West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Can't say I would want to shower in water prepared for the boilers of a steam loco. Would suggest watering from a water crane would not be clever.

 

Harking back to my formative years a 2 wheeled bowser was used for topping up carriage tanks, how about recreating them for the 800s?

 

Very good points I'd missed that and thanks for the images on Google, so you would just have to add to the list taking the roadside parking in Railway Street into the railway boundary to give you the width, extending the platform and moving the new footbridge steps/slope back about 12 feet. All do able and would add about £2 million to the bill. It sounds like fantasy BUT just look at other things that are happening in the UK including the GCR putting bridges over a busy NR mainline and a canal, plus rebuilding all of the lines and embankments on both sides and rearranging their workshops, that is a much larger project than this proposal, so never say never. However the first thing is always where is the money going to come from ?

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now #155

Bishops Lydeard 1989 / 2017

For many of us, the WSR moved up to the ‘big league’ with the period that ‘Evening Star’ came on loan from the National Railway Museum, arriving on 11 March 1989. It is seen here on arrival by road.. As well as the equivalent shot today, I have included one of 19 March 1989 at Minehead of the crew preparing her for traffic - some earlier versions of WSR faces there - and of ES storming past Stogumber.

Such a shame she now stands cold and lifeless in York.

Copyright Rob Lindley / Robin White / Graham Stagg / Keith Strickland

11.3.89


2017


19.3.89


1989

 

All very well but the essential first step is surely to establish if there really is sufficient demand to make the project financially viable, and acceptable to the WSR PLC. Without the first there is no point in looking further. All the proposals I have seen would effectively destroy the heritage rail aspect of the WSR so why would the shaeholders agree to that?

 

That post may make sense to those who already know what is going on in the background but it makes little sense to the rest of us. In particular

seems to mean that some of the present PLC Board ought to be resigning, just after some have already done so.

Some indication of the general area of the issue(s) needing to be resolved, and why further resignations would be a positive step, would help to discourage speculation.

 

The Acting Chairman has already stated his position. It would probably be best if he, and his fellow director,s were given some breathing space.

 

I quite agree, Peter, with the first part of your posting (is there "sufficient demand") although I suggest there is certainly "some demand" which is why this topic keeps cropping up. I'm not entirely convinced the Plc (a mere leaseholder) would be able to veto any plans thrust on it by "higher authority". If, through huge public subsidy, it all works out to be financially viable to the Plc (even if not to everyone else) how could it resist anyway? The money would come in handy. As for the Plc shareholders - they rarely get the chance to agree to anything the Plc does or does not do (at least that is the experience of this shareholder). Now if it was all owned by a charitable organisation and run by its competent commercial arm...perhaps now is as good a time as any for that cocoon

Don't worry I haven't gone over to the "other (MRLG) side"! Just lobbing thoughts about.

Steve

 

Sorry Steve but AFAIK no demand other than the incessant ones from MCOC has been demonstrated. Time after time, after time MCOC have been asked for estimates of demand and costs. They have produced absolutely nothing except WIBN. As for the PLC if any shrehoders want to put a motion to a general meeting they can do so within the compay's rules. Cocoon?????

 

Ken

I was (obviously unsuccessfully) trying to be amusing. On its inaugural press run, the air con on the unit showered water over the assembled (and seated) great and good.

I believe the source of the problem has been identified and fixed.

Robin

 

I have now had the circumstances reported to me by about six different routes, such that the Station Cat at Bishops Lydeard knows what happened.

It is reported that Alan Nicholson proposed a way forward on a number of significant issues. However, he did not carry his Board. He therefore did the honourable thing and resigned, and Paul Hancock went with him.

It would not be right to set out those issues in public, for a number of reasons.

No doubt the new Chairman and Board will need to consider how to tackle the issues, which will not have gone away. No doubt, when they are ready, they will communicate with the wider world. It is right, now, to give them thinking time.

Robin

 

I think we're on the same side, Peter, on this matter. You are quite right to question their mission. From their point of view, they see a railway linked to the main line that for long periods is unused. It is not unreasonable to explore how more use might be made of that resource - the WSR Plc itself already engages in doing just that. However, as you know, there's a long list of questions that need to be answered even before a (public) penny is spent on a feasability study. MRLG is the more likely place for answers. MCoC is nothing more than a trade association and only exists to serve its members interests (ie not the rest of us). My dealings with MCoC have produced some answers which verge on ridiculous, especially as they form part of the basis for the cause. My dealings with MRLG have provided no answers but do show a fervent desire for a train service. Regardless of how I feel about their aims, I think we shouldn't ignore that enthusiasm (even if it is WIBN). Perhaps I should say I have been asked on more than one occasion to add to wsr.org.uk a few news items about their mission. You will not find a single mention and until I get quality answers to the questions about demand, funding, damage to a successful local business, and so on, that's how it stays. I agree with your point about Plc shareholders putting motions forward (within company rules), but I was rather more commenting on how few specific major proposed policies are put to the shareholders, so I wouldn't expect the Plc to ask the shareholders about any proposed hybrid rail service on our Branch. Hopefully I'm wrong on that. Now, "cocoon" - I have used this term in previous posts when describing my preferred organisational structure for the Railway (I fully understand we may not agree on that!).

Steve

 

The WSR PLC is a company and it is reasonable that it is run like one rather, than as a member's club. I don't think they do badly keeping shareholders, and staff, informed formally and informally. AIUI there are some difficiculties at present, but nothing like the shambles that theWSRA had. Comparisons by some ill informed people with that are very wide of the mark. IMHO it is not appropriate for those to be discussed publicly at this time. Neither MCOC or MRLG really have a clue about the harsh economic, and practical, realities of their aspirations. As a Somerset County Council taxpayer I strongly object to my taxes being wasted on schemes like this when we cannot even look after our elderly, children and sick properly in the County.

RANT OFF!

 

Unless the promoters face up to the realities of their proposals, even the £50K to £100K that a full, formal feasibility study would cost is money thrown away that would be better spent on the people of West Somerset.

Robin

 

Exactly! There is no need for a full feasibility study unless, and until, one proving the passenger demand. Of course MCOC et al won’t dare do that.

 

Another WSR fiasco time to get the popcorn out.

 

Has to be something to fill in the time between the annual pre-Christmas Star Wars film releases.

Robin

 

If indeed matters are/were as you state it perhaps indicates some confusion as to what a Chairman's role is ?

First off I think it is universally accepted that within a Plc the Chairman and CEO ( or variations thereof e.g. COO) should be separate. Are you saying the Chairman has been acting as if the CEO or equivalent ?

A Chairman's role within a Plc is to manage the Board. IMHO he has two (and only two) absolute powers ie to select members of the Board and to decide the agenda ( and the time and emphasis to be given to each item) for a Board Meeting. As a corollary he chairs the Board Meeting ( in many ways he is an arbitrator and if there is no decision the ultimate authority ie he has a casting vote) and relates to the Shareholders.

Michael Rowe

 

Michael, what you are effectively saying is that there ought to be a managing director reporting to an honorary chairman ? Have I misunderstood ?

 

On the run round debate.

Do you need to Run Round in the platform?
Or would it be possible to propel out , RR and then propel back in?
Similar to the previous situation at Whitby.
Is there a piece of ground wide enough to fit a Loop of sufficient length within a few 100yds of the platforms?