6201 Princess Elizabeth

I must start by apologizing if this post comes across as unstructured, as this is the first time I’ve posted on this Forum and I’m still learning the ropes. First, let me introduce myself. My name is Dave Cresswell, and I am a 44 year old active member of the Locomotive 6201 Princess Elizabeth Society. I have been registered on this Forum since March, but I have only been a “Lurker” up till now. As a relative newcomer to the railway preservation movement, I don’t usually feel I have anything of interest to say, so like many of the fascinating threads on the Forum, I have just been following this particular one with interest, but without the urge to contribute. However, as I was hoping for more positive support for 6201 after my colleague Steve Blakemore’s post on Wednesday, I am truly disheartened by some of the posts following it.

The comments throughout this thread have, in the main, been very critical of the Society’s chairman, seemingly due to a concern that moves were afoot to end 6201’s mainline career. However, as soon as it was revealed that the Society and particularly its Chairman, are determined to return the locomotive to the mainline next year, posts appeared that seem to discourage donations towards remedial work on the boiler. I agree that everyone has the right to an opinion, but it would be sad if the tone of this thread leads to a failure to raise funds, or leads to the Train Operating Companies not giving 6201 work, through fear of it lacking a guaranteed return.

As I have mentioned, I am merely an active member of the Society and hold no position of authority (although I have been approached to be the Society Safety Officer) so my comments here are unofficial, but do have the benefit of first hand experience of recent events involving Lizzie. I would like to address some of the issues raised here, by describing how I got involved with the Society. Back in 2006, Princess Elizabeth was at the SVR Autumn Steam Gala and one of its spare nameplates was raffled off to raise funds for the Society. Much to my surprise, I won the nameplate and when I went to collect it, the Society Engineer Roy Kerry and Secretary, Tony Harries, made me feel very welcome. Prior to this, I had no particular interest in this locomotive, but now that I owned part of it, I decided to find out more about it. I had purchased a 6201 DVD and used the address on the back to contact Clive Mojonnier who was more than happy to talk to me about the locomotive. After a short correspondence, he asked if I would like to join the Society, which I did and I offered my services in any capacity. Jill Mojonnier gave me a job on sales and after 8 months I was asked if I would like to join the working party. Roy then asked if I was prepared to go on a course to qualify for a Network Rail Sentinel (Personal Track Safety) card, which involved learning safe practices when working on or near a railway line. As a holder of a PTS card I was allowed to join the Support Crew and basically help the more experienced crew members, with a view to learning the ropes and hopefully gradually become more useful.

I have had the pleasure of meeting a lot of the 6201 society members, who have all been very kind and of course, I have probably met many of the people who have posted to this thread. Many people here don’t reveal their names, but of course I do recognise the people who are brave enough to use their own names here and I have a great deal of respect for them as members of the preservation movement. Obviously I know Colin Worral Steve Blakemore and Richard, who are my fellow Support Crew members, Ian Riley, who has devoted a lot of time and resource to keeping Lizzie going and Adrian Hassell, who was Lizzie’s fireman on the SVR during the Royal visit and who kindly gave me a lift back to Bewdley on the footplate, after we had had the honour of meeting the Prince of Wales (Lizzie was in reserve for the Royal Train). This past year with Lizzie has certainly been a happy one for me and so it is particularly devastating that there is so much acrimony aimed at people I consider friends.

I am particularly sad that Roy, our Engineer and the person I considered to be my mentor, felt that he had no other choice but to walk away from 6201, which was in effect a major part of his life. I don’t think anyone comes out of this episode with any dignity. Everyone at the Society’s AGM back in September will testify that Roy resigned from his position as Engineer to the Society and did not retire, which is the impression our Chairman has given. I can only assume that Clive’s statement to the national press was not intentionally misleading, but an attempt to extricate all those involved from a potentially damaging situation with as much dignity as possible. Obviously this backfired and probably did more harm than good, as most people knew Roy’s real reason for leaving, before Clive even issued the statement. Obviously I am not aware of all the details, but the crux of the matter is that Roy wanted Lizzie to return to Bury, i.e. Riley & Son (E) Ltd, for the overhaul, whereas, Clive wanted the locomotive to finish the last trip at Crewe. The majority of the Society’s committee voted with Clive, so 6201 ended up in Crewe. Roy’s desire to take Lizzie to Bury is understandable, as not only is Riley & Son there, but it is also where the spares for the locomotive are stored. I understand that most of the work carried out on 6201 has been undertaken at Riley & Son’s, in the recent past. However, I understand that the Society’s funds have been diminishing with regular payouts for running repairs. Any well-run business will get a number of quotes for a job and give the work to the most competitive bidder. I gather that this was not being done, or at least Riley & Son was in effect being given a monopoly. Whether this is true or not; that is the impression which has been given. Unfortunately, instead of coming to some diplomatic agreement, personalities have got in the way, causing this sad state of affairs. I have suggested to Clive that the committee is as much to blame, as it perhaps should have made its financial concerns known to Roy with more vigour. With regard to Frank’s point about the ELR not being informed that Lizzie was not returning to Bury, if this is indeed true it is unforgivable. I must admit, I didn’t know our final destination until the day before the trip. I presume the decision had been made prior to the Friday, but why no one was informed, mystifies me. In the admittedly brief time I have been on the operational side of the Society, I have never seen anyone act with anything less than complete professionalism. I can easily imagine that at the time, feelings were running high and perhaps the main protagonists thought that they wouldn’t bother phoning, expecting the other one to do it. Nevertheless, it was a major lapse, if true.

I get the impression from this thread that people think that Lizzie is some how stranded and without engineering support. Anyone familiar with Crewe Heritage Centre will know that it shares the site with LNWR Heritage which has submitted a quote to carry out the boiler repairs. I understand that two quotation requests have been sent out, but only one has been received so far. The main problem is that wherever the locomotive is situated, automatically has an advantage over their competitors, which was one of the issues with going back to Bury. It costs something like £4000 to move a locomotive, so if a competing company wants the work, they have to either charge for moving the locomotive, or charge for transporting parts and labour to the locomotive. Thinking about it, it would have been fairer to negotiate a price for the repairs before 6201 had completed its last trip and used the trip to get back to the lowest priced engineering company. But of course, that would have required the boiler inspection well in advance of the trip.

I was particularly concerned by Tracklayer’s post on 6th November. He states that 6201 “seems to do little mainline work,” and says that “the difference in mileage between, for example, 6201 and 6233 is huge.” Lizzie undertook 10 mainline excursions between 23rd February and 30th August, with destinations ranging from Kingswear in the south, to Scarborough in the north. 6201 also hauled service trains on the SVR and ELR. I don’t know exactly how many trips 6233 did, but just adding up those mentioned on UK Steam, comes to 13 prior to 30th August and a further 3 to the end of the year. I wouldn’t exactly describe this difference in operations “huge.” Tracklayer also asks if 6201 has been asked to stand in at short notice for another locomotive. Our first trip was as stand in for Gresley, and we also stood in for the Duke on some of the RTC August operations. I know of at least two of our trips that have had to be cancelled due to line closures. I do hope Tracklayer will consider giving at least a small sum towards keeping 6201 going for its last three years on the mainline, then by all means put it “on a plinth for a few years.”

The concern over 6201 being open to the elements at its current location is a valid one and it is hoped that some form of protection can be found for it in the short term, although as has already been mentioned, many heritage railway locomotives have in the past, spent several winters stabled outdoors and they are still with us.

As for the Society being “bereft of funds,” I understand that the Society already has sufficient money to cover around 40% of the cost, so if every one of the 123 small tubes are sponsored for £80 each, then the outstanding funding will be well on the way to being covered. Steve asked in his post, that further details should be obtained directly from the Society’s chairman. Unfortunately, Clive is not on line (surprisingly in this day and age) and I know how awkward it is sometimes to write a letter or phone. So if anyone would like more details, such as an address to send funding, or where membership enquiries should be sent, please PM me and I will be happy to help.

The Support Crew has lost some key members due, it seems, to personality differences. However, there are a number of us remaining who are determined to put 6201 before our personal differences and endeavour to run her on the mainline again, so that when the time does come, she can go out in style and not sink without trace in a sea of acrimony.

Sorry for the massive post and congratulations to all who managed to read it all the way through without falling asleep! I hope that it has been helpful, but more importantly, I hope my grammar and spelling have passed the exacting scrutiny of the Forum seniors. ;-)

Hope to see you around,

Dave.

 

Hi

Thankyou for this well written and clearly understandable post of what you see and what you know to be going on as a member of the 6201 society and support crew.

Alex

 

No need to appologise - the input is interesting...

I appologise if my comments were not factual. They showed my perception of the activity as 6201 has been far from the limelight IMO. I am happy to stand corrected on that one.

That said, I believe that the group need to tidy themselves up a little. There have obviously been problems intearnally and they are affecting the profesionalism of the group. I still don't believe the loco to be attractive to new members and fresh support.

It is not just a problem with this group but many on the railways and beyond, Profesionalism and Communication are key.

 

Well done Dave - as an insider you are in the best position to obtain information - and possibly to get personalities put to one side and good objective business sense under way again in the interests of 6201 which is what the society is all about.

I hope the figures you have mentioned are correct. The last figures that I had in September would have been considerably less effective in a short term certification budget.

There seems to be a problem with the costs of engineering work emerging. I have no axe to grind and would thoroughly understand anyone testing the market when figures of this magnitude are in play.

One has to put alongside this, however, the timing of obtaining estimates, and placing work, so as to maintain cash flow - which has been lost here to the tune of at least six months; the reputability of work eventually done - which I am not in a position to comment on, and the fact that at Crewe - she can't earn a penny towards her keep - not the situation at Bury where she would also have had a roof over her head.

To voluntarily move away from that reality would be a compelling reason for any motivated member to walk away and I for one - all personalities put to one side - can see no business sense at all in what was done that night.

We are where we are - get her back on track - and then find a good permanent enclosed home for her thereafter - preferably one where there is sufficient business capacity and operating enthusiasm to write a business case to keep her running, as I have to say - Crewe is an engineering base - not the home of a main line operator

 

Hope to see you around too Dave.

It may not be the shortest post ever on this site, but it has to be the fairest and most informative post on this subject and other than certain subscribers offering apologies to others, there probably isn't much more that can be usefully said.

The members of the Lizzie Society would do well to keep their eyes on this man, he has all the hallmarks of being a worthy successor to the late, great Ken Andrews.

 

May I add my thanks to DaveC and congratualtions on a post which, far from his initial warning, is in fact an object lesson in logically detailing events with clarity and completeness. Indeed, with his sensible comments on the various opptions and decisions, I would suggest to others involved with 6201 that Dave seems a very valuable member of the team.

The issues Dave hightlights will seem very familiar to anyone involved in either the engineering or finance side of railway preservation. I would tend to agree that a move back to Bury would have enabled the loco to earn some money (I understand that the East Lancs is one of a number of lines looking to hire in locos to handle heavy Santa traffic) but Steve's point is also correct that there are few lines where this amounts to daily income. Indeed, even a number of the larger ones that do have a regular requirement for more than one loco in traffic aim to primarily use locos they don't pay for by the day or mile, and I can tell you why when you see how much those costs add up to!

Whilst some of the negativity towwards the appeal for 6201 may almost appear to be sour grapes that a solution is at hand (and in the hands of enthusiasts rather than a "faceless" committee), the point I raised earlier was that large locos will struggle to fund themselves on the mainline. I think everyone would agree there is no room to raise tour ticket prices, and most loco can't get the sort of semi-daily work that makes The Jacobite seem so attractive (although this operation is a major commitment for owners concerned). It should also be recalled that hiring a steam loco to work a mainline excursion is different from the same loco being hired on a preserved railway. As Ian Riley has pointed out elsewhere on here, on the mainline you prerpare your own loco - the driver and fireman very much "walk on and off" compared with a heritage line crew. This may well be better for the owner in that they have more assurance of the standard of preparation etc. but it means that the owner is supplying a locos and support crew, not just the loco (and often a single owners rep). This has to affect how much work they can commit to on the mainline.

The real problem here (and, to be fair, I think the 6201 Society have been flagging this up for some time) is that mainline running is simply not, by itself, viable. I don't have an up to date figure for the fee per trip - Clive had quoted £10,000 per trip as the loss in the press after the Steam Affairs cancellations, but I understand that both coal and water, and certification costs etc. have to come out of that, so I am guessing the average trip leaves between £6,000 and £8,000 after direct costs. If the owners have to use contractors for any repairs, then maybe an average of £70,000 to £80,000 after direct costs per annum will soon become much less, and a large loco is easily going to cost £500,000 plus (6100 is supposed to be about £1 million, and other locos have been over £700,000) for a 10 year overhaul. If running costs can be kept to a third of net income, then it might just about work, but the impression with at least a couple of locos is that intermediate repairs have used much more than this.

Hence, many locos will struggle with the next overhaul and I don't think either the Lottery or enthusiasts will be in a position to help them all. Perhaps 6201 has achieved the unfortunately position of being the first loco to highlight this.

 

Well said Dave, an inspirational post. It is time you were offered a position on our committee ,which is lacking in people like you who put 6201 first not themselves. I believe we will soon have a new Membership Sec/Newsletter Editor, lets hope he is of the same calibre as you, and will speak up for our beloved loco. Dare I say Dave, I hope it is not long before you are our new chairman.

 

Yes, good post Dave, and thanks. It is inevitable that societies, groups, organisations - call them what you will - are going to face issues from time to time. Its human nature. Wherever a good number of folks are involved, there are bound to be issues. However, there is always a solution to any problem, sometimes it is quick and easy, sometimes it is harder and takes longer. The 6024 society has been through an undesireable episode recently as everyone I am sure is aware, but decisive action, strong leadership, unity and a commitment to the locomotive as the number one priority has seen us come through it. yes some folks have walked away, others have joined, but the King has remained the focus for those who are truly dedicated to the cause, which, same as for Lizzie, is keeping a flagship express loco on the mainline. I wish all who genuinely care passionately aout 6201 the very best, she is a marvelous machine, and here's to a long and successful future on the mainline.

 

slightly off the main points of this, who says there is room at Bury for undercover, the shed is full, regards locos for the santa trains we hasve the k4 and bert htichens black 5 is now with us

 

The current situation therefore seems to have been dictated by a choice of contractor. The chairman seemes not to want to use Bury & Riley whereas the chief engineer did. As the chairman seems to be more involved with the logistics side than the engineer his wish prevailed and the loco is at Crewe. Having seen 6201 from a passing train this week the engine looks a little forlorn but there is hope and engineering expertise close at hand that will surely see the loco back on the main line during 2009. Regards ELR, I don't think there is much true affiliation between the 6201 Society and the railway as it was the on site contractor providing the main attraction as well as the winter covered storage. The 6201 Society have changed bases a number of times during their long and distinguished existence, sometimes of necessity and otherwise for convenience/advantage. An option may be to consider some amalgamation/merger with the PRLT at Butterley where at least the loco could be displayed in a sympathetic environment when not in working order. If there exists the resources to keep the engine operational beyond the current spell, then this could be acheived through co-operation with PRLT to maximise opportunities for both groups and therefore locos.

 

Good post, Dave C.
Without wishing to fan flames, from my contact not only was the ELR kept unaware that 6201 was not returning, since that date the silence from the owning group to the ELR has been deafening as the owning group has not replied to anything, including at least one written request made a month or so ago.

 

6201 is another example of a group who havent moved with the times...
6201 wasnt the first to hit the buffers because of a bad business model... 4472 was surely first...

To me the 6201 group are acting like spoilt homeless children...

They dont want to earn peanuts on a preserved line inbetween mainline running, but instead want hand outs to fund their occasional feast..

reading this is the tale of 2 engines both cash strapped both needing repairs both have the same home in Lancashire....

71000 goes out earns some small winter money on preserved lines / galas and plans to save for next year after a summer seeing the engine go over Scotland, West Coast, East Coast, Midland, Wales and West Country..Starting from just about every major city in the country even deputising for 6201 on a number of occasions.

6201 refuses to go home, after a summer of starting from Crewe, Liverpool or Carnforth to York, Holyhead or Carlilse, sits in a siding and refuses to earn any money, instead plans to beg, steal and borrow for next year. Following a squabble people go different ways, the engine in a poor place for repairs which may be more expense.

71000 is refined and modified to increase it's performance and travels anywhere in the country for money, and enthusiasts become excited at seeing it everytime in a different place. There is constant hype about the ever touring engine. Even after a break down 200 miles away it treks home for repair.. as obviously this must have been the cheaper option.

6201 never changes, sticks to the same routes and only goes out on selective occasions... enthusiasts dont bother to go on it as nothing changed since 1972.

Both need money...Who would you rather donate money to ?

 

71000 is rostered to run at the ELR on both Saturday and Sunday 22 and 23 November, together with 61994.
It will be interesting to see what locos are rostered at the ELR in early 2009. I am sure that 71000 will be one of them, because it is a crowd puller.

 

Has 6201 ever been asked to stand in at short notice for another loco. There have been plenty of times this year when a big engine has dropped out and a tour been cancelled - or that same tour operated by somthing like a Black 5 because the operator knows they can call the owner and get a YES.[/quote]


Sidmouth was right in his answer, but only one of a number of stand ins.

3/6/2006 Doncaster - Carlisle RTC Stand in for 71000

10/6/2006 Skipton - Carlisle - Preston RTC 71000

7/10/2006 Taunton - Plymouth - Taunton RTC 6024

16/6/2007 Carlisle - Doncaster RTC 71000

20/7/2007 Derby - Scarboro - Derby RTC 71000

15/9/2007 Bristol - Shrewsbury Past Time 6024
When 6201 was booked for the return working

23/2/2008 Hellifield - Carlisle - Carnforth Past Time 60007

29/3/2008 Bristol P - Kingswear - Exeter RTC 6024

Interestingly 6201 had never been booked for a tour in its own right by RTC until Aug 2008, when 4 tours were planned but 5 actually ran. Only 1 on its original date to its original destination the other 4 being stand ins for the non appearing 71000 or failed 60009.

Hope this answers your question

STEVE BLAKEMORE 6201 Support Crew Member

 

I stand corrected and I blatantly do!

 

Rumour has it that dismantling work has been started by LNW at Crewe, any comments?

 

I was told yesterday that a contract has been signed with CHC at a figure substantially less than was being quoted elsewhere and that material is on order. I don'tknow about a start on work so cannot comment.

This must of course be balanced with the period of time that the loco has been isolated to stand outside in the wind and rain, not capable of earning a penny towards those repairs, and the internal friction and resignations within the supporting group that followed the hasty decision to abandon the previous accommodation arrangements to which there will, in the long term, be a cost in terms of available staffing resources etc that were previously set up.

 

Its not a rumour, work has commenced, =D> =D> =D>

 

First , may I thank everyone for their kind comments following my post about Lizzie. Also I would like to thank again those who, as a result of my post, have made donations towards getting 6201 back on the mainline. The funds are steadily growing. If any of the people who made very generous offers on pages 9 and 10 of this thread would also care to contact me by PM I would be happy to pass on the details of how to donate to 6201’s overhaul. In particular Mark (ipod) in your small print you stated “Conditions apply and they are available on request.” Please can you PM your conditions and I’ll make sure they are reviewed by the appropriate people. ;-)

Regarding the progress of the repairs, as D1963 quite rightly confirms, funds have been cleared to allow work to commence on the boiler. I understand that the quotation from LNWR Heritage Ltd. (not, as Frank thought, Crewe Heritage Centre which is a separate company) has been accepted by the Society and the cost of work is close to £22500 as reported to the 6201 Society members. This may be reduced if we can do some of the brick arch replacement ourselves. Lizzie has been shunted to a less exposed area of the site, closer to the boiler shop and a well wagon has been buffered up to the front to work from when extracting the tubes. The blast pipe has been removed and the smokebox has been generally cleared ready for the next stage. Here's a link to a couple of recent photographs:-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24982765@N07/sets/72157609631974309

To address Frank’s concerns, I am on the working party which has been visiting 6201 every weekend to keep an eye on the condition of the metalwork. All gauges have been removed for protection, paintwork has been polished and bright steelwork has been coated in rust inhibitor. So rest assured, the locomotive is in good hands.

Regards,

Dave.