The merits or otherwise of BR Mk I coaches, ex-Bluebell Motive Power

The majority of the cost of a Mk1 restoration is in labour cost I reckon. You're right, to fully restore a Mk1 using a normal work force does cost six figure sums, but if it's kept to volunteers then even the most comprehensive restoration needn't cost the earth, and we manage to take no more than 18 months or so on the worst, although I accept we're lucky with our facilities.

What does need thinking about is replacement tyres. We send ours away for turning and we've a few that are getting close to scrapping thickness I understand.

 

Taking that figure of 18 months at face value: If you reckon a Mark 1 needs a complete overhaul every 30 years, it means you can probably maintain a steady state with no more than 20 such vehicles - say three five coach rakes, one carriage under heavy overhaul, and three or four undergoing light repairs / maintenance and available as occasional strengtheners. If you need any more than that to run your service, you have either got to find a way to increase throughput (i.e. decrease the 18 month figure), or increase the length between heavy overhauls (without that making the overhauls take longer), or both.

You can see why, for many railways, a policy of buying in, running for a period and then laying aside to replace with a new vehicle was an attractive strategy, though its viability is essentially now at an end.

Tom

 

Oh absolutely, hence the importance of carriage sheds to extend the time needed between thorough overhauls, something that's high on the list for us after Broadway!

 

We have just had 4 LBSCR wheel sets retyred at a cost of £20K+. A not insignificant sum! The cost needs to be planned for wellin advance, next year we are having 2 SR1A sets retyred and the following year another 2 sets and so it goes on.

 

Indeed, hence why I think that's more of a worry than replacing some corroded metal, which isn't too difficult as long as you've got a reasonably competent welder.

 

Ahhh, you guys are funny! The Great British public must not realise how good they have got it if they can choose which railway to visit based on which coaching stock fits their aesthetic criteria or indeed their bums! I'd sit on 5 plank filled with barbed wire, and be happy to do so, for the privilege of being able ride behind any one of the 100's(?) of preserved steam locos on offer in the UK!

 

The "Great British Public", who provide most of the revenue income, may or may not know anything about trains' They will all know whether the vehicles are clean, in reasonable state and adequately comfortable. Quite a few will have thoughts on aesthetic attractiveness. Such things matter less to the gricer fraternity. Pity!

PH

 

Yes. My post was more to do with me being insanely jealous of what is on offer rather than any commentary on suitability of coaching stock.

 

To please the "Great British Public" priority ONE must be the state of cleanliness of the ladies loos. If any tourist attraction wishes to encourage repeat visits, make sure these are kept immaculate. Grandma, grandpa, ma, pa and the kiddies provide the income and it is grandma and ma who veto trips even if they do not choose them.

Best regards

 

Would the continuing discussion of the merits or otherwise of the Mk1 carriage not be better split off and stuck in the rolling stock section of the forum, rather than on the Bluebell Steam loco thread?

John

 

It's not always about style or maintenance. My wife detests the LNER teaks, because she finds the seats incredibly uncomfortable because of the state of her back. She's no great fan of Mk1s, but she can walk afterwards.

Which teak coaches are you talking about, though? There are two very different sets, the NYMR one where the seats are largely to the original specification, or the SVR one where the seats are essentially BR Mk 1s. I can really only speak for the NYMR examples, but most folk tell that they find them very comfortable, even the earlier (allegedly uncomfortable from contemporary comments) bucket seats.

 

NYMR. She and I disagree on the comfort, but as she's had the back surgery, I don't debate that one with her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Here's something P.H. might recall! It was in the early to mid 1990's if I recall correctly that the I.O.W.S.R. planned to obtain some Class 207 vehicles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_207 from B.R. because they where the only coaches that fitted the islands loading gauge, and where fitted with air brakes. The plan being to run them until they needed major works, and then to use the underframes for grounded bodies which had been restored in the meantime. A good idea so I thought but it never happened! The Mark 1 underframe was designed with the idea that the body would be replaced and it was indeed done in a couple of cases the leyland body job see http://www.traintesting.com/leyland-coach.htm and the Networker Classic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_424, so if your Mark 1 body becomes beyond repair, there is an answer.
I for one will always try to travel in vehicles other than Mark 1's, although I think this to be an age thing, I can just about remember Bulleid coaches on the Brighton to Plymouth workings in the early 1960's so like to recall that time
The Mid Hants ran a Class 25 with Mark 1's in the late 1980's , which I avoided because at the time, class 33's with Mark 1's where still used on the Portsmouth to Cardiff services, time has moved on Mark 1's where modern but are now historic. But the basic matter is the coach the public is traveling in should be clean, tidy, comfortable and safe! What more is there?

 

The newest Mk1's are 50+ years old. They are heritage vehicles in their own right.

 

Suggest you seat her in the Thompson TK next time you travel on the teak train, then. Despite appearances to the contrary it has Mk 1 compartment seats (lightly modified, the designs are very similar) rather than replica LNER.

 

Back in the 1980s I overheard a young lady express her disappointment that the KWVR's train was just like any other train. She probably just got out of a slam-door DMU ... not that different from a Mark One open (to the general public).

In the 1990s, the Airedale-Wharfedale lines were electrified and the stopgap EMUs were class 308, which were actually older than some of the KWVR's Mark Ones.

I'm not a big fan of Mark Ones. They tend to be drab on the inside, and lack the style of pre-nationalisation vehicles. However, I fully understand their place in railway preservation. Without them, many lines would have struggled.

As a passenger on BR I used to rather like the Mark 2 coaches. They were brighter and more comfortable than Mark Ones. However, to my eyes they look too modern for steam-operated heritage lines. Still, they are better than what followed, with airline-style seating and windows that don't open.

 

I will often seek out interesting coaching stock but Mk1s are perfectly alright by me.

My own bit of anecdotal evidence suggests some of the general public rather like them. I remember being sat in a compartment at a rainy G&WR gala and a family trouping on look very excited. I thought it was because they had escaped the rain but they actually were overjoyed the the carriage looked "just like (the one's used in) Harry Potter". Move over Thomas, there is a new train in town.

 

I'm sure to some younger generations, a Mk1 would seem positively ancient!

 

How true that is,being in a queue to get out behind stupified normals blankly looking at the inside of the door

 

Will try, but she's not a fan of compartment stock. And as we often travel with the dog, I think that's ruled out as LNERCA say no dogs in 3663.