Manx Northern Railway Cleminson Coaches

You say “I will stick myself on the line and say please answer the questions in the thread directly”

So to the point –
A) I will not answer questions that are intended to assist raiders to harm the society.
B) I will do all I can to help anyone who wants to preserve the Cleminson coach in Douglas.

This thread is about Cleminson coaches. It is not entitled “How can we harm the IOMR&TPS”. If that is your goal then set up a thread and fulminate to your heart’s content.

I suggest our critics stop carping and try to save the Cleminson coach that is rotting in the Isle of Man, or are they so consumed with hate that screaming abuse matters more than preservation? I suggested a friendly contest, two coaches preserved is better than one, and that I would gladly help with patterns, photos, drawings etc.

If this is National-Preservation, then take up that challenge.
If it is National-Carping, then Carry On Carping. They were good comedy films, but the way some people evade my challenge that they preserve something is making this a better comedy.

Come on National-Preservation. Set up a fund to help the Carping Brigade. If they are to save the Douglas Cleminson, they’ll need plenty of help. I said it would be nice if both coaches were supported, but I think the coach in Douglas needs all the support. Our coach can depend on our members. What can the Douglas coach depend on?
Robert Hendry

 

<Moderator hat removed - actually thrown on the floor!>

Robert,

You are kidding, aren't you?

What about the hundreds of other preservation schemes and appeals for unique historic vehicles? Are we supposed to do their fund-raising for them too?

Maybe you haven't had a look at many other appeals which have been made on this forum, where people have explained their project, responded to questions (both on and off the forum) and provided easy access to further information for those who wanted it. This forum has *not* done their fund-raising for them - each project's promoters have had to make their appeal against many other competing projects and the forum members have then responded in whichever way they felt most appropriate.

You originally asked for technical help and fund-raising for your project, and have since tried to "persuade" people to get involved in your own particular way. If that hasn't worked, maybe you should think how you come across to people who you would like to help you.

<mod hat back on ...>

Richard

 

Est Bonum Ad Putrescet - It is Good to Rot.

I have enough to do restoring our coach. I see that no one else on this forum actually cares in the least about saving the Cleminson coach in Douglas. You would all rather hurl abuse at our society and screech "how many members" than ask "How can we save a coach".

Someone bellyached that hendry did nothing with his coach. After it was restored for static display our detestable little society was raising money for a locomotive boiler, or we would have done more. When the Douglas coach rots away, what do those of you who care so much for Cleminson coaches that you have written in to this forum have as an excuse? You can say "We were too busy throwing stones to waste our valuable time on preservation. Est Bonus Ad Putrescet."

When I started this discussion, my dream was to see BOTH coaches restored. I do not think that was a very bad idea. We are doing as much as our small society can realistically cope with. Will not one of our critics agree that saving two coaches is better than one? Is that too much to ask?

The words of the King James Bible answer that question better than any word of mine could.
"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?"

Robert Hendry

 

Goodness me, what an easy scapegoat an internet forum is for the fate of this coach.

 

Indeed...

A good template to follow would be the LNWR George Vth newbuild thread.

At the time it first appeared, there had been a spate of "facebook new build" proposals on NatPres (mostly from one particular member) and it is fair to say the whole concept of new build projects was pretty much being laughed out of court on this forum. But by dint of perservarance and patience and answering people's questions, however hostile or left-field, Knotty (the main proponent of the project) was able to win most people round and at least demonstrate the project was serious, even to the more sceptical end of the audience here. That doesn't mean every single member of the site chipped in a tenner or so (if only it were that easy!), and no doubt many people are still sceptical (take a bow, PH!) but the change in attitude from open hostility to acceptance of the project as serious was profound.

Frankly, as I have said earlier, the defensiveness displayed by Robert Hendry, at the very least, isn't warming people on the forum to either his project, or a potential new project to save the other Cleminson carriage. I'd like to be proved wrong and see both running somewhere in my lifetime.

Tom

 

No! A forum has no more guilt than a knife or a gun. It is the man behind it who has guilt or no guilt. I had asked for technical help and some good people came forward, and I am deeply in their debt. A great many people just wanted to throw stones.

I said we cannot save the other coach, how about someone else doing something? Four people replied to my last post begging for someone to come forward to do as we did and save a coach. Did one of them say "Lets Save it". No.

When the Douglas Cleminson has rotted away, I can say
"I tried"
The four of you can say,
"We threw stones at him for trying. That was our priority."

I don't really know why I am bothering. I think there is the hope in my heart that someone new may chance on this forum and read it and say yes I want to save that coach. If some open-minded and good person out there says that, please understand this. You can see how much the stone throwers hate me. They would rather throw stones than save a coach. For me to be involved would tar you with the same brush. I seek NO official position in such a group. Indeed I would refuse it, but I will help in any way I can.

The forum is NOT guilty.
Robert Hendry

 

You ask
"How does your involvement with Elrokits work?"

If I say nothing, someone will accuse me of being evasive.
If I say something someone will accuse me of feathering my own nest through the forum and being long winded.

I do not know whether you work or are retired.

Whether you are married or single, black or white, tall or short, like pasta or yorkshire puddings, produce kits, fly fighter jets or are a pop star, is not relevant to the forum.

I would refer you to the words of one of the moderators over this question
"the thread is ..... wildly off topic now"
I wonder what will be the matter with this answer? Too short, Evasive, Not enough detail?

Robert Hendry

 

This thread has somewhat strayed from the original topic and I am very reluctant to get involved in it again.

I have quoted the original post in response to a number of references regarding the Cleminson coach that has remained in Douglas. The content of the original post made no reference to this other carriage and I think it was therefore reasonable not to expect this thread to develop into a discussion on the future of that one. That carriage is, as far as I am aware, owned by the Isle of Man Railway and is in a very different state to the one being discussed on this thread. Information on that example can be found at N.41 (Manx Northern Railway No. 2, 1879)

This thread has focussed on the Cleminson which is owned by the IOMRTPS and was originally started as an appeal for information on suppliers. I have no problem with this as a request for help. What many people are frustrated about is that they would consider helping restore this carriage (either by donations, volunteering or becoming an associate member) but that information is not readily available or forthcoming. Robert did kindly send me the information and I did make an offer to share that but I had wanted Robert's permission first.

Robert - What the society has achieved to date is admirable and most people do not want to resist what you are trying to achieve or put barriers in your way. People are genuinely interested in this carriage and the restoration project and even Allan has said that he would visit the Southwold Railway and pay to see the restored carriage! The requests for information are not them trying to be difficult or to undermine the work done by the society.

The vacuum of information just wants to be filled and if answers are not forthcoming then people will read into that in their own way (as an example the Rampton Collection) and that only compounds the problem. I am sure when you do see rumour presented as fact you will want to correct it but at that point it is often too late. All I would encourage is that the Society becomes more pro-active in communications... Maybe one of the members would be willing to look after a website and use that to publicise information so that you can concentrate on putting in place the relevant measures for the restoration project.

I hope that you will see that I am trying to be genuine and do want you to succeed in restoring the carriage and No.7 Tynwald as well as securing the future for the MER stock.

 

When did asking for information become 'stone-throwing'? If you plan on dealing with the HLF you should expect some pretty intense questioning on how the Society operates and functions.

 

Hi,

I entitled the thread Manx Northern Railway Cleminson CoachES. As jmolyneux says I had sought contacts who could help with restoration, and I hoped it would evolve into a discussion on useful restoration matters. The IMRTPS has quite enough to restore with the Cleminson we own and No 7. There is no way we could take on the Douglas Cleminson, but I have always felt that saving that was important. As a sensible discussion evolved I hoped people would see that. That was my ambition and when I say that if that coach was restored ahead of ours I would be delighted to congratulate those responsible, I meant it.

What is wrong with saving it?

As to secrecy, I have explained repeatedly that raiders for an outlay of under £1000 could secure control of disposable assets in excess of $50,000. I gave my accountancy background to explain why I am familiar with such tactics. That would not be fair to the members. If I give precise membership numbers, it makes it easy for them. I believe that the Associate Status safeguard the board has adopted protect the members interests. For saying that I am bullied non stop, it is a society of one, hendrys private company and so on. Membership numbers are a nonsense. If you look at the Middle East wars from the 1940s to the 1980s, Israel was massively outnumbered in men and equipment on every occasion, and achieved some of the most decisive victories in military history, when the numbers game suggests the opposite result would be inevitable. In 1974 we had 37 members and had been going for a year and had a surplus of £233. The IOMSRSA had 500 members had been going for several years and had a surplus of £9. The numbers game offers nothing of value. Its only value would be to raiders, and the Associate status negates its value even to them.

As to publicity, until we have a survey of the coach and KNOW exactly what we need to spend, I am peddling 'maybe' and 'hope to'. I have said before I will ask for money when we KNOW exactly what is needed. If I sell a nonsense idea and you give me money, it means you trusted me and I have let you down. Do I say we need another £900 to restore the coach or another £90,000. If we only need £900 and I ask for £90,000 and get it, will the people who gave the money for a coach be happy if we spend it on something else.

We had 14 years pleading with the DTL/DCCL to get some sensible outcome. We have not yet had a month. If you demand answers a lot of them would be guesswork. You have been very reasonable and sensible, but a lot of people see me as a target, as with the three cheap gibes from michaelh or the demand from RalphW,
How does your involvement with Elrokits work,
What does that have to do with Cleminson coaches?
Give us time and we will deliver, but if we are realistic, there are a number of people on this thread like michaeln who have a perceived grievance from over twenty years ago to vent against my father. Nothing will change their minds.
Robert Hendry

 

I imagine it is pointless to say so again, but we have had less than a month to find out what we need to do on the coach. You may be prepared to give answers on guesswork and hope. I am not. I can only give maybe or perhaps answers until we do have the details, as I said to jmolyneux.

You say we will face "some pretty intense questioning on how the Society operates and functions." You use the word Society but one of the administrators demands ""How does your involvement with Elrokits work?" It has nothing to do with Cleminson coaches. It has nothing to do with the Society. OK Now you want personal data, so how about you and all the critics posting your passwords on this site. You would be mad to do so, but what's the difference. The thread was abut Cleminson coaches, not how can we harm the IOMRTPS or what about my kit business. If I did post details about the kit business someone would accuse me of trying to gain free publicity, so I have tried to say as little as possible as I now know that anything will be seized on to attack me.

What do you call the posts from michaelh. They were cheap insults not questions.

We asked for some technical advice rather than embarked on a fund raising campaign. When we seek Lottery funding we will need a detailed historical case, structural evidence, costings, and data about the IMRTPS. We will do that when we have all the evidence. I am not asking you for money at the moment as I would prefer to know the situation rather than just guess.

I have offered a mass of facts, but I have said no to data that could be harmful to our members and to offering guesswork rather than fact.
Robert H

 

Robert

Absolutely nothing wrong with saving N.41 as it does not appear to be a restoration project that the IOM Railway are planning on undertaking. I was just attempting to point out that although the thread title says coaches the content of your post focused on one in particular. That is most likely the reason why the discussion did not open up further.

In relation to the publicity it is the perceived lack of information and progress that causes the problems. I do not think anyone would have any objections to you publicly publishing the aims of the Society and the hopes for the Cleminson and No.7 - even the Southwold Railway have a website up and running when (to the best of my knowledge) they do not yet have planning permission for the line. If you had a set of objectives that could be easily found then at least people know what is happening.

As an example;

Obj. 1 - Relocate Cleminson Coach & No.7 to Southwold Railway by Nov (Done!)
Obj. 2 - Undertake an engineering survey of the Cleminson Coach (Due Date XXXX)
Obj. 3 - Publish a project plan for the restoration (Due Date XXXX)

I do not think that this information could be abused and would at least let people who are interested and would consider becoming an associate member and idea of what is going on.

 

OK

I see no problems with that so here is the statement,


Obj. 1 - Relocate Cleminson Coach & No.7 to Southwold Railway by Nov 2012 (Done!)
Obj. 2 - Undertake an engineering survey of the Cleminson Coach (Due as soon as possible)
Obj. 3 - Develop a detailed restoration plan as soon as 2 permits.
Obj. 4 - Prepare a case with full supporting evidence to apply for Heritage Lottery funding
Obj. 5 - Submit the Lottery funding application
Obj. 6 - Commence restoration work using commercial and/or volunteer work as may be appropriate
Obj. 7 - Make a properly costed and accurate appeal for enthusiast support.
Obj. 8 - Monitor progress on fund raising to preclude possible unexpected cash shortfalls
Obj. 9 - Monitor progress on restoration, amending the plan in light of how work evolves
Obj 10 - Undertake an engineering survey of chassis of No 7 with a view to rebuilding.


Current Funding Allocated by Board to Project £25,000
Overall funding requirement - £25,000-£75,000


I trust this will satisfy everybody.
Robert Hendry

 

Gosh - 12 pages on and at last something concise and to the point. This is what I've been waiting for. It doesn't particularly bother me if a coach is preserved away from it's original home - it is good to see it preserved. I wish the Southwold project well - I walked much of the eastern part of the trackbed in the 1960's and have always wished to see something restored. If the two projects can assist each other so much the better. I'm fairly certain that many others on the forum would concur.

Now on this thread there has been much hot air, and talk of fund-raising and the like. When the time comes to launch your appeal (point 7 above) Robert then please make sure that you make it easy to give. That means good, open information. If the project is perceived as being run by a small and secretive clique then most of us will simple say "let them get on with it". I'm not saying that you are a small and secretive clique, but you have to see how others might perceive this to be the case.

With regard to the other coach at Douglas, you have flagged up a concern, and as you are not in a position to do anything about it yourself then others might have to. Or the owners might. I suspect that your plea to Nat Pres was not to the moderators, but to us as readers to start something going. Whether it does or not, time will tell.

I look forward to riding in a Cleminson somewhere, sometime, somehow!

Steve B

 

Thanks Tom,

If there is ever a poster whom one could agree with 90% of the time, disagree with strongly on 10% (Brighton Atlantic) and maintain respect for, it is you. Even "Knotty", whom I disagree with 100% on his scheme (LNWR George V) gives as good as he gets with good humour. There are lessons to be learned here, especially in not regarding with suspicion potential future (note the word "future") supporters asking reasonable questions.

P.H.

 

OK, a couple of things:

I've stood back and watched the mud-slinging with a mixture of amusement and despair. Robert - you are new to internet forums and are obviously just learning that a lot of words get chucked about, people shoot from the hip, people feel 'protected' by the screen between you and them and may say things they wouldn't say to your face. Sometimes this is uncomfortable; sometimes it can be a good thing as you find out what they really think. Sometimes it is just bored kids with nothing better to do; sometimes it is experienced preservationists who have 'been there, done that'. It's not always easy to extract the useful information, but do try not to get drawn into endless arguments which detract from your core aim. A simple website (which if you could attract some younger members, someone will probably do for you at zero cost) would have answered most of the questions asked here about the trust and saved us all from getting distracted.

As for the carriage(s), I only have a mild passing interest as an enthusiast and rolling stock owner; I'm unlikely to be putting money into it and unlikely to ever have a ride in it, but I wish you well with its rehabilitation.

Don't hang your entire hopes on a successful lottery application though. There are plenty of worthy projects which have failed to secure funding from that source, so you should also look into other potential sources of funding. Also, grant-giving bodies tend to want some sort of matched funding - you have allocated 25k which is a good start, but if you're not careful the lottery application process could eat into that, particularly if you need professional help to put your case together. Matched funding can often be in the form of volunteer labour so think about which elements of the project could be done by volunteers and which parts definitely need specialist help. Volunteers need not be 'local enthusiasts' either, some railways have got local youth groups or even remand prisoners involved, with the appropriate supervision. There are many, many ways of doing things and they don't all involve spending mega-bucks, though some can take a lot longer than others.

Finally - No.7, I'm sure we would all love to see it rebuilt, but I have a question - are there any wheelsets for it on the IoM, granted perhaps not in your ownership but something which could be negotiated for? If not, the cost is going to go through the roof.

It's a pity you let your three 'complete' engines go really - I don't want to rake over that again but I think I would have moved them elsewhere years ago when relations first got soured; had you still owned them I think attracting new members would have been easier, and had you based them elsewhere you might have earned the trust some money for the use of 'Fenella'. I can't help thinking that the Tralee & Dingle would have given it some decent mileage, without stressing it too much, for example.

Anyway, what's done is done. Good luck with your coach restoration, and do keep us informed of progress.

Phil

 

The problem with two of those locomotives was asbestos. The information that I have seen presented suggests that the cost of removing the asbestos was significant and that there may have been access problems.

It has also been suggested that the Government would not have granted the relevant paperwork to allow a complete locomotive to leave the Island. I do not know how true that is.

I am conscious that we are again stepping into a potentially controversial area that being discussed again on this thread would do no one any favours!