Tornado

There used to be - Graham Langer, a.k.a. "Foxhunter".

 

Correct, but he hasn’t posted for several years and I imagine that any posts were his personal opinion and not official comments.

 

Repeated numerous times as if fact on this forum, but whenever I have asked where this information has come from, a big wall of silence. So I have concluded until proven otherwise this is an unfounded rumour. It didn't make sense as West Coast operated Tornado without issue for much of its last ticket, indeed I travelled behind it several times on West Coast operated trains, in West Coast branded carriages, with West Coast crews. So why it's such a big story it being operated by them again I do not know.

I have been critical of recent decisions related to CDL by West Coast management, some of which have been bizarre to say the least. I have been critical of A1ST project management, communication and decision making, some of which has been equally bizarre (and incredibly naive).

However, West Coast remains the largest operator of heritage steam in the country, have drivers and route knowledge across the UK and following a (very wise) business decision to acquire Riviera trains, have access to a large number of CDL fitted carriages. Through RTC, Pathfinder and West Coast tours there is access to a huge chunk of the railtour business. They operated Tornado in its last ticket and are familiar with the loco. There is the potential for it to earn a lot of income and start repaying the significant standstill time it has suffered. It will be seen and accessible to people, right across the country, for the next 3 years.

Whether people like it or not, this is the correct deal for Tornado and makes significant financial sense. I don't think there is a better one, however happy to be corrected on this?
Just as much as we have a right to be critical of daft decisions, we must also be big enough to admit when organisations make sound ones.

 

Which is understandable, but how does that change anything?
If PR is avoiding difficult questions and hoping they go away, it's not a good advert for any future donations is it?

 

I suspect it's a good move for WCR. Whether it's good for the A1ST is something we'll find out in 2 years time...

 

https://www.a1steam.com/tornado/about-tornado/the-charity

"The organisation was based around four principles:

1. It would have to be run using the best business practices by people experienced in the appropriate areas.
2. The funding method would have to be simple, and capable of being understood and afforded by virtually anyone.
3. Because of the enormity of the task, there would have to be a single aim to focus on, the project’s mission statement – “The building and operation of an A1” – against which all proposed actions would be judged.
4. The rules of the organisation would prohibit cliques and any form of élitism. Everyone would achieve recognition based on effort rather than size of cheque book. This would enable all efforts to go into the building of the ‘A1’"

"A nationwide management team was put together who freely give considerable amounts of time and expertise. The Trust has secured a reputation for being supported by a wide range of specialists, experts and enthusiasts from all walks of life"

For those who were wondering why I accused them of being "professionals", perhaps "experts" would have been more apt. But I think a re-appraisal of recent decisions against this metric would be a good thing.

 

That was written a long time ago. There has been considerable "mission creep" since those days.

 

I've thought (and possibly said previously) that if WCR chose to take a litigious hard line then many social media outlets, including this one, and contributors could see letters from our learned friends on a very regular basis.

 

That's indeed very much my point...

 

With the exception of 3), I'd suggest all of those ought to remain applicable.

 

They ought to. Whether they do is a different matter.

 

I fully agree - and that question is an important underlying factor in this discussion.

 

I recall (perhaps accurately, perhaps not) one occasion some years ago when WCRC were due to operate a railtour and/or to provide the coaches, the rostered locomotive wasn't available, Tornado was substituted, and WCRC then withdrew. Have I got that right?

Whatever issues WCRC may have had with Tornado at that time seem to have been resolved subsequently.

 

Not only mission creep, changes in external conditions.

Twenty years ago there were numerous independent locos hired out to TOCs. DB was a large player and not a loco owner. There were numerous tour promoters and rolling stock hire was not a problem. All that has changed and the market is now composed of three integrated operators.

You folks know better than me, but I imagine that twenty years ago the model was that the core operation would be Kings Cross to York in four hours each way appealing to a mixture of domestic and international markets as something really special. Unfortunately that dream died, and from that moment on the idea of the A1LST as a genuinely independent force in the marketplace has become ever more difficult to maintain. WCR were the TOC very successfully for several trips in 2018/9 including Doncaster to Edinburgh and Doncaster to Carlisle ( plus the Aberdonian?).

I am left asking those who do not like the tie up with WCR 'What is the practical alternative?' How do you best give effect to those four principles in today's conditions?

 

Again it's not "what's wrong with doing a deal with WCR?"

The question is, as I see it, is "what is the deal with WCR, why is it being done the way it is, and what are the risks that A1SLT is accepting (noting there have been significant unexplained and seemingly unremedied issues during the most recent overhaul that call into question the decision-making of the trust and it's ability and willingess to fully and properly communicate with its funders)?"
Not as snappy, but life seldom is, is it?

 

My concern is not the tie up, whether with WCRC or anyone else. It is about how it has been announced, and when - and what that says about the condition of the A1SLT. It has a very strong feel of a rushed decision, entered in haste and in reaction to circumstances, rather than as a planned choice.

In the circumstances, the Trust have probably done what's needed. My question is about what "in the circumstances" means, and where we will proceed given the known issues with the locomotive.

 

Fair enough. I am a complete outsider and respect those who have been insiders all these years and the pain and grief and turmoil they have suffered. I can completely see that the events surrounding the overhaul have left a legacy of mistrust around both competency and comms. However....

If I ask myself 'Does best business practice require the disclosure of commercial arrangements to covenantors?' my answer is no, that's not how the world works.

 

Why does the old adage "marry in haste, repent at leisure" keep entering my head?

 

The bit that gets me is the idea that Tornado is going to match better WCRC's ' traditional rolling stock' in BR Green any more than it does in its current apple green livery. Unless WC is going to bring back the MK1's steam is going to look incongruous at the head of a rake of air con Mk2's no matter what colour the loco or the coaches are painted!