Kent & East Sussex Railway

You can’t be serious?

 

Is it a steam engine?

 

Getting away from the Airplane gags that doesn’t look a bad line up, the Clayton’s a nice little machine I’ve a feeling it’s going to look right at home, certainly has a bit of Col Stephen’s whiffery about it.

 

It's a while since 37714 was green with split boxes though... does the gala graphic indicate they were hoping for D6700?

 

Colonel Stephen's Bingo Round 2

Britannia is coming to the RVR/KESR
https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/0...o-take-part-in-kent-railway-celebrations.html


- It will split the points
- The bridges will collapse
- The turntable is too short
- The rails will break
- Will it be crossing Austen's Bridge?
- Colonel Stephens would have bought Britannia had he been alive?
- It won't fit a light railway image
- It will upset the Cricket Club
- None of the crews are trained to drive these.
- Will it be coming in via Headcorn?
- Surely the route availability is too great?
- It will foul the platforms
- Colonel Stephens never had one
- Have the railway thought about the permanent way before hiring this locomotive?
- William Austen never had one
- It will look ridiculous at Junction Road
- It will never make it up the bank out of the station
- It does not look like a Bucket (aka austerity 0-6-0)
- Will it be facing Junction Road or Robertsbridge Station?
- William Austen would have bought Britannia had he remained alive.
- These locos never ran on the pre-preservation RVR

 

You have missed;

It’s big chufferitis
And

Think of the coal bill


In all seriousness though- well done KESR, the light pacific got a lot of attention so having another big visitor must have been deemed worthwhile!

Chris

 

Oooh - this one?

Tom

 

Love it! It could cut the grass while it's there, too.

 

For those that were asking what is happening with 1638:

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/0...d-to-restore-kent-based-steam-locomotive.html

 

It’s already off it’s wheels down at Leaky’s so I’m surprised it’s taken this long to get fundraising off the ground

 

It went to Leaky's for remedial work. It very quickly became obvious that far more than remedial work was needed. Since then, decisions have had to be made about whether to repair the problems it had, then run out the remainder of the boiler ticket, or do the whole lot at once. Options for funding either option, including various grant opportunities, have been explored. It is felt that a fund raising effort, similar to that when members of the line bought 6619, is the fastest route to getting 1638 running again. Bear in mind that the KESR already had several things going on, and you can only do so many things WELL at once. The saga of Bodlar and the insurance claim is drawing to a close, which will be another positive.

 

Honestly my thought was just ‘That’s a bit cliché…’

Serious question: Is 70000 an attraction to anyone outside of railway enthusiasts? Or it it just the name that whips up nostalgia?

 

I would have expected some such agreement to have been made years ago, when the RVR got started.

 

I don't think it really matters, considering the loco's owner is helping fund the RVR.

 

I expect there was agreement in principle however RVR did not posses powers to fully operate the railway, nor to delegate them to the KESR, until the TWAO came into force on 02/08/2023.

 

I would not be surprised if RVR is dissolved and incorporate into a unified structure with the KESR. It makes little sense in having two companies beyond opening. The rationale for the creation of the RVR , was reduction of risk associated to any reopening project for the KESR (previously Tenterden Rly Co). A divided structure beyond reopening would only service to create unnecessary complexities in governance, railway operation, accounting and transaction costs.

 

Rumour has it that UP 4014 has been lined up for the 2025 gala...

Sent from my SM-A125F using Tapatalk

 

I would have thought that there were advantages in haveing the ownership of the land in two seperate entities.

 

Why?

I can understand a separation during construction, as it insulates the operational railway (KESR) from the financial and other risks around construction. But if the long-term objective is to operate the complete route as a single operational entity, then I’m not sure why you would want to bake in a more complex structure than is necessary. That would suggest to me that as far as possible, one landowner, one operator and one membership body on the line - not two of each.

Tom

 

Cough, L&B, cough