S&C Pathfinder Charter - Aug 2018: Now 16/3/19 and with 60163

Totally agree. As far as I'm aware no promoters made communication with paying passengers regarding the fire risk position. I know from my experience that Pathfinder didn't even bother contacting paying passengers on the 15/16th July about the change in motive power when the A1SLT made their announcement on their website. To clear up the refund position, we didn't get one. All they did was issue a credit note to the value of 50% of the £500 payment I made in real money to be used at my risk again with them in the next 12 months if and that's a very big if they run a train I want to do. It will in all likelihood end up in the shredder.

 

What is possibly more priceless (or classless) is choosing to slate a fellow poster in a random thread and not having the common courtesy/balls (delete as appropriate) to put @goldfish thus letting them be aware of your remarks and giving a right of reply....

 

I would imagine one benefit being that the WCRC crews drive the route on a regular basis whilst I assume that DBC steam crews at best drive rarely with steam and maybe even were conducted?

 

We have had a lot of rain at times, but its been very localised, so for instance we had heavy showers on Saturday afternoon, but the next village 2 miles away had nothing at all, possibly this local knowledge was used by WCRC?

 

I don't find the potential loss for a loco owner unpalatable it is simply one more unfortunate consequence of the ban. What I do think, which may be controversial, in the hierarchy of consideration where financial detriment is concerned, the customer comes first and the businesses secondary. Without custom there is no train to haul and the engine owners have nothing to help offset their investment.
It also borders on the absurd in my opinion to drag a loco the length of the country in total to act as a 130t brake valve cum whistle. If we are so worried about cost, where is the sense in that?

 

TBF, our golf course was fine yesterday, yet others within a 5 mile radius were closed, so a good observation.

We know from experience the first few downpours just run off the top, it takes an almost dirty mizzle to get really into the undergrowth to make a difference.

 

It is interesting. DBC were obviously running 'Diesel hauled with steam locomotive in light steam' which I'm sure was quoted on the site last month as being the mode of operation due to the high fire risk. Can't find it unfortunately.

In response to Big Al's post: "My info says DL behind loco as train engine but on the day who knows?"; James Shuttleworth replied last Wednesday "I do. Having just got off the fire-risk conference call, the status remains 'high' on LNW(N); it was therefore agreed that all three trains over the S&C on Saturday will have diesel assistance, with the diesel positioned immediately behind the steam loco. Unfortunately, as one should realise, the weather has little respect for the significance of the date".

So maybe DBC were over cautious.

 

Agreed apart from the 'light steam' comment, in the majority of video's I have seen 60009 is blowing off which suggests either the fireman was expecting her to be doing more or fire management was not very good? Although to be fair looking at the colour of smoke she was belching all the way up shap god only knows what they were firing her on?

Over cautious, who knows I suspect it was a lack of local knowledge, they run very little steam on a lot of the route?

 

I hesitate to wade into this again, but isn't it fairly common knowledge that the steam promotion business is not particularly profitable and downright precarious at times, thus for a promoter... Do you

a) cancel, refund and possibly put the survival of the whole business at risk as one would assume that if the train can run you (but you as promoter choose to cancel) you still have to pay TOC, probably some compensation to food suppliers and I would assume engine owner, also accounting for the x% of passengers who are only on the train to have a day out regardless of motive power and the y% of passengers who booked hotels etc etc but z% (who you know are only a small proportion) will be happy as they want no assistance;
b) run with steam on the front, knowing from your knowledge of the business that 90%+ of passengers will be happy with that; or
c) Just pack up and go home knowing that you will never make everyone (or if you read NP anyone) happy.

Ultimately you pays your money you takes your chance, no doubt this sort of risk analysis is undertaken for every tour, the companies get a lot of repeat custom and they will know whats the most sustainable solution to take in each case, they will know from their databases the likely cancellations and repeat bookings for each scenario and will make a judgement accordingly.

Its not as if there is an unlimited supply of companies running tours, the fact that there has been so much historic failure and consolidation just supports how precarious the market is, I suspect in the not to distant it will come down to 2-3 promoter operators I suggest WCRC, VT and Saphos who provide the lot in house and thus are more able to sustain losses/short term changes, I still suspect that the change in WCRC focus probably says more about how they think the market is going from experience at the coalface?

 

My two pennorth :

1. Not all steam excursions are the same. To cancel the SSE rather than putting a diesel on the back (or front) would be absurd. People are buying a day out over a scenic route with a mix of diesel and steam traction and four hours at the seaside. The Sugar Loaf Mountaineer was in a different category. There are shades of grey in between.

2. The business model is clearly to run about eight steam on the main line trips per week from April to September. The autumn is unfortunately truncated by the leaf fall rules. To cancel all the trains at times of fire risk would have serious consequences for the business model. We have been incredibly fortunate that steam on the main line has been available to people willing to pay from £50/day upwards. No-one wants to see it restricted to the Belmond style operation, beautiful as that train is.

3. I'm prepared to believe that faced with the choice between steam plus diesel or no train, a high proportion of customers prefer steam plus diesel to a late cancellation.

4. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. I decided after the 2013 summer that the risk of advance booking for July/August was simply too great for what I want out of it. But I'm in a small minority. As long as the centre of gravity of the market is to provide a distinctive and memorable day out with steam present that's fine. I have occasionally read the pages of Trip Advisor and the adverse comments are usually about the coaching stock, the heat/cold, or the quality of the dining experience. So I don't really accept this straw man little consumer who is totally ignorant of the risks, cannot read the small print and is deeply unhappy with the outcome. I don't think it's evidence based.

5. I doubt very much that pure steam is an insurable risk--- and if it was, the premia would in the long term equal the compensation from cancelling. No-one wants the situation to be what it is , no-one can question the legitimacy of a ban over the last six weeks, the operators and promoters have done their best with the cards they've been dealt. A lot of business is based on using best endeavours and this is an example of that.

 

Just a thought, but if 90%+ passengers are happy with "showpony" trains, and I suspect you're probably right, what's the problem with offering some more generous refunds to those that aren't so happy beyond a 50% credit note?

IMHO what's happened this summer in general in operational terms has been the only sensible solution, absolutely fine with that. But I was so relieved when I found my tour cancelled purely by chance as opposed to going ahead not in the way I imagined purely because I was worried about the money. having spent a lot of money I wouldn't have been happy with the trip I'd paid for. I'm perfectly willing to accept that most people would be happy, and that's fine. But I was that close to either being £300 down, or paying £300 for something I didn't want. How is that fair, or good business?

 

I don't disagree with a much of the analysis there and others, nor am I particularly an advocate of cancellation. What I do feel strongly is that where circumstances dictate beyond the control of the promoter, the customer should be offered something by way of recognition their purchase has been detrimentally affected, however the promoter chooses to use the diesel. That's all really, it just seems to me the customers don't get accorded the fullest consideration they deserve, given that without them there would be nothing.

 

Possibly so, I don't have all (or in fact any) of the answers, my immediate thought though is where do you stop, do you give a refund if for instance 45690 substitutes for 45699 or if something changes livery between booking and train running?

Again I don't disagree but going back to my earlier point, if there has been an outright cancellation of everything that has not been steam only since the ban how many trains would RTC etc have cancelled, they might be able to sustain 2-3 full refunds but how many before they go bang and you are left with nowt? It may not be good business, but when its a question of business or no business what is 'good business' and thats for company owners and potential passengers, if there is no one promoting steam on the mainline there is no steam?

There are frankly no easy answers that I can think of.... I think we are coming to the end of the Indian summer of main line running, the storm clouds are gathering from all directions.

 

in the case of entertainment, steam powered travel is akin to a fairground ride or a stage show. I f the main attraction is unavailable there will be either a substitute or understudy. Its really not the end of life if things don't go to plan.

 

Completely agree about "the storm clouds gathering from all directions", in hindsight, the mainline offering over the past 8 weeks or so, may help extend that period, think ECML is going to be out of bounds, once new accelerated timetable gets into place, either that or you need a really quick accelerating loco, to move a lighter weight than usual, to get a path.

 

There are no easy answers; the debate shows that. The 'market' has changed. Apparently 90+% just go for a day out. The steam engine is just a part of and not the reason for them going. So we, the enthusiasts, are the afterthought now and won't be missed even though they are aware people like me book 20-30 tours a year spread across all the major promoters. We'll still keep the faith and spend lots of money on more tours for a while yet, and support the locomotive groups. It's good to have forums like this where we can do everything from discussing performance to debating issues that disadvantage us and other travellers, like the Ts&Cs, diesel assistance, diesel substitution et al. By the way where was the 50th Anniversary Golden Express Headboard? Are margins that tight???

 

1985 was once put forward as the limit for steam, david ward via steam railway mag

 

Thanks -

 

To say that most passengers would not care whether the tour was steam hauled, diesel assisted or diesel hauled is disingenuous. They BOUGHT a STEAM HAULED Tour. To claim that the route is the attraction is crass. Just like the Jacobite, the route can be done by normal service train at a fraction of the cost. Last time I was on the Jacobite the Scotrail trains were rammed.

 

The A4 was a disgrace.