Bluebell 2009 "Modernisation"

Dont encourage him....

 

Can you imagine how many saddos you would get if there were diesels running a train service at the Bluebell?
It's bad enough when you get bus gricers at a steam railway without the modern traction types.
Let 'em stay over at the mad hants

 

Maybe the Bluebell could have a mix traction weekend at some point in the future. One way to beat the credit crunch and to keep passenger numbers up. It would be great to see a green crompton and a Oxted/Hampshire unit running up and down the Bluebell.

 

A classic example of how to make friends and influence people....

...... :-#

 

So Mr i_like_trains; i say this because your name suggests a generic term meaning you like ALL trains. at what point do you consider yourself not to be a "saddo" for liking old steam trains? not exactly the coollest thing around is it? i would suggest you refrain from making such childish remarks as you might find one day it comes back to bite you.

Steam, diesels, buses, cars, etc etc etc are all worthy of preservation and peoples constant rubbishing of other peoples efforts help no one.

best regards

just another "Saddo"

 

Hear hear Matt, there is something for everyone in preservation, no matter what you do and what part of the country you do it in.

I did ask this gentleman what his contribution to preservation is in an earlier post on this thread but so far he has not replied. It would appear that this gentleman is fond of being negative behind a user name because he has nothing to offer himself ?.

I could be wrong of course.

Best wishes and the seasons greetings to all.
Chris Willis

 

Out of interest, have the running dates for the 73 been decided yet? I assume that rather like the spoil trains of a couple of years ago it will not run to any set timetable.

 

08168 and 73136-when's the diesel gala?

Of course we will want all those old smelly steam engines hiding out of the way beyond Kingscote.

 

Perhaps instead of resorting to the usual insults and innuendo about things pertaining to kettles, boxes etc we could look at the facts?

Shifting the tip in the Imberhorne Lane cutting is estimated to have a cost of £4-5M. Running a kettle costs upwards of £350 a day, plus maintenance if it is not one on hire. Hiring in a box costs about £50 a day (at least, the first 08 did, allegedly) which saves £1500 a week, or almost £80K over a whole year. So, to all the foaming armchair members who think that paying under £20 a year and turning up once in a blue moon gives you the casting vote, what would you prefer? A box on a spoil train that you will never see, or £80K extra to spend on restoring the next kettle for you to fawn over if you ever bother to visit?

Personally, I'd rather see a hired piece of plant save £300 a day and get itself worn out than waste an extra £300 a day to wear out one of our engines just so that the invisible enthusiasts don't have to worry that a diesel might have traversed our metals. Or, when you want to see 65, 592 etc would you be quite happy to hear that they have been shopped for a general repair because they're knackered after six months of spoil trains just so that might not have seen a diesel had you bothered turn up?

 

Good heavens Nick, when do you get the time to lead a normal life outside the Railway?.

We lesser mortals have to make do with once,( sometimes twice ),a week but only with my Wife,s permission.

Happy new year
Chris Willis

 

congratulations Nick its about time someone told these old fools the truth about economics it makes sense to hire in a diesel and why have BB not got their own one this would make sense seeing as how they have used the hired ones that they had
Engineer

 

A 73? 'Bout bleeding time too. I've seen people saying this for a good 5 years or more. Nice to see some sense has finally, finally filtered through to the powers that be and we can start doing things in a manner more suited to the Swiss railway system than the Sodor railway system...

 

Which is what we all have been saying Mr Engineer for a long time now.

Old fools is one way on putting it . Another way is that in general , (and it happens at all Railways),when one has been in a job too long you run out of idea,s and lose touch with the real world .

Very sad.
Chris Willis

 

Possibly it’s about time that there was a time limit for general mangers and board directors to let new forward thinking people take the helm.

 

Well Lee this is what I have been saying for a long long time now.

The Society rules at most Railways are generally the same whereas you stand for re-election by rotation every three years or so. I have seen the rules slightly vary from Railway to Railway, but basically they are the same.

The problem as I see it is that the official or Director can stand time and time again for the same position. Eventually they become staid and complacent,losing touch with Society members .

I have always thought that part of the American election system shouls apply here. That is the official cum Director stands for say a maximum of eight years , then must stanf down for say a period of five years before seeking re-election.

The gives the opportunity for new blood to stand for election giving fresh impetus and ideas for can in my opinion only be good for the preservation movement.

The only fly in the ointment here would be that those who write the rules are those least likely to want to change the system.

Does anyone else have any thoughts/ideas?

Regards
Chris Willis

 

You dont like, and want to get rid of certain directors and people at the Bluebell. Do we need to revisit this subject yet again?

 

Thats an unkind and unfair statement Christopher as I was replying to someone else.

I was referring to Railways in general

Happy new year
Chris Willis

 

No. Chris has replied to the comment made by another user, I suggest we leave that particular strand there, as it invariably leads to someone, usually me, having to get the key out and stopping it that way. Now, can we get back on topic, please?

 

Clearance of the inert material starts in mid-January, the reasons for using the 73 are explained here.

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/blueb ... tprog.html

46118

 

Firstly my apologies to 'Stepney60' for not being quite on-topic, but I do agree that there ought to be a change of rules at the Bluebell, a change that will ensure that long standing executives of the railway do in practice (not just in theory) step down for a period in that their role is taken over by another.

This isn't to say that the persons required to step down haven't done a good job over their period in office but just to ensure that new blood MUST come forward if any one role in the organisation is to be carried forward. An infusion of new blood is in my view essential if the Bluebell (or any other organisation) is to continue into the future. There is always a risk that if new talent isn't encouraged that there will be a shortage of experience when a long-standing incumbent finally does decide to retire and that is not a healthy position of the railway to be in. It is perfectly possible to imagine, for example, that when the extension to East Grinstead is finally complete many of the senior management team will decide they have had enough (so to speak) and decide to step down then. Those who replace these retiring members will be inherently inexperienced. Not a good thing for a business that is turning over c£1m.

Yes a change of rules, and one that a change of roles isn't just a matter of 'Buggin's turn' will be most helpful in this respect.

(Having said all of that, I would like to offer an observation that the longer a person is in office the more likely they are to clash with those Bluebell members who disagree with any one decision as well as those who are congenitally inclined to argue with everything.)