Swanage Railway General Discussion

There is agreement that investigative work can be carried out, that’s all. Depending what is found, that doesn’t necessarily mean the SR will want to continue with the overhaul, or that the NRM will be happy for the work to be done.

Hopefully it will all be good news though, and in the not too distant future we might see the T3, T9 and M7 in action together.

 

Good to see Manston today it does look good in its worn livery trains looked busy so kids for a quid looks to be filling the trains which is good news roll on the gala in March

 

A shame to see the amount of clutter the RRI site has attracted in a relatively short space of time.
If I remember correctly, one of the concerns of the Council in granting change of use to permit the new siding and vehicle loading area was that it didn’t become a general railway yard and car park. Regardless of whether that’s 100% accurate or not, this isn’t a good look, being clearly visible from a public place and having just had an Open Weekend’s worth of trains passing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It would be interesting to know what SRCs traction plan for the next 5 - 10 years is, the reasoning behind it and how it is going to be funded.

Given that they plan to run less mileage going forward and potentially having the Wareham service in the mix (which presumably would use the Class 117 and 121 DMus upon which so much money has been spent) how does this equate to 2 X BoB/WC (hired), 3 X Moguls (hired), T3 (gifted), T9 (loaned), M7 (hired ?), 2 X Class 33 (hired?), Class 117 DMU, Class 121 DMU (loaned)? (I have ignored the 2 X Class 08 as presumably these are used for shunting and supporting pway and LCand W etc.

 

We enjoyed an excellent day at the Swanage Railway yesterday. Trains were busy on most services - this was probably due to the 'Kids for a Pound' special offer.

Manston was running in it's 1960s end of steam livery. It looked fantastic and certainly took me back to my spotting days of the period.

The weather, scenery and trains were excellent. What else could we ask for?

Many thanks to the Swanage Railway. <BJ>

 

Presumably this question relates primarily to the steam fleet, with an implication that it may be too big? A fleet of 8 locos doesn't seem that excessive when you consider that only 4 or 5 are likely to be in traffic at any one time. As for the diesels, I'd consider the DMUs to be effectively a single 3 car unit leaving the two 33s to back up and cover other duties, which again does not seem to be particularly excessive.

 

Not forgetting your namesake, 80104.

It does seem an excessive number of steam locos for the future levels of service. I can see at
least one more of the Bulleids going elsewhere in future.

 

Doh! Yes exactly. I appreciate that boiler tickets expire and that overhauls take time (to say the least) etc but it does seem excessive especially when hire fees are being paid for locos that are doing comparatively little service. SR is not blessed with much undercover storage (or indeed any storage hence the Furzebrook Sidings wish) either. Cant help but feel that pruning the fleet would save money and free up space to make operating that bit easier. I suspect though that each loco has its group of supporters who will fight tooth and nail for it to be retained.

 

Well there meant to creating such a plan back in 2015 but as far as I can tell it never went anywhere. So I wouldn't hold your breath.

 

I wasnt implying that the steam fleet per se was too big / excessive. It was to gain an understanding of how such a fleet size related to the operational demands: primarily one steam loco required for traffic 240 days approx per year plus additional steam traction for peak season*, AND how such a fleet was funded: revenue versus costs.

*How much additional steam traction will be needed given it is planned to operate the Wareham service with the dmu on 90 days? In 2017 on peak Wareham days the traction requirement was 3 (2 steam 1 diesel) however given the general downturn in traffic will 3 units be required or will it remain 2 (1 steam 1 dmu)?

 

I guess getting plans together would have been a task of the new GM/CEO who has yet to be found and appointed?.

From 2021
https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2021/0...ive-update-from-southern-locomotives-ltd.html
"A very generous supporter has provided a £200,000 interest-free loan towards 80104's overhaul, estimated to cover three-quarters of the overhaul cost."
It could be if this loan was for the loco only, rather than SR, and SR can't guarantee revenue earning use as it has enough locos, SLL could use it at another railway which could offer revenue earning use to help pay back the loan?

 

Why would the loan be to SR when they don't own the loco?
I would've thought the SR would be keen to have 80104 back as it is more economical and better suited to their trains. If the SR felt they were over stocked with locos, they could maybe release one of the Bulleids, although I would imagine that there's a legal agreement with SLL.
This is all very speculative though, as the SR only have 3 working steam locos at present which is hardly an overkill, when you take into account washouts and running repairs. Things can and do change in a short time, so any locos coming back from overhaul could work well with a change of traffic patterns.

 

What is the back up plan to operate the Wareham service if the DMU fails and can not be returned to traffic "overnight"?

 

A bus?

Every railway operator has that scenario. In the heritage sector in particular we operate with old machinery. You can have some resiliency - two steam locos when your daily diagrams only involve one; or a diesel thunderbird - but resiliency costs money and a responsible operator has to consider what is prudent in terms of layering on resiliency against the costs of having assets that, if all goes to plan, just sit around idle. Sometimes the best plan is just to admit that if something fails, you can't run the service you advertise.

Bear in mind it is not just rolling stock that can fail: the DMU might be fine and the token instrument in the signal box could throw a wobbly.

Tom

 

Well you can’t run round at Wareham!

(See Wareham Foot Crossing Ad Nauseum)

 

A bus? This is Dorset. Seriously there are so few bus / coach operators in Dorset the chances of getting one is the same as Accrington Stanley winning the Champions League.

 

The 4 car DMU set has 3 power cars, 3 driving vehicles and 2 guards vans. I think the idea is that a bit of mixing and matching will overcome any problems with individual vehicles.

 

In which case pilot working would be set up.

 

You have coach operators though? What I was implying is that if your motive power fails, but you are legally bound to run the service, you do what the mainline would do and hire a coach. Or else if you are not bound to run it, cancel and ring up all your pre-booked passengers with an apology and some offer of compensation / rebooking etc. The key point being you have a contingency plan for failure, but that doesn't necessarily have to involve a replacement unit, which would be quite expensive as a contingency.

Tom

 

Few if any bus and coach operators have drivers on standby and thus be able to meet an urgent request for rail replacement buses due to a unit failure. Some operators who do planned rail replacement decline work on Sundays because (a) they prefer to roster fewer drivers for Sundays to be "family friendly" (b) if a vehicle incurs a defect it may not be "fixable" before the Monday morning run out.