaling back' will produce sustainability.

A lot of the costs of a railway are fixed - the actual maintenance in working order of the railway itself. Actual usage, at the sort of level seen on heritage railways, makes a marginal difference if any to - age and passage of time are major factors, especially for structures but track, sleepers etc. also degrade simply by out in the 'Great British Weather'!

That isn't to say 'run as much as you can' is the answer, become there is a marginal cost of operating trains, mainly by way of fuel, staff, any loco or stock hire etc. But in theory, it worth running any service that takes an excess over these costs - although you may want to set a minimum excess due to risk factors which could affect actual income like the weather.

Simply running less spreads the fixed costs over fewer income earning operations. The view has been stated on here that it can concentrate income on available days and that may be true, but I very much remain to be convinced that missing out the odd day makes huge cost savings, or gives the ability to do significant amounts of extra maintenance that can't be done with trains running, and could actually see some additional costs (keeping locos in steam/resteaming from cold etc.)

Steven

 

I didn't make any assumptions correct or incorrect

 

There is no "one size fits all" answer to this. We tried and tested this at Fairbourne and it work and our permanent staff was so small that it made a difference - if the chief engineer was having to drive (because of days off for other staff, for example)then he couldn't be in the workshop maintaining engines and carriages, it was that stark a choice. In mid Wales in the offpeak season midweek volunteer operating staff are a rarity.

 

I think I should ask the Mods to ban Tom, on the grounds that his posts are far too sensible.
The demographic profile of volunteers may well skew to the "mature" end of the scale, but older pople are healthier than they were a generation ago. "The youngsters" as we greysters may wish to call them, are now officially both cash and time poorer than their parents' generation.
Tom's point is valid though, heritage railways (and buses and planes and Opera houses) will need to continue to rely on donations and bequests and psonsorship and other sources of funding. What worries me is the timebomb of infrastructure renewal quietly ticking away beneath many heritage operations.

 

Not sure about your time bomb. Surely all the established lines must have a programme of staged renewals. I would not be surprised if some lines have renewed track more than once already in preservation. Bridge renewals are being carried out, culverts rebuilt etc.

Any line which is not doing so needs to give the matter urgent attention.

 

There is definitely a time bomb ticking away with infrastructure. It is not simply about track renewal but the bigger maintenance renwals. As you say, bridge renewals are being carried out. The NYMR have been doing it for years with the smaller ones. It is when you get to the larger structures that the ticking bomb gets louder. The NYMR has four bridges to replace at Goathland within the next three years at an estimated cost of £2m. I suspect that that sort of money isn't hanging around in bank accounts on any heritage railway but the money has to come from somewhere or the railway will close. I hate to think what it would cost to replace the Victoria Bridge on the Valley if and when it becomes necessary.

 

The answer to the question of whether there will be more new preserved railways depends on what you mean by "preserved railway".
I should think it extremely unlikely that we will see any new successful lines of several miles running length with multiple ex-mainline locos running regular timetabled steam services. I also suspect that a few of the recent lines won't get to that state either. Some, like the Mid Norfolk, have potential to get there gradually, but a lot of hurdles also. I suspect some like Sharpness and Helston might not get that far.
I think there is more potential with NG lines, although again I would imagine it will be the LBR which will be the main story. Southwold would be great, but won't get anywhere without local support.
Any new line would have to have great scenic attractions in an area with decent visitor to succeed, and a unique history to get much interest from the wider preservation community. I'm afraid quite a few of the recent new lines which took on mothballed branch lines are not in this category.

 

I think another potential issue with "youngsters" going forwards, as our country continues to wind down its engineering / manufacturing sectors, is that fewer and fewer of them will have the traditional skills that are so useful to heritage railways. It's possible that it could work in heritage lines favour, as those with a leaning towards these skills may be enticed to work / volunteer in the sector as there are fewer opportunities elsewhere. Interesting times...

 

The most glaringly obvious candidate (IMO) is Peak Rail. There is the prospect of wonderful National Park scenery and great civil engineering, with Manchester, Sheffield and Derby providing the day trippers. But sadly, after several decades, it still hasn't broken into the National Park. I don't know the why's and wherefores, but I can only guess that lack of funding is holding it back.

 

wow a WIBN thread, so if i say belezebub three times will the high priest of "no you can't" appear

 

Come across that attitude several times.

 

Happily I've never experienced it on the GWSR, and neither have any other "yoofs" on the railway.

 

Lucky you.