Cumbrian Mountain Express - 14/10/17

Is there anything to stop you running these trains on Sunday's when more paths are possibly available, I know there are weekend problems round the coast due to signal box closures is it the same down to Clitheroe?

 

Agree with most of that. What seems to be a factor for RTC is the additional cost of hiring stock means the break even demands a longer train, class 8 etc. Perhaps if WC had the CMEs in house even from London it would be more flexible.
Secondly, diesel assistance per se is not the real issue to me, sometimes its wholly necessary for operational reasons. My ONLY gripe is where any lack of transparency results from PLANNED operations not disclosed.
For the rest I would suggest discretion is very much the better part of valour so avoiding unmitigated risks should be paramount in order that unwanted scrutiny results in cessation.

 

That would be disappointing for the loco performance analysts in our hobby. The only other way would be to up the ticket price in order to make a decent margin from shorter trains, but I doubt the wider market would put up with that.

 

Sadly you cannot please everyone (or in WCRC's case - anyone).... Hard questions need difficult answers and ultimately it will all come down to basic economics, initially I suppose you could reduce the loads over shap to the bare minimum, drop the loadings and up the prices and see what happens - possibly as a one off trial...

 

Are you of the opinion the likes of WC, RTC et al would be open to suggestions and recommendations?

 

In the past there were far more trips on Sundays than today but there didn't seem to be so many line closures for engineering works back then as single line/wrong line working seemed to be the preferred option rather than line closure and replacement buses.

 

How many CME's have run this year without issue? No point trying to solve an issue that does not actually exist - although I accept 90% of NP would not exist if that were the case! I have always felt the CME itinerary works pretty well, with a good balance of time, performance and scenery. It also provides very useful employment for Les Ross.

As was said previously, in leaf fall season a second loco would be preferable - I am sure the vast majority of us would prefer that to be steam rather than diesel. It would be interesting to know if a second steam engine is much more (or at all) expensive to provide than a 47, given West Coast can provide both from its own stable.

I remember several VT tours that used a second steam engine on the traditional diesel legs as at the time it was cheaper than hiring in a diesel - this was I think before VT had their own certified diesel.

 

Other problem with Sundays if even if your route is open chances are those for connecting passengers are not. Plus it is certainly difficult to get to London for a 0700ish departure on a Sunday unless you are on the Tube Network, and last trains are earlier of course as well.

 

Mr Riley has ventured two is only marginally greater cost than 1. He should know and 44871 was only a short trip from Carnforth away.

 

We are in the good old days right now. Fantastic performances by Jubilees and a Scot on the northbound climb to Shap followed by the Long Drag or the Cumbrian coast. Around fifteen northbound runs so far this year. The right LMS loco's on the right lines. A 90mph A1 next year on the ECML. And for me one of the highlights of this year was photographing Leander on 30th September storming past Scout Green in appalling weather then down to Gresford to see Castle 5043 flatten Gresford bank. Right loco's on the right lines, these are the good old days.

 

Wonder if the Cumbrian Coast route would ever have been considered if it hadn't been for the S&C's issues? Seem to recall coaches with drop lights being barred north of Sellafield being the original problem with that route?

Sorry for the thread drift...
...again

 

Flooding would be a significant issue if Hellifield was on the Cumbrian Coast..

 

oops, bloody predictive text lol! Edited

 

Putting Saturday's performance on Wilpshire in context, last night's Clitheroe to Avonmouth cement train managed to lose 251 minutes between Clitheroe and Daisyfield Junction.

 

It's strange that the RHTT programme still seems to be rather limited at the moment rather than running the full complement of trains. I don't think there's any scientific reason for leaf fall from trees in the vicinity of Network Rail to follow a radically different pattern from elsewhere and in my back garden, I have already amassed a very substantial pile of fallen leaves ready for my next bonfire while there are plenty more awaiting the attention of my garden rake. Thankfully, unlike Network Rail, the only wheeled object which has to try to run over them is my wheelbarrow!

 

No, I rather thought not. Pity, there is a great deal of wheat amongst the chaff.

 

I only wish they had bought more RHTT fluid and been out with it, not only because the trains would have run okay, but also because we make and supply it!
It's not only leaf fall that's the problem, it's any lineside vegetation that gives the same effect. As plants/leaves/vegetation falls over and decomposes, they give off volatile sticky/slippy substances into the surrounding atmosphere. This material sticks to anything substantive, and you don't get anything more substantive than a bright steel railhead. Moisture in the form of settling dew exacerbates the problem many fold.
Because the sticky substances vary according to the plant source, so the fluid is a mixture of several compounds capable of dissolving almost anything it comes across. As far as I am aware, our fluid is the only one approved by Scientifics (Railway test house) for use. We spent a lot of time ensuring the fluid didn't upset the environment (frogs having two heads etc), and didn't leach some of the nasty heavy metals out of the ballast, dropped over years from lubricants from passing trains. Lesson over!