Tornado

I was responding specifically to the point on start-ups v on-going and that both worked pretty successfully for almost 30 years.

As I long term covenantor to both A1 and P2 who has donated many thousands of pounds to both projects I’m furious about how the organisation is now being mismanaged and how that is impacting Tornado (over 2.5 years into a 6 month overhaul) and the P2 build (effectively ground to a halt and now many years from completion).

The A1SLT’s reputation is in tatters as promise after promise is broken. And I suspect its finances are too.

So I’m going to keep banging that drum until its leadership takes responsibility for its actions as apart from withdrawing all of my funding it’s all I can do atm.

 

I could. But I wouldn’t miss this riveting experience

 

Is the reputation of the Trust in 'tatters'? I appreciate the frustration of a very delayed overhaul and public pronouncements of reappearance that haven't been met, but aren't those both things that we have been through time and time again about so many locomotives, both privately owned and in the charitable sector, over recent years? This hardly compares with the Flying Scotsman or Royal Scot situations for example. How many times do we get breathless claims of steaming by the end of the year, which ends up taking a decade or more? Where, for example, is the Patriot that was expected to steam in 2017 and was for a long time a poster child for the new build movement? I have long since taken the view that all such claims are no more than idle guesswork, and to not expect to see anything until it has pulled its first train post overhaul / restoration / construction.

I would also note that I'm not sure that repeated expressions of frustration at the trustees on this website is really likely to lead to any change in management, whether the claims are justified or not.

Sent from my SM-S926B using Tapatalk

 

Each time I check back and see another few pages of posts have been added my heart leaps - surely this extra activity on NP is related to the loco having steamed and started running in... Alas this vacuum is being filled with another form of hot air.. I never knew there were so many different ways of saying 'the leadership is cr*p' - it's been a learning experience for me!

Many pages back I said the loco needs to move and start earning some pennies, then everything will start to fall into place. That hasn't happened yet and there have been many communication errors from those who should know better - but it is sure as damn close now.
What we all want is a working A1, it's desperately needed. Let's hope the next few days bring some cause for celebration.

 

Of course it’s reputation isn’t in tatters! Over exaggeration at it’s absolute finest! A trust with the grand acclaims such as the A1, doesn’t lose that reputation overnight. People have come on here to vent their anger and that’s all this is. It’s not a reputation in tatters. I think all of them on here moaning should be standing up to lead the Trust. Stand and be counted. Perhaps our esteemed Mr ‘Wedgwood’ could become the new leader!

Nothing will change through the repetitive moans and groans on here. And if these idle “Ill withdraw my funding” threats are actioned they won’t have a trust at all!

 

You. Don't. Have. To. Read. It.

 

As I recall, that was the case - 90mph plus 10% and I believe it was Peter (now Lord) Hendy who said it'd be churlish not to allow 100... I think it's on YouTube or BBC iPlayer or summat.

 

You probably aren’t aware that the only members of A1SLT are its trustees. They elect its chairman and appoint their peers. Others are just supporters.

 

See here, from 4'10"

Graeme Bunker: "If we want to run regularly at 90 miles per hour, we have to show the locomotive operates satisfactorily at 10% over that speed. It's 99 but the point of 100 came from Network rail whose comment was 'if we are going to authorise you at 99, we should authorise you at 100 miles an hour and not leave you like a batsman at the crease.'"​

Tom

 

You don’t have to moan about it

 

Yes you are correct. At the convention, in reply to my querying the decision to overhaul the old boiler rather than wait for the first new one, the Trust stated that the new ones were further delayed because Covid had been much more severe in Germany.

Naturally as soon as I got back home in fact checked this claim, but could find no substance to it whatsoever.

As we now know, the boiler overhaul has been a long drawn out unmitigated disaster involving 3 sets of tubes, more stays requiring replacement recently and resulting in the firebox fouling the rear drivers.

Interestingly in the latest edition of the supporters newsletter, there is a resume of the loco’s overhaul and the challenges faced in which surprisingly they seem to have completely overlooked the distorted boiler fitment.

They do however mention the delay caused by having to replace a section of distorted platework on the rear fireman’s side Cartazzi extension frame (or ‘starboard side’ in the Chairman’s words). This was known about just a few months into the overhaul and was pretty serious, yet this is the first the supporters will have heard about it.

Some of us do actually know what’s been going on, whilst most can only base their comments on the official Trust statements. I think it is beholden on us that we try and keep the supporters who pay for all this as well informed as possible. If there was a better way of reaching them believe me we would.

Remember that the dissatisfaction expressed on here is not about the time taken per-see, it is very much about the Trust’s pronouncements. As I see it, and as others have said, there are two valid strategies in cases like this. Day nothing at all, as per WCRC, which wouldn’t sit well with the supporters, or be open and honest. So do not keep issuing completion date after completion date which are highly unlikely to be met, and worse still, do not advertise tours and visits which you know you cannot possibly fulfil.

Please don’t shoot the messengers, just scroll on by if you don’t like the message. Alternatively, mods please feel free to devolve the campaign to a new thread.

 

I'm pretty damned sure it won't.

In this context the GWS accounts for the last year (2023/4) were interesting. Judging by the bile and venom here and elsewhere the 4709 group's decision in 2022 to purchase 7027 and use the boiler on 4709 should have resulted in a collapse in support and income. However their 2023/4 income was the highest of any of the GWS limited funds, so clearly, in spite of a minimal publicity presence and no special appeals, their support wasn't catastrophically diminished by the noise.

As ever Shakespeare has a phrase: 'sound and fury signifying nothing'.

 

Using the words "starboard side" just about says it all.

 

The reputation of the trust may not be in tatters with the majority; because the funding of Tornado, P2 etc is more than ever reliant on people without the knowledge or inclination to challenge its trustees.
Think I stopped my contributions at the point where I realised I was no longer in that category.

 

Or perhaps the majority don't feel that they need to be informed about every last detail - or have time to come up with alternative using the perfect law of hindsight.

They look forward to seeing the loco back running again, without insisting on a change of management.

Are we likely to see placards at future railtours demanding new management, or people super-gluing themselves to the regulator?



Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

 

No. But those same people who just want to see it run are the ones who will eventually wonder why they're being asked for more and more money, or finding everything takes longer and longer. And as anno domini take their toll, why there are fewer supporters bearing more burden.

It is not that the process has taken longer that matters, nor that it has been more expensive. It is that these have been accompanied by a steady litany of misleading press releases and announcements, all pointing to a lack of control. I've got experience of projects going wrong; the recovery doesn't start until reality is grasped and plans built on that reality. As for luck, it does have a role. However, luck is not abstract, but something created and harnessed. If a project is consistently "unlucky", that is usually a sign that the basics are missing.

The Trust is chaired by an ex-military man; I find it particularly noteworthy that the 7 Ps seem particularly absent.

Some have advanced views as to why this is; I can't comment on their veracity. Trustees are and will be judged by hindsight; it is in the definition of their role and legal accountability to exercise foresight, so that hindsight isn't required. And if you want an example of where this can lead, I can suggest no better than the case of "Kid's Company".

 

This reminds me of Vulcan XH558. Time and again there was a vocal minority complaining about the way things were going, threatening to stop their contributions and calling for changes at the top. Yet time and again the vast majority of the supporters stumped up the cash in answer to yet another appeal for funds to keep her in the air.
The hot air being generated in this thread would be enough to see the A1 get from London to Edinburgh non stop.

 

It's already the case. Numerous "clubs" and appeals are ongoing.

 

And, a few years later, their emails are now going into my "delete" folder and I'm far from motivated to give them anything.

 

Somewhat irrelevant now as she’s out of hours and grounded permanently but lots of people are paying to have their names or that of a loved one applied to the airframe.