The Border Raider with 60163 - 16/09/17

I really wish I'd had a look at this sooner. I've been trying see steam across Stockport viaduct for ages, and the fact it was round about sundown could have made for a superb silhouette shot.

Buggrit.

 

KGX-Newcastle is the route I was thinking is most likely to be done with a 90mph certified engine.

 

Serious question, will A1ST have had to take a hit on this one to achieve their efforts to still keep an interesting itinerary despite NR's best efforts?

I am thinking (and this would apply to any TOC or promoter I hasten to add) extra access charges for the additional miles, extra costs for the TOC - in that I imagine DBC don't have steam crews signing a lot of the return route at least and thus additional conductors would be needed in additional to footplate crew and paid for, arranging logistics for watering and coaling at very short notice. In addition to the strain on volunteers (stewards and support crew)?

They did a fantastic job to snatch a very successful win from the jaws of a defeat not of their making, but I would imagine rather than these epics there is probably easier funds to be raised through simpler operations?

Very laudable effort by all involved though.

 

As I recall it was just about dark going across the viaduct so you probably did not miss a lot.

 

The size and influence of DBC no doubt helped with the rapid replanning being effectively implemented. I am doubtful WC would have been able to exercise the necessary clout in the time available, but perhaps WC might have done the 2+2 sooner? Absolute credit though to all that made sure this was such a success.

 

I have to disagree with you there. IIRC on a Tin Bath not many years back, the route had been affected by some problem - derailment perhaps but I forget exactly what. The tour departed as scheduled but while it was en route, NR and WC got their heads together to modify the the route to get round the problem to allow the tour to continue. Others on here may have a better memory of what occurred that day.

 

Thats a good example of emergency replanning on the day of operation when NR is perhaps more obligated to find a path. I remain sceptical that a like for like scenario would have seen WC treated as favourably. That is not dig at WC, by the way, before anyone sets that hare running.

 

Here's my provisional log of the outward journey. Pretty much as recorded, and therefore perhaps too much detail - especially Crewe to Preston! Apologies.
Will review and upload a streamlined version. But folk are always asking how fast was it going at X or Y.

Have done some horsepower calcs based on a tare load of 469 tons, gross load of 505 tons and total incl loco of 671 tons:-

Boars Head: 7 02 Frog Lane UB to 8 60 Boars Head OB, 1 in 104, 1,925 edhp
Grayrigg (upper): 20 76 Birds Park UB to 26 01 Grayrigg OB, ave 1 in 119, 1,705 edhp
Shap (whole): 31 43 OB to 37 22 FB, ave 1 in 88, 1,775 edhp
Shap (upper): 33 27 Birkbeck Via S to 37 22 FB, 1 in 75, 1,834 edhp

So solid rather than exceptional outputs.

Return to follow later in the week.

 

Thanks Shaun. Pretty much what was said by the crews. Not pushed too hard due to the weather and rail head conditions. looking forward to Part 2..

 

This one: https://www.national-preservation.c...“extra”-sunday-7th-november-2010.27286/page-2

What happened starts at #39. @RalphW summarises later in the thread. I was on it and it turned out OK despite the missed climbs.

 

If you stopped making unnecessary comparisons between the TOCS in some of your posts then that particular hare would never leave the trap.

Dave B

 

We will never know will we....

 

There is a standard set of rules (notice periods, delivery etc), which have been agreed between all charter TOCs and NR planners and are there to ensure fair play; it is a fundamental that NR, as a monopoly supplier, has to demonstrate equal treatment, under Regulatory scrutiny.

When the wheel comes off the cart, for whatever reason, it is then down to best remaining endeavours, to try and ensure the fare-paying passengers (who, of course, have no say in what might have caused the problem) get something other than a cancellation, The NR charter planners are small and dedicated bunch but are nonetheless a finite resource and it is inevitable, however, that there will be a knock-onto other charters, such as late delivery of timings.

To suggest preferential treatment is disingenuous (as was your previous comment about route knowledge).

 

Thanks for this, all the footage ive seen so far is of a continuous high, but as you say not exceptional output with that distinctive Kylchap chatter, Kylchatter ! is that a word ?.... it is now.

 

I thought you only got that with Jeremy Kyle

Dave B

 

Why remain sceptical? Arguably WC and NR pulled an even bigger rabbit out of the hat by rescheduling the Tin Bath en route than DBC and NR did by planning the rerouting of a tour before the day of the event.

Edit : James Shuttleworth has explained it much better than I could.

 

Oh it is, it sure as hell is.

 

There is nothing disingenuous about it James because it was an expression of opinion rather than any assertion of fact. My scepticism is reserved for NR, notwithstanding your excellent explanation of the regulatory framework, in its actual fulfilment of statutory obligations on each and every occasion. I also tend towards the suspicion that an ecosystem effect is inherent within all regulatory controlled environments. However, I absolutely defer to the superior basis upon which your convictions are based that compliance is intrinsic to the industry in which you work.
As regards the further remark you make aboyt route knowledge, this is again an area of genuine question. My assumption is that route knowledge has a finite life dependent on a driver having used it within any maximum interval. If that is a false premise, I would be totally pleased for you to publicly debunk it by explaining a little of how WC manages this requirement.
Thanks as always in advance if you can spare the time to respond.

 

I won't hold my breath for you to thank me for my "unnecessary" question eliciting a genuinely informative response from a factual source. You're welcome by the way.