Project Wareham

Is a Unicorn a gricers name for a type of diesel with only a single horn?
Steve B

 

Nice Try. There is a St Ives which has a thriving branch line and a great main line connection.(been there and done it!) oooooooh the gloom and despondency over what should be a landmark step forward for the SR and HR in general. Or do some want to remain in a permanent state of grice ie happy in their own suspended realities and oblivious to the great wide world outside?
Run that snowplow and..........,.
Let the Trials commence!

 

That’s 37424!

 

And, as you’d know if you paid any attention to the views of others, the concern is how running through operations will be compatible with the heritage operation.

The St Ives branch is thriving (though I’m not sure what subsidy it requires), but as I’m sure you’ll remember, is a 4 mile long siding, with no heritage atmosphere whatsoever, and with a terminus curtailed so that only 4 coach trains can run there.

I also wasn’t aware that tourism in Swanage was remotely near the level it is in St Ives.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

What I think we need to bear in mind is that the situation in Swanage isnt the same as anywhere else, both St Ives and plans to put Bishops Lydeyard back on the National Network are quite different.

 

Hybrids. we have Hybrids in all manner of applications in the 21st Century. The SR, or the ELR could well be the first manifestations of a new approach to integration. The question remains,can any current standard HR continue on a "stand alone" basis? Particularly if they have the wherewithal for connection the the main line. There are today at least a couple of railways who still have that very goal in mind!! , Like any other association or partnership some things must be negotiable

And just why is Swanage so different?

 

There are so many tourists in St Ives that the authorities are desperate to get rid of them, to the extent of proposing to run regular beachfront to beachfront St Ives - Swanage shuttles just to relieve pressure on the former. It's a win-win!

Tom

 

Indeed, many things are possible. But before you assert that it just requires negotiation, you may wish to look at the legislation governing railways in this country, and the exemptions that heritage railways benefit from that constrain how they can operate.

The existence of those constraints is precisely why proposals for operation over the Swanage are fundamentally different in their implications than the operations to St Ives, or for extending GW services to Bishops Lydeard. These are also why the concerns about commuter services over the ELR, or running GW services between Bishops Lydeard and Minehead are as they are.

You see issues over the future of standalone heritage railways in today’s world. Most on here disagree, though recognise that they face major challenges. However, what all seem to agree on is that the key challenges relate to being able to earn enough income to pay the significantly higher costs that are now unfortunately arising. To take just one, who is going to volunteer to signal the line for the 23:35 class 159 DMU on a Thursday night in November?

This is precisely why I, and I suspect a number of others, believe that hybrid operation is precisely the wrong answer. It will add additional costs and obligations to volunteer based organisations, while potentially undermining the ability to earn money as a heritage railway, or preserve that heritage.

Heritage railways are subject to a 25mph speed limit; if that is raised, they become subject to the full set of obligations associated with mainline railways. We know that the 25mph limit on the Swanage means that the bus is faster than the train from Wareham to Swanage; elsewhere, we know that minor matters like cant or signal sighting distances would mean that heritage and “mainline” operation would sit poorly together.

Specifically at Swanage, we know from the last trial that there was limited additional income from through running, but allied to that were significant additional costs. That background is why many of us welcome the trial (as others say, there’s an obligation to discharge) but are deeply doubtful that it will be a success.

When I write, I assume that there will be no additional subsidy available. That’s not because I don’t think it’s worthwhile but because I live in this country, and have an awareness of how tight local authority budgets are. And if you want national government subsidy, we know from the way that the Department for Transport are controlling the railways that this subsidy will come with massive strings attached.

I’m delighted that the St Ives branch survived, and is thriving. But, as a line, it has lost all of its character - just like almost all of the other twigs that survived Beeching. But as someone who is arguing vigorously for steam throughout, and is unimpressed by delays in other projects, I find it hard to believe that you’d like the Swanage to be just like those other branch lines.

You called for optimism; I admire that. But when you say that positivity will win out, can I just refer you to the current short term tenant at 10 Downing St, and what has happened when positivity isn’t backed up by any kind of realism. And by choosing to treat all of the reasoned concerns as “molehills”, you are indulging in precisely that kind of fact free boosterism which, if followed by those charged with running the Swanage, would probably lead to the demise of the hard work that many volunteers have given to it over the last 50 years.

 

You’re absolutely right but I fear you are wasting your time. I admire your patience, even your optimism that he might finally take some notice, but it seems to me that he is either incapable of understanding facts and concepts so obvious to most of us here that they hardly need stating, or pretends not to in order to prolong his “fun”. Perhaps it is a bit of both.
With respect, I suggest you call it a day and leave him to plough (plow?) his lonely furrow ignored by (I suspect) the majority of those on this forum.

 

changes are coming. Are you ready? I am not pretending to be a prophet but as both a SR member and infrequent visitor please enunciate how with (anecdotally) lower visitor numbers,fewer volunteers and dwindling income SR can continue as strictly a "heritage" railway? SR is not alone in this conundrum and that is why the winds of change are going to blow through the HR movement

 

Leave it Matt… go to your happy place

 

I shall (probably to my regret) ignore the sage advice from @Nantyglo and respond.

That response is not to pretend that change isn't coming, but to warn against the pursuit of a mirage. In particular, the challenge of moving to operating on a "big railway" model will add material costs, without necessarily contributing material additional revenue, and in the process compromise what makes the heritage railways special.

You advocate changing towards a public service model; how will that help sustain the Swanage when so many heritage railways have started down that road and then retreated because it wouldn't work for them?

 

The HR movement is going to have to adapt to changing circumstances. There are fewer volunteers, and the cost of living crisis means fewer visitors as people dont have the cash for trips. So there will be cost cutting - fewer locos in service and locos with expired boiler certificates will take longer to come back into service. But this is nothing new. It has happened before. The MHR nearly went bust in the nineties and was saved in part by Thomas days. Recent innovations at the MHR around Christmas with putting lights on trains have helped. But HRs are a leisure business and are affected by the economy. There are a lot of HRs and sadly one or two won't survive. Most will adapt and survive as HRs

But numbers on Network Rail lines are also hit in recessions. It really doesnt follow that SR offering a service to Wareham is the answer as many posters on this thread have patiently tried to explain

 

As I understand it SRT SRC are compelled by one of the terms and conditions of the 2014 track lease agreement to operate two Wareham trial periods one of 60 days and one of 90 days. The 60 day trial was carried out in 2017. If SRT SRC do not operate the second trial period then they would be in breach of one of the conditions of the lease. If SRT SRC do not comply with the terms of the lease and DC enforce the lease then the ultimate outcome would be SRT SRC forfeiting the trackbed and thus be unable to operate services. It would be "politically difficult" for DC not to enforce the lease or at the very least insist that SRT SRC pay back the public monies spent on the enabling works.

Offering a service to Wareham may increase passenger numbers by increasing connectivity / access to the branch line by means of mainline services connecting at Wareham. There is no doubt that some passengers would indeed connect at Wareham but whether this is financially viable or increases total passenger traffic is in some doubt.

 

Thinking outside the box. 5 pound bucket and spade trains to run three times on Greater Anglia (Rail Advent). Result of some group think for a good community benefit. So come on SRC.SWR and Purbeck Rail Partnership. Can you do that?
Make sure that those snow plows are working firsr!!

 

There were very similar running a few years ago - Weymouth to Corfe Castle for £10 flat fare as I recall (plus a morning / evening Salisbury - Weymouth that positioned the stock, but was available for passengers). It only ran about one season, as I recall.

Tom

 

A point for @oliversbest to ponder.
I went to the dentist yesterday and when I went to book the next one the receptionist said they are getting a hell of a lot of cancellations. I said due to Covid and she said no because people are unable or unwilling to spend the money. Now if people are not prepared to look after their teeth (where pain may be the outcome) what makes you think they have money to spend leisure travel or to volunteer.
btw this is a dentist in Swanage that you can actually just see the railway from.

 

Unless SR can get additional funding from either Dorset CC, or some grant from central gov to off set the additional costs, I think it's going to be too big a risk to operate the 90 day contracted service to Wareham, Ok, on some days, it might pay for its self, but on others your going to be running ECS, What would be the fixed costs of say running the single car DMU, plus access charge to NR, how many passengers per day does it need to break even?

 

I think that most of these questions raised in this thread are for SR management. There have been lots of good points raised. I am sure that they will have been working this through. Is anyone reading this thread in the know and willing to answer the following:

1. What level of service is required for the 90 day trial?
2. What upfront level of investment is required?
3. What happens if part way through the trial it becomes clear that the service is not covering costs? Can it be stopped part way through?
4. What is the definition of success?

 

The merchants and businesses in Swanage are going to love those bucket and spade specials. Cheap rail fare means more to spend in Town!
The investment is already made by DC in the Class 117 DMU and by the SR and its supporters enabling the Worgret signalling compliance
The Snow plow is going to demolish molehills prior to the initial run' Anyone up for sponsoring a class 33 snowplow fitted trip Wareham to Norden Gates??
The definition of success is simply full carriages to and from Wareham
..and the railway will have fulfilled its obligations to DC and to the founders who asked for nothing less "amenity service to connect to the main line" It aint rocket science!!