Swanage Railway General Discussion

There’s a sub committee which meets continuously, either in the mess room or the club and has an open remit to consider everything. It seldom reaches the same conclusions as the railways Council. I must admit to being occasionally co-opted but I’m not a regular member.

 

There are obviously some on here a lot closer to SR management than I am;. why should I as a member not be informed in a fairly prompt manner of the direction of appeals to which i and many others have contributed/ That is good business isn't it because when the next appeal comes around punters are going to be very wary of getting the same non results on quite a few SR projects. Do your google research and see if you can find ANY update of the "critical" carriage shed appeal later than April 2021

 

@oliversbest normally posts complete drivel, but the final sentence is interesting for a change. It's a reasonable request

Given the issues facing all HRs at the moment, changes to previous plans and objectives is inevitable. This doesnt just go for HRs. Keeping staff and volunteers onside is essential. Which means making sure that there are really good communications from management to the wider team, so that decisions made are at least understood even if they are not agreed with by everyone. There is a tendency to keep information within an inner circle - concentration of power and all that. It's the 'you don't need to know that syndrome'. Keeping teams onside means being open and telling people what they don't necessarily need to know but that they would be interested in. And letting people know if a decision on something hasnt yet been made. Only keeping information within management that cannot be shared.

 

I certainly think, and it has come up in other discussions, and allowing for other calls on management time there is a useful question about

'What sort of information might our supporters and the community we operate in reasonably be entitled to/interested in?'

OK somebody can probably put it better than me, but I hope you get the idea

Clearly in the case of The Swanage Railway there are a number of projects that seem to have raised funds but are not going anywhere at the moment, I am sure that there are perfectly good reasons but it would not hurt to put them in the public domain.

 

"They" are all very busy doing the something, which must be done...

 

No, “they” are all very busy talking about something which must be done (preferably by someone else…)!

Tom

 

We must have a different sort of 'They' department. Our 'They' department does many things, but they are never the right things!

 

Which is worse - a 'they' department which does nothing or a 'they' department which does the wrong things!?

 

Everything the 'they' department do is wrong, isn't it? After all, 'they' should be doing what 'everybody' knows is most important - usually half a dozen conflicting things all at once...

 

What they need is Tom no 2 to do a Swanage Times like the Bluebell Times where there is a regular slot from the Chairman outlining what is going on and Tom seems to be able to persaude people to do updates on ongoing projects.

 

It might be a reasonable request to the right people, but as he's been told over and over again, if he wants answers he needs to write/email/phone the railway. Coming on here with the same complaints and demanding answers/action from forum users is most definitely not the solution.

 

"Why are we repainting all the engines in full SECR livery"
"Dunno, that's what it said in the newsletter though..."

 

Interesting part from Southern locomotives latest update,
"For reasons which cannot currently be revealed we will now be fitting the cab out more extensively than planned"

Could Sidmouth be heading for future mainline running?

Southern Locomotives Ltd | Latest News (southern-locomotives.co.uk)

 

The text is a little ambiguous but the photo caption infers thar it is Brocklebank's cab which could be seeing more work. I don't think you can jump to a conclusion of mainline restoration though.

 

Deleted

 

Think the comment refers to 35025 Brocklebank Line (edit I see Keith has already replied)
Like the Canadian Pacific at the MHR is an important loco, but will be large and have high coal usage for most Heritage lines. Like the other Merchant Navy class locos Clan Line and British India line more suited to mainline running.

 

It depends on what the SLL see as the loco's future, and how it can be done, in a way that attracts more shareholders and donations, The biggest cost is the extra equipment, and the paperwork, inspections etc, but the actual cost of overhauling an engine, are not much more, as SLL already restore their engines to the standard that is required any way, costs could be saved if the mainline equipment can be removed from another engine, such as the U class, if its decided that its not powerful enough to really be of much use on the mainline, where as an MN, could haul any Railtour that you might want to put behind it,

 

(Deleted)

 

There's also a support coach, support crew, the mainline electronics (I doubt the SR would want to lose the U as a mainline loco). These are all reasons given when SLL sold 35027 and got out of mainline running. I can't see what has changed that would make SLL want to change their minds

 

Kind of you to say, though ultimately those in positions of authority / knowledge have to want to communicate. If they do, then a good editor / communications person can help tidy up what they say to be as clear as possible and have maximum impact - but if the shutters go down, there is not much you can do. We are lucky that our current plc Chairman definitely seems to value communications. From projects, some are better than others.

The conversation earlier on this thread was interesting, I could see both sides of what was discussed. I'm not sure everyone in the heritage railway world - and I include in that volunteers, supporters, enthusiasts etc - has fully woken up to just how tough things might be for the next few years. All railways are going to be forced to take some pretty tough decisions - which might be in terms of disposals, or cutting back services, or delaying key projects - and how those are communicated to the wider stakeholder base will go a long way to how smoothly those decisions are received.

Personally, I'm in favour of a touch of honesty - don't spend months saying "everything is fine" and then suddenly turn round and say "we urgently need to invest £1million in our track" (and then, even worse, don't then promptly let the aspiration die when £1million isn't immediately forthcoming - no names, no pack drill). But there has to be a degree of honesty both ways: those in director / trustee positions need to up their game in communication, but the quid pro quo is that it has to be recognised by supporters that "not every decision is a referendum" - you have to accept that you elect Trustees and Directors to act on behalf of the membership, which sometimes involves taking unpopular decisions if they are in the best overall interest of the railway. As a member, you can't have it both ways: you can't appoint someone to take on the onerous responsibility that comes with being a director if you don't then empower them to - well, direct without having every decision second-guessed.

Tom