Mid Hants Railway Operational Matters

How far off is 35005? It’s owned by MHR so there really shouldn’t be any contractual issues.
Isn’t 35005’s overhaul being funded by HLF?

 

In light of recent happenings, the MHR has to grasp the nettle, If the MHRPS, cannot gain a majority shareholding, then reluctantly the engine has to leave the line, Richard Heather, is supposing the majority shareholder, knowing the background, I would think that it's most likely that he owns the shares in connection with others, most likely as gifts of shares for his exchanging shares in other engines,

 

Mechanically I think it's virtually done, it's the boiler work that's delaying the completion, because of covid, and the boiler being in worse condition that was thought at first, needing more work and platework

 

I believe the target is some time in 2023?

 

That seems a bit extreme- surely the sensible thing would be to try to secure a watertight legal agreement with the owner? Other railways do it with privately owned engines and there are different options ranging from paying hire mileage to the railway taking on responsibility for maintenance on a loan basis.

 

If only it were that simple.

The MHR had an unfortunate run of luck with locomotives, ownership and financial arrangements. This run of luck had its origins in various personalities who are no longer involved in the railway. It is always about people and their interactions isn't it? The consequences of that period of the railway's history remain with it to this day. It will be some time yet before all the problems can be resolved.

 

From such " agreements" comes much of the work of contracts lawyers. There's no such thing as a " watertight legal agreement"!

 

I think you're right. Nothing will truly be known until the boiler is opened up. Personally I would plan for a new firebox and then hope to be pleasantly surprised.

 

The earlier days of heritage railways are littered with these things, whether it is locos, coaches, wagons or even plant. People would often fund the purchase of something by paying the bill and the railway often thought it was effectively theirs but the name on the bill of sale would be the person who had paid it. There would often be no agreement as it wasn't thought to be necessary. One railway was caught out when the secretary wrote to a member and said that, if he bought the loco, the railway would restore it. The use of the word 'would' instead of 'could' cost dearly. Railways have even cut up locos that they later discovered that they didn't own.

 

Indeed. But they leak less when people work at what the deal is meant to be.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Quite so, goodwill is important, but the MHR have a strong hand here, providing the majority shareholder actually wants to see it back in working order - he doesn't seem to have been able to do much with the other locos he's had shares in, and how many other railways are there who would actually want the loco and have the resources to finish it? A very short list I suggest!

 

Anything can be sorted out with goodwill on all sides. It is not always easy to get that situation to exist.

 

But why would the MHR want to take the risk of pumping their money and resources into overhauling a loco, which has the potential to turn into another 76017 situation? When instead they have several of their own locos they could overhaul instead, where it’s guaranteed that no such ownership issues would subsequently arise?

Indeed work did start on overhauling 34105, but something made the MHR nervous enough to stop.

 

The question then becomes what made them stop - was it fear of, or a threat to remove the loco? If it was the first and no threat was issued , has an attempt been made to try to secure a contract that keeps the loco at the MHR at least until the next 10yr overhaul is due? Itmay be that old feelings on either side run too deep but the fact that the loco is still at Ropley suggests that there is possibly a chance of agreement being reached - if there wasn't there would presumably have been a "take it away" ultimatum by now.

 

I think part of the problem is working out actually who owns it, and who a running agreement needs to be agreed with, or take away order issued to.

 

From https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/34105-swanage/
34105 is partly owned by MHRPS and a private owner, there is doubt if the centre cylinder casting needs replacing, and if both part owners will pay the extra cost?

From discussions in this forum the private part owner might want 34105 moved to another railway to get more running revenue?

 

Andso dear reader, another Saturday dawned atop the hill with just three like minded nutters in attendance.....

For once breakfast & a brew were taken in the relative luxury & comfort of the mess room.

What was meant to be a relatibely gentle day turned out to be anything but - plus it also snowed (metaphorically) different shades of brown!!!

First job was to trial fit the remaining floor planks in LMS van M517317 - that is when it first started snowing with beige sawdust, as the planks needed to cut to length, but to do that, we also had to place the bottom cladding planks & angle iron in each corner & remove any bolts holding the gusset plates in place, so as to get a true length.

This seemed to go without a hitch, including rebating undersides where rivet or bolt heads prevented the plank from sitting flush!

With the floor planks in place, next job was to locate at least one acrow prop along with a suitable length of timber to support the roof - after some ferreting we found both, plus base support and installed the acrow.

After lunch, the plan was to investigate the state of the north side longitudinal and door runner, and work out what needed to be done....... well that was the plan......with a scaffold tower in place alongside the van, we discovered that what was left of the external timber was in far worse condition than we originally thought - in places it didn't exist!

So it was decided to attempt to remove the longitudinal in one piece, leaving the door runner in place - yeah, right, as you may have guessed, that didn't happen!

That is when it started snowing again & quite hard, this time, brown from rust & black from rotten timber!!! The bolts securing everything in place were rusted in place, so the heads were ground off & the threads beaten through & the more it snowed rust, the more we were thinking that things were not good behind the cladding.......

During all this we were cursing the sunny conditions, as the sun was now causing us problems with visability, which left muggins 'ere wishing that we'd had these conditions last week on the charter, especially with a golden sunset, but consoled himself with the thought that man can control most things, except for two things - the weather & the wife.......

As bolts were knocked out we found it easier to hand shunt the van to where the scaffold was rather than the other way round & before we knew it, the longitudinal was off - actually it fell off, as the country end was rotten in one section, but its still good enough as temlate!

That done, the door runner was next....... the bolts holding that eventually gave up, revealing that the upright C section iron work is in need of some serious TLC, if not replacement!

We knew things were bad with this vehicle, but just not how bad & the north side was deemed to be in better condition than the south, which once the north side is sorted, will be approached with trepidation.......

With no trains running, exept for the Wickham, here's a few more from last Saturday's charter......

https://www.flickr.com/photos/duty_druid/52491201818/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/duty_druid/52490931524/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/duty_druid/52491119980/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/duty_druid/52490650876/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/duty_druid/52490651541/in/dateposted-public/

The floor in place, mostly loose fitted, and the timbers will now be allowed to et used to their new home.


The acrow prop in place.


Longitudinal on the deck where it fell, almost in one piece.


The door runner on the ground, ready to be assessed.



One of the horrors we're now going to have to deal with!

 

For any agreement, there has to be communication, but what happens when the major shareholder refuses to join those discussions? or engages in railway politics that in truth were put to bed ages ago, or should have been, the truth of the matter is, that the engine has the very real chance to become a forgotten engine, until the majority shareholder decides to sell their shares, then and only then, can the situation be remedied, either a new owner agrees to buy the MHR Trust's shareholding, and then takes the engine elsewhere, or comes to agreement to base the engine on the MHR, and the stalled overhaul gets re started.

 

There is the added complication of a lot work already carried out on it by the MHR. Could it be sold and move elsewhere unless there was some recompense to the MHR for that?