West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I don't know what you are talking about here. 563 ownership was handed over to the SRT from the NRM.
Then the 563 Group was formed to manage it.
The group sorted an assessment that was authorised by the trust and that was extended into an overhaul.
Once the NRM handed ownership over, it's involvement ceased.

 

I think @Gladiator 5076 meant the T9, not the T3.

 

On the other hand, if MHR have a loco sat around with a pot of money to spend on it (or rather, a secure promise of staged payments), that might be a more inviting prospect than spending their own money which they may not have on one of their own locos. Swings and roundabouts!

Sent from my PGT-N19 using Tapatalk

 

Correct I will amend.

 

Too many T,s (meant T9) including the one I was drinking as I typed it

 

To be fair, the MHR decided to return 925 so any overhaul would not have been started.
The workshops are currently working on the heavy overhauls of 35005 and 75079 and assisting the Urie group with the heavy overhaul of 499. They also recently completed Kilmersdon and made a deal with SSL for 34058 which may give the railway a working Bulleid on long term loan in due course.

I think it is a bit unreasonable to think that they could/should be overhauling more than this - there is only a limited amount of money/space/volunteers/time to go around!

 

There's an element of looking through the wrong end of the telescope there. "These are there resources we've got so here is what we can produce". Rather than "this is what the service plan requires, so how much resource will be needed?"

I appreciate that resources will always be tight - but the starting point for a railway is "this is the service we want to operate" and you then assess whether that is viable given the resources you have. There's quite a lot of WSR bashing that basically runs along the line "they are falling behind in repairs of [track, locos, carriages...] and soon [undefined as to how soon!] won't be able to run the service they want". While that might be true, it would seem odd to criticise the WSR if there is a mismatch between the desire to run a service and the resources available to make that happen; and yet give a pass to another railway by saying, in effect, "they are doing as well as can be expected given the resources they have!" What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and all that.

Tom

 

Without comment on either named railway, it is also true that behaviour will be given a pass in some places where in others it will be criticised. This is usually due to how much trust those in charge have from each.

 

I can see where you’re coming from here Tom, although there has to be an element of making do with available resources, otherwise you’d be constantly changing your workshop size/capabilities/staff numbers to suit changing passenger demands!

Just for the record, I haven’t criticised the WSR about their workshop output.

 

Considering there were only 2 non GWR mainline locomotives based on the line, and neither suited the needs of the WSR in one way or another, then rumours can be created. Shame for that person 6960 wasn't a black 5 I guess. As I said previously, 6695's deal being terminated dispels any such myth.

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs with 4422, I'm struggling with the idea that 53808 didn't "suit the needs of the WSR" given it's long and successful history there.

 

That's a valid point. Whilst there are quite a few companies that will take on contract boiler work most mechanical overhauls are carried out on the host railways premises and there are fewer companies that would take on this side of the overhaul. They are also in it to make a profit and their costs are almost certainly going to be greater than if it were being done 'in house', even if the loco is not owned by the host railway. It's also unlikely that any independent contractor would allow volunteers to work alongside them for any number of reasons, something that is quite the norm on a railway.

 

53808 was originally on a run and repair basis at the WSR. Given that such arrangements (not just this one) have been seen to have many drawbacks, I can't see the SDRT opting for this again so, unless a suitable long turn agreement is available for the MHR, I can't see them undertaking the work.

 

What about repair and run?

 

I have certainly had conversations and email exchanges with many SDRT directors and chairman Roger Hardingham that 53808’s overhaul should be

1. delayed until the promised ‘strategic review’ by the SDRT board has been completed,

2. the overhaul delayed until the money is there in the bank,

3. A proper competitive tendering process is undertaken, and certainly not assume the Mid Hants/Watercress Line will get the work. I made a strong recommendation for considering also the East Somerset Railway workshop.

One very highly respected person with impeccable experience linked for awhile with the WSR PLC thought that the work required to 53808 would be very extensive - a back to bare frames approach. (Bob Meanley).

Given the WSR PLC’s financial perilous situation, I don’t think their agreement about 53808 (some of which vital details are not in the public domain via Companies House recently) can be relied upon. Hence my view that the overhaul of 53808 (that I consider to be a far more extensive and expensive prospect than has been admitted) should be put on the back burner for awhile whilst the SDRT board have the time to review matters.

 

Only one thing is certain, the overhaul will cost much more than any current estimate. If the SDRT wait until "the money is in the bank" the job will never start. Having left all of the engineering work to the WSR for many years I would question whether the SDRT has the professional expertise to manage such a project. It's rather more demanding than publishing a historical magazine and painting wagons.

 

All lofty stuff but inflation is your enemy and "engineering" inflation always seems to outstrip the general rate. Delay just rots your available finance. Contractors in this line of work are generally pretty busy with long start times. Surely you would approach this in manageable parts? For example - get on now with the tender tank replacement which is known to be necessary. Its difficult to see how a strategic review would conclude that nothing should be done!

 

It's a trade-off; wait till all the money's available and it might never arrived, but start without it all, and you may be left with a half finished project.

It's about balancing a range of risks.

Given what the S&DRT have managed in the last 5 years, I'd suggest that they have the key attributes to be able to achieve this - it is not just engineering skills that would be required, and they've shown themselves able to thrive outside of the WSR.

 

This should really be in the MHR section, but as we are discussing MHR overhaul queues, 35005, should be done by march 2025, The standard 4, possibly a year later, and 499 also some time in 2056-26, Now a lot of the members of the S&DMT, also support other groups connected with the railway, such as the Urie soc, and other loco groups, so towards the end of 2025, that opens a slot for 88, to be lifted, by that time 499 should be back on its wheels, and in the main workshop for finishing, So 88'S frames could go where 499's are now, there is money in the kitty to start the work, and the frames can be worked on, out of the way, the people working on 499, have the experience with frame repairs, so their expertise will be useful, if only offering support, but I think you will find that everyone will be working together regardless of who owns what.