Tornado

I have mentioned before that, with my very narrow focus on BR SR and BR Standard class locos that used to work on the SR, I have zero interest in ever wanting to photograph or travel beind Tornado.

But I fully recognise the vital importance of Tornado to the current and future main line steam loco operations in Britain. And because of that I find it very sad indeed to read of what comes across to me by reading this thread, as an incredibely long stream of issues stopping the loco getting back into service. And the impact that has on those, some of whom are on Nat Pres, who have invested a lot of time and /or money on this loco.

Please forgive my ignorance on this, but what makes the re-emergence of Tornado seemingly so different to other main line steam locos that go through overhauls and then look to get back into main line operation far quicker?

Bryan B

 

Shame that there is not a dislike button. Not helpful.

 

Tornado is a magnificent piece of equipment and we shouldn't forget it, even after the endless promises (that haven't materialised) The A1 Trust could and should have handled the situation better, it's just about unforgivable what they've done , but Tornado WILL be back in all it's David Elliot glory. So ride this out lads, the loco WILL grace the ECML (and many other lines) again.

 

Whereas I have given it a like. There may be very good reasons why Tornado will not be ready to pull a train on 21st September, but was the Trust right to sell tickets which it now has to refund?

 

It’s particularly concerning that in the last few days supporters (and presumably previous customers) have received a mail shot urging us to book the “last few remaining seats” on this tour. This pretty much sums up the last two years.

 

Absolutely. Unless something material has happened that has changed the previous plans (in which case, why does the statement not say as much?), the continued advertising feels like a case of hoping that something will come up. Good planning should have foreseen the possibility and, at the very least, have avoided running a campaign to sell those seats.

 

Really? What isn’t helpful is the poor way that this overhaul has been managed and the constant over promising and under delivering to covenantors, passengers and other industry partners. I’ve lost count of the number of trains that have been promoted and subsequently cancelled. Shooting the messenger helps no one. Tornado deserves better and heads really do need to roll.

 

When did Wilkins Micawber join the Trust?

 

The Convention next month could be interesting, with disgruntled supporters expressing their views.
Sadly I won't be attending myself. Are you @Sir Ralph Wedgwood?

Dave B

 

I believe he had a large family, all of whom seemed to want to change their names!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Do you really believe that the faithful will rebel? In the past, during Q&A’s, when I have raised probing questions, many grumbled that I was prolonging the meeting and stopping them from getting off to the Works to see the lovely loco and take their pictures.

 

It does seem an odd strategy. It's not like they're burning the midnight oil to try and get it ready - it's weeks away from being able to work on the mainline. Even if it hadn't had any problems at the GCR, would there have been enough time to arrange a low loader to get it to Tyseley and get it mainline tested at any point in the next couple of weeks?

I realise they're in an awkward situation where the loco is the only source of income so needs to be out earning its keep, but continually missed deadlines don't instill any confidence.

 

It's really not helpful.

1. You say don't shoot the messenger, but you didn't deliver the message. You just had (yet another) go at the trust.
2. Your message merely repeats your messages of the last number of months, which does not help the loco get back in service.

Yes mistakes have been made, but you constantly complaining and having a go on here will not help.

 

Nothing unusual about this overhaul (aside from the fitting of ETCS). It has had a comprehensive rebuild which has taken around 3 years. It is being recommissioned and some teething issues have been found - all pretty standard stuff.

What is unusual is that those in charge have set totally unrealistic targets for its return and have been bitten in the ar*e as a result.

Im sure hard lessons around expectation management and reputational damage will be learnt.

I look forward to booking behind when it has passed all it's tests.

 

Nothing unusual? Only required about half the tyre thickness to be turned off the wheels so that the clearance of the firebox would be OK.

 

The first, and by no means the least, being that they would achieve all of this in 6 months, and then marketing tours on this basis!

 

Yes, an attitude I've seen elsewhere. "Shut up, we want our dinner/to go to the pub/go home"...

 

What worries me is that we get chapter and verse on the defective firebar and then
"We hope to resume soon, once some other minor defects have been attended to..."

They've had to drop the fire, which would lose a day's running, but they are cancelling a railtour 3 weeks away.

It is possible that there are insufficient paths available at the GC to run in (allowing for time for transporting etc), but if the programme was so tight that a minor defect like that kyboshes the timescale (as viewed from the point the tour was advertised), then it seems a very small contingency was allowed.

If, OTOH, these other defects are the problem, then it would be interesting to know what these are.

In other industries, it is pretty typical for the party trying to avoid liability for delay to go into great detail on the items that give them from relief for delay, and be vanishingly unspecific about items that are their liability in the hope of avoiding the causation being analysed.

It would be a shame if this were the case here.

 

Thank you for speaking my mind