S&D Railway Trust

I appreciate and sympathise with your dilemma about whether or not to post but, without intending to put the point aggressively, this doesn't alter my view that your decision to do so was the wrong one, for reasons I have probably repeated far too often.

If it really is the case that a trial on Nat Pres. achieves nothing, then it would matter not one jot if you had decided instead to keep to yourself your concerns about the validity issue and a discussion about it had never taken place here. This is, after all, nothing more than an internet discussion forum, the expressions of opinion on which count for little.

Or have I misunderstood, and you believe instead that suppositions and assumptions made here that you see as being wrong need to be corrected?

 

It is not only many on NP that are unhappy about this - even disgusted I may add - don't forget the threats made to a school teacher and the diversion of a grant to a different purpose than was hoped for by many in the local community. Not a pleasant scenario and one wonders how much goodwill still exists locally since one of their major attractions has ceased to feature in the local events calendar.
Curiously a Forties Week End is planned. How incongruous as WW2 was a very busy and hectic time for our railways but in West Somerset there are no trains running. (Just a platform shuffle maybe).

 

There's a fine photo on the Mid Hants thread.

 

That was what I had in mind. The detailed operation of that legislation and its interaction with other legislation is the preserve of finer minds than mine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It's a bit Wizard of Oz. To explain the rational behind making the determination would be to peel back the curtain, because the moment someone says 'I came to my conclusions on the basis of x,y,z' then someone else can say 'but what about a,b and c' that you haven't considered, and so it gets contested and questioned because although it is presented as an objective opinion it is actually a subjective opinion. This is no different to anything else, I am sure that if someone were to make some suggestions on loco front ends for example, or any other thing, there would be counterveiling views. There is almost an expectation of deference, that people should stop questioning and should just accept John Bailey's opinion.

It seems strange to announce an answer but not to explain the working to get to the answer.

 

Sad to see 53808 leaving WSR yesterday! However it was pleasing to see that the shed crew had turned her out in super looking condition. Well done! Just shows the affection for the loco and the dedication of WSR staff and volunteers. Keith & Joyce

 

Thank you for the clarification.

 

It has been mentioned many time that the crew are great; it is just Captain Bligh and those on the upper deck that are the problem

 

https://www.west-somerset-railway.c...orset-railway-trust-ltd-joint-press-statement

“There will be further discussions between the WSR and S&DRT on funding towards the end of this hire period to the MHR.”​

Tom

 

Was it not in the press release that included the reference to the ORR related incident that never happened that some loco crews didn't like "88" and that she was often "thrashed" ? If ever there was any evidence needed to the contrary then it is the meticulous attention that the most loved loco on the line has received in recent weeks.

Well done guys.

 

What is it that is said about politics? A week is a long time? I guess a couple of years is probably a long time in heritage railway circles.
I wonder if the engineering experts here can suggest whether recent work, at Minehead, done on 88. could warrant an extension to the locos life after the 'official date' of its ticket. An extra short period could make quite a difference to the Trust's budget for 88.
I wonder what the odds a bookmaker might give regarding the return - or non return - to the WSR, of 88 in the future?

 

I'm pretty sure the work was on valves and/or pistons, nothing on the boiler of note. Doesn't preclude an extension being granted due to other reasons though, although I wouldn't be too hopeful on that front.

 

My money would be on it not returning, but we shall have to wait and see.

 

I didn’t say what you quote me as saying - can you edit please?

Thanks

Tom

 

Boilers are examined on a yearly basis, and depending on what is found, they are then allowed to steam for 12 months, but insurance protocols do insist that every 10 years a boiler has to have an inspection, and all defects found remedied followed by an out of the frames hydraulic, and steam test, before an new 10 year ticket can be granted, subject to an insurers inspection every 12 months.

 

In two years time, who knows what the WSR will look like, it's even possible that the WSR may not survive its self, if it can not earn revenue to see it through the winter, At least 53808 will have a safe home at Ropley for the next two years, and who knows, the trust might decide its better to seek a longer term deal, especially if the MHR can offer financial help with some funding for the boiler repairs.

 

I personally cant see the loco ever returning to the WSR and if the S&D Trust have any sense they should keep it well away from them. Also i personally believe the PLC dont want it back as they see it as a liability.