Tornado

I would not disagree with the thrust of your post. But I assume, as it is a loco I have little interest in, that there are no full time employees managing this project. I spent most of my working life involved with projects that had by comparison I suspect an army of engineers, project managers and procurement folk and over the years very few of those ran without major issues or to the original timeframe, be they major refits or something as simple as a couple of aircraft wardrobes.
So maybe those managing this, who I assume are volunteers, should be cut some slack. This is not an LSL or WCRC we are talking about is it.

 

The question is really at what point cutting slack becomes tolerance of ineffectiveness. I have plenty of experience around challenged projects, and they can be hell - I have great sympathy with the A1 Steam Trust in trying to get this project onto an even keel. But I also see a repeated pattern of deadlines being announced - and then missed. When suppliers and customers are relying on that, there comes a point where it's not good enough.

 

On the assumption that Tornado is expected to resume main line operations eventually, the Trust must surely be negotiating intensely with at least one TOC. It is understandable that the negotiations would be confidential, but a few words just to reassure interested parties that negotiations are in hand would not go amiss.

 

I'm afraid that the current Trustees (and shadow Trustee) are not capable of honesty and self reflection. They have deliberately mislead their Covenantors, passengers, industry partners and other supporters throughout Tornado's overhaul. They have consistently over promised and under delivered at every stage, letting down passengers who have booked and rebooked, industry partners such as the SRPS, NVR, Belmond and NNR as well as their long suffering financial supporters. They have promoted trains that they know had little - if any - chance of running, even doing so without having an agreed operator or rolling stock and continue to do so.

The Trust's leadership has demonstrated nothing but hubris and complete distain for those impacted by their mismanagement and lack of honest and open communications. Yes, of course things go wrong during any locomotive overhaul and often the work needed is more than anticipated but their lack of transparency has severely damaged this once premier league railway heritage organisations reputation. As a long standing Covenanter I will not put putting in another penny above my standing covenant until there is a complete change of leadership. And I am only keeping that so that I can play my part in holding the current regime to account - I want to know where my money has gone and the true state of their financials, including how much has been 'borrowed' from the P2 which I also support, and when that will be repaid. If they had any honour at all they would resign.

 

I agree, as a Project Manager most projects do not run to schedule or budget - it is how you react to that which makes or breaks reputations though . You do not need to be a full time project manager to be capable of making correct decisions, especially public communications - much of which comes down to expectation management. I can tell you straight away, members of the public do not like BS and inevitably see straight through it!! It all comes down to displaying competence, something the trust have historically been very adept at (helped in bucket loads when you have an operational locomotive).
Incidentally, I believe several full time staff are employed, certainly on the engineering side. One position was being recently advertised.
I have been hesitant (unlike some) to be critical of the Trust and given their historic achievements they do deserve a lot of slack - but given the latest delays it is starting to look very poor on the leadership. You do start wonder if they have any grasp on what is happening when yet another self imposed target drifts by.
That said, there will be no one happier than me to see the loco return to the mainline and having had 3 tours cancelled I would like another run behind it.

 

I assume the loco hasn’t steamed yet? Anyone at the GCR have any news of progress on that front please?

In other news, apparently the loco’s injectors have been changed to 2x BR live steam units. Interesting that on P2 the injector club appeal is for the same arrangement that has just been discarded here ( one live steam, one ESI) …. ?

A couple of fairly obvious questions ….

1. If the original arrangement isn’t satisfactory, why repeat it on the P2?

Alternatively ….

2. If the original arrangement is satisfactory, why replace it, and as they are now surplus, why not refurb them for the P2? Much cheaper than casting new ones, esp. the ESI?

 

agree with your comments. Of course all of its past achievements were under different management with different leadership….

 

As was the original boiler order...

 

No, the order was placed in 2019 when the trust was between chairmen and was overseen by recently former (change of status not announced or explained) trustee Graeme Bunker-James.

 

I just want to see it bring the crowds in at a heritage railway that desperately needs the cash, it having let them down before.

 

On the P1 thread you put mr Bunker Jones in with the former management
"This is clearly no longer the case. The whole board has been churned in recent years with Paul Bruce (2023), Huw Parker (2023), Graeme Bunker-James (2023), Mark Allatt (2021) and David Elliott (2020) all leaving since the new chairman was installed and not all communicated to supporters."
On that basis, all of the persons you list were still there at the date of boiler order.

 

ITYM Bunker-James, however: on Companies House, he is shown as having active involvement in varying capacities in no less than six companies related to the A1SLT, but as Graeme Bunker: I believe he changed his name when he got married. As Graeme Bunker-James, he is listed as a consultant to two other companies.

 

I do, apologies.
When does the public record show he took up these positions?

 

From A1Steam - The Ribblehead Rambler is now expected to run on the 21st of September

 

There was no chairman at that time

 

How many of us share that expectation?

 

As it's a matter of public record, Companies House will give you all the details. As it will for the others.

 

He resigned as a director of A1SLT in Nov 23 and this was also reflected on the Charities Commission website. However, this change in status at the Trust and reasons for resigning, along with that of Huw Parker, has never been shared with Covenantors.

 

Not disputing the points you were making, but Tornado can hardly be a beacon of preservation achievement, as they haven't preserved anything. (It's a nice engine, but preserved it isn't!)

 

Fair cop guv'nor!!