West Somerset Railway General Discussion

If the WSR is to survive, it has to learn to avoid not only interminable bitter arguments but also expenditure it cannot afford in order to operate motive power it doesn't need to.

 

Constantly having to hire in locos on a short term basis isn’t ideal for any railway. The WSR themselves have realised this. That’s why they bought 4110 and signed long term agreements for 6695 and 44422.

Financial problems unfortunately led to these agreements being cancelled and 4110 being sold. Circumstance has left them in the position where they are short of locos and need short term hires, but ideally it’s not the position they’d choose to be in.

Indeed when 9351 was being overhauled, the need to get it back in traffic to avoid the expensive hire of another loco was cited by the WSR.

 

I completely agree with this more "liberal" view. Unfortunately the HRA, certainly in the Bailey report, struck a much more conservative note in my view, and if that's the view of the HRA, it takes perhaps a braver board of trustees to go against that.

 

You do realise that 6024 has a 25 ton axle load, on a line that has recent well-publicised restriction on axle load to a far lower value? Not even worth contemplating such a loco until the whole infrastructure is upgraded, which, given a realistic timescale, would likely be after 6024 had gone back out of traffic - if it happens at all.

Given the traffic demands, a small-wheeled 2-8-0 with a 16ton axle load capable of hauling ten coaches when needed but also 5 or 6 economically would look like quite a useful bit of kit to me ...

Tom

 

I completely agree with this interpretation, and @Lineisclear, as with the Bailey report and others back in previous debates, takes what seems to me to be an excessively cautious interpretation of what is allowable. However, I will sound one note of caution in implementing that interpretation. Charities have to be registered by the Charities Commission, who also have the power to reject proposed objectives. There may be precedents from the recent past that would make the proposed usage harder to attain when setting up now than was previously the case. However, I suggest that in establishing what is possible, much depends on what questions are asked and how - my experience is that lawyers are much less likely to tell you something can't be done if they are asked how something can be done than if just asked whether it's possible, for example.

 

Agreed. I think that it would be a mistake to get macho about things and spend a lot on upgrading the line to take 'red' locos like Halls, Castles and Kings. A very decent 2-8-0 is already at home on the WSR, looks right and is popular. I'm sure it will continue to be available as long as the plc behaves sensibly and meets its repair obligations. If the plc doesn't, there could be difficulty in getting anyone else to lend locos.

 

I suspect the problem to do with the 7f Is that it isn't an GWR loco. And in some eyes that's reason enough to want to see it leave.

 

As far as I recall the macho mistake has already been made some while ago in that the emphasis in the line upgrade was to bring it up to 'red' route standard. I gather the fact that a couple of locos, of 'red route' classification are already well known to the PLC.

 

Sorry Tom I wasn't aware of the time frame that was required to get the line back up to scratch.

Yes 53808 certainly is a useful piece of kit, no denying that.

 

Whilst I can understand that some people may like GWR locos and prefer them over those of other former companies, I really struggle to understand anyone taking their likes to the extent of hating anything from another company.

There are people who like Southern or LNER locos, but they don't normally seem to dislike other companies locos.

I'm sure that many of the followers of the KESR would like it if they could manage with only ex Southern locos, but the reality is that ex GWR locos are available and so they are used, as indeed is a loco from Norway.

The NYMR use locos from other areas, they don't seem to hate the ex Southern locos.

 

Good to see you've changed your tune in the last few pages!

 

I never said it wasn't. I just said that the 53808 and WSR aren't mutually inclusive.

 

Ok maybe not 4144 but wasn't that due to go on holiday down to Kent before everything went the shape of the Pear? Tyseley may have wanted to have finished off the 3 loco's you've mentioned but again we go back to what's happened this year.
1) will they finished?
2) 2 of those locos don't have a base on the WSR, so if they do they'll be hired in motive power wont they?

 

And you still haven't suggested a suitable replacement? King - too heavy, 9466 and 4936 - too heavy and not rated in our Rule Book for 12 coaches, 4561 - not suitable for load 12, 4144 - Didcot are not doing long term hires and this loco could not manage 12 as 88 can....
The hire market is simply not awash with class 7 locomotives of blue route availability or lower and if there were any available for hire would they want to do long term?

 

Indeed, and under this scenario where the 7F has been ejected from the railway, who'd want to take their loco to the WSR anyway?

 

They might consider COD!

 

ISTR that there used to be a GWR 2-8-0 based on the WSR. What happened to that?

 

OTOH we should bear in mind the example of the first world war as to what happens if you leave changing the strategy until after the war is over. Yes, we won (or rather the US won it for us), but at what cost in lives?

 

3850? Boiler ticket expired, now under overhaul at Toddington, having moved there to see out its last few weeks in steam alongside Dinmore Manor, owned by the same group.

 

Weren't they 'red' route availability?