Flying Scotsman

To that end - quoted from this story from February:

"Flying Scotsman’s custodian, Northern Steam Operations Limited, has brought in DB Cargo UK to operate FLying Scotsman on the mainline, but the NRM says that 2025 will be more focussed on heritage railway visits for the famous locomotive."

 

The NRM could really help out the Heritage Railway industry by opening up visits of Scotsman to many more railways than they do. It only seems to go to the same few railways on a repeated basis and when you see them running more trains and longer trains than normal it is clear a big money earner.

They could set up a program that over the 10 years of its boiler ticket it visits X amount of railways per year so that everyone gets a go, with the option to opt out of course.

They seem to have a "no low loader" policy, many other pacifics go on and off low loaders without any issues it just seems more of an excuse.

You feel its time for the NRM to step up and help the sector!

 

Several loco owners have a no low loader policy.

 

The "no low loader" policy is for a good reason - the fixed wheelbase of an LNER pacific is about 24'. There's virtually no vertical movement in the Cartazzi, unlike the rear bogie of a Bulleid or Standard. The occasional road movement to and from works is OK, but not for a quick jolly to a preserved line. LMS pacifics are the same.

 

Well FS has been the "hot potato" for many years with it's history in many hands. Looking back, to my mind, it's most successful period has been under the management of Ian Riley whose company "straightened it out" mechanically and under their main line/heritage line running was a huge success. They were obviously proud and grateful of their guardianship and delivered accordingly. I await the next few years running to retract my observation ....

 

I don't think Northern Steam are short of support staff with NR PTS. They know plenty of people who I'm sure would help out. They certainly aren't scraping the barrel because they haven't asked me yet.

 

Where have the "main TOC's" stated this publicly ?....you state "clearly"...