VT - Marylebone Flyer (Inter-City) - Oct 13th

I'm afraid, that's the nature of the beast we follow.

For booking with confidence, read Chiltern Railways ! Not nearly so much fun, but you do stand a better chance of having your expectations met !

 

All of which makes me think of an alternative to the converted GUV for water. Bearing in mind that 10,000 litres would probably give a big loco another 50 miles beyond its tender capacity, and that the motor coaches of the Mark 1 Southern DEMUs had the structural strength to carry 61 tonnes, would it not be feasible to fit this capacity beneath the floor of an occupied carriage? Another sold-seats carriage would improve economic viablity whilst adding only 10 tonnes to the starting weight of the train. Any rolling stock experts with a view?

 

The GUV is gravity fed so underfloor is less atractive. The GUV is a good idea and looks right, but maybe metal tanks rather than plastic...

Just briefly repeating my previous post from the business point of view, my main reason for the comment is that I would think the unavoidable charges VTL will have to pay will not be far short of the losses of running the trip with the empty seats for the few who would take option 3 and the compensation for those who take option 1...

 

Of course, we are not party to the financial arrangements between VTL, their Partners, and NR. They may have all agreed to share the hit to a degree in this case, reducing the impact of cancellation from what those of us, not in the know, would imagine would follow !

In any case, it's unlikely in today's climate that any organisation, especially one in the preservation movement, would take a decision that would result in a financial loss, without there being a business case for it !

 

Some of the reasons why I don't post on this forum anymore are contained in the last two pages of this thread.
I stopped volunteering at Tyseley about two years ago so I'm coming at this with no axe to grind.
Firstly the water tank splitting a couple of days before the tour is due to run. You can't nip down to B&Q and buy a 2,500 gallon plastic water tank off the shelf, they have to be ordered, delivered and then altered for the piping to be fitted all in three days.........I don't think so.
I can just imagine the uproar on here of TbirdFrank proportions if Tyseley had kept quiet about this and on Saturday the tour had run with a water stop. 'It wasn't what was advertised, you're taking money under false pretences' etc.
As someone has already said, this is going to cost Tyseley a fair bit of money. Not just in refunds but they will already have paid NR for the pathing and timings and these fees will have to be paid again when asking for a new date next year, I should think West Coast will want some compensation for the work they have put into this trip as the TOC.
I know from my time working at Tyseley that bookings would have to be extremeley low for it to be cancelled for that reason so that nails that 'theory'. Plus everyone at Tyseley from Bob Meanley down is an enthusiast first and foremost and it will have hurt them a lot to have to postpone this trip, believe me the excitement during the week leading upto a 'special run' like this one would have been palpable.
Oh, and don't forget, the money lost could have been spent on Clun's overhaul. People on here seem to forget that all the money earned from these trips goes back into keeping Tyseleys loco's in the condition we have come to expect and doesn't go into someones pocket as profit.

 

Well said salty as for people moaning about hotel bills etc that's something this hobby comes with sometimes a cancellation can make you out of pocket but the thrill of the ride when everything comes into place is worth the risk to me I dunno about others but someone has already made this point .

 

I'm afraid that's the age we live in now......everybody seems to think you just press a button...........

 

This is a genuine comment! Welcome back, myself (and probably many others) have wondered where you had got to, maybe fearing the worst. Always remember your early posts with a "Paddington" totem sign as your avatar. You seemed to have joined the ranks of many others, KentYeti being one of the most recent to "disappear".

 

Whilst I agree with others on here than VT probably made the right decision to cancel, I think I would tend to agree with Nick that even though it appeared to be a good path, the chances of a clear run were not good. As has already been mentioned, the tour was running a few minutes behind a Kidderminster to Marylebone Chiltern service which stops at Solihull, Warwick Parkway, Leamington Spa, Banbury and Bicester North. If this train ran on time then fine, but a couple of minutes delay and 5043 would start seeing yellows and possibly reds in front of it. OK, a non-stop run may still be achieved by approaching adverse signals very slowly but that would rather spoil the run. Having said that, like others, although I wasn't booked on Saturday's trip as I have other things on, I may be tempted to book when it runs next year, subject to no clashes and seats being available.

 

Given that it was WCRC's water carrier that failed, I'd hope they wouldn't charge extra for running this train when it finally happens, and might even contribute to any extra costs VT incur as a result of the postponement. Also, I'd hope the number of passengers requiring refunds will be fairly small.

If anyone's reputation is going to suffer as a result of this, it's likely to be West Coast's. They've had a run of bad luck recently.

 

In reply to those who have expressed doubts about the possibility of this being a non stop run because it was following a Chiltern stopper and it may have been held because of that. You obviously didn't read the VT tour page for this tour. It was being run in conjunction with Chiltern Railways and judging from past experience they would have made sure that it was a true non stop run. Just as First Great Western did for the Bristolian. Some of you would be pleasantly surprised at the amount of co-operation that goes on between the 'modern' TOC's and the people running steam on the mainline.
And buseng, thank you for your concern but I haven't hit the buffer stops yet!!! I stopped working at Tyseley because I knew that I wouldn't pass my next PTS medical due to a 'dickey ticker', so there was no chance of me being able to do the thing I enjoyed most, getting up at stupid o'clock to get a loco ready to go out on the big railway and show off some of Britain's greatest engineering achievements to an amazed and admiring public.
There's no such thing as 'light duties' in a steam shed, so unfortunately like a few others I have had to become a watcher rather than a doer.

 

Alistair, your kind comments are much appreciated and yes, I hope most people here find my postings "interesting and thought-provoking". Comments made are always in good faith and as a former railwayman and steam enthusiast, made from a person who is passionate about mainline steam.

If people feel it necessary to make personal insults I believe it is a sign of their shortcomings and weaknesses and not mine.

Thank you once again.

Nick

 

The ability of some on here to talk absolute drivel never fails to amaze me, particularly it seems those who elect to hide behind pen names (or should it be poison pen names?). It is absolutely apparent that they have never had any experience of the operation of charter trains, because if they had, they would know that it is impossible to please all of the people for even some of the time, and that appears to be particularly applicable to those who know best, do nothing and are not actually paying passngers on the trains. In passing I do feel it is worth telling you that by far (and I do mean many times worse) the worst haranguing that a member of my staff has had was from a couple of particularly nasty non paying train spotters on Moor Street station this morning because we had ruined their (free) day. Whatever we did was never going to be universally popular. What we did do however was for the ladies in our office to personally ring up every passenger who we could get hold of to explain the situation well into the evening in their own time, later aided by Ben. With one exception all those contacted were unfailingly polite, the majority at least sympathetic, and only one who gave them any earache as he said that we should have put in water stops and run it. Regrettably ( and just to confound the expert on here who reckoned the non stop timings wouldn't work), the timings would not have worked if we had to put a water stop in at Banbury (so Chiltern's excellent planning team tell me).

Putting a water stop in was never an option, as either that or the use of a diesel to help out would have had (in our experience) led to a vastly greater level of complaints from disenchanted customers, and commercially speaking would have failed to be what we offered. We believed (and still do despite the wisdom of the semi informed on here) that we did the responsible thing, and we have already had loads of comments and email from our customers (for the benefit of bystanders customers are the people who pay for the trains which you think you have a right to watch) that they agree with what we did.

With regard to the half baked comments about the water carrier it requires a fitness to run exam just like every other vehicle before it is allowed to operate on Network Rail, and its fitness to run was never in question. However it also has to undertake a variety of roles for West Coast and does not always have the tanks fitted. In preparing the vehicle to send down to us a fault with a tank was discovered which was found to be incapable of resolution by either WCR or TLW in the time remaining, and consequently we were placed in a position where we had to make a decision and to do so quickly, and such decisions will never be universally popular.

We (and I in particular) have enjoyed a business relationship with David Smith for almost fifteen years, and I very much enjoy dealing with him. He has a reputation for openly stating that his business is nothing to do with anyone else. I tend to agree with him, and in view of the comments regarding compensation and the like, the uninformed can speculate as much as they like but sorry chaps it is absolutely none of your business, and if you are looking for explanations of something which is none of your concern you are going to be sat around for a very long time. Over a lengthy period of time, David and I have done many things to help each other; most work out, some occasionally less so. In this instance the use of this vehicle was one of those favours, because we have been unable to complete our own water carrier due to pressure of other works, some of which are yet to become apparent. It didn't happen, some may have genuine disappointment, but hopefully we will all be breathing in and out on Monday morning, so on a scale of 1 to 10 it doesn't get very high does it? I certainly shall not be falling out with David about it and I am sure that we shall come to an accomodation. I certainly have a very dim view of anyone on here using this as an opportunity to take another snipe at David and WCR.

I must thank the budding engineers who have probably never put a vehicle back into use on Network Rail for the suggestions of improvements to the water carrier and alternative vehicles, but what we developed worked fine for us and when ours eventually does get sorted in the coming months the use of it will be planned around its capabilities and capacity just as with all of our other assets.

Finally for anyone with a genuine interest in travelling on the re-dated train the date is April 6th replacing one which cannot be run due to Network possessions. Chiltern have already confirmed that the route is clear and the path should be similar, in fact it should be similar to the last time that we ran a non stop to Marylebone when we got there in 1 hour 56 minutes - so much for the "expert" on here who predicted that it would be crawling around behind service trains. Yes there was a bit of soft pedalling occasionally but there was also a lot that wasn't, as you cannot get there in that sort of time by dawdling.

Regards
Bob

 

I would also like to thank Bob Meanley for his comments. The level of cynicism on here must make people like him wonder if it's all worthwhile sometimes. I received a very pleasant phone call from the office staff on Thurday to explain matters and give me the options. I too have chosen to let the booking stand and here's hoping everything goes well on April 6th.

 

Considering the performance of the steam rail tour industry over the years, a high level of cynicism is understandable.