North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Not to join in on kicking the NYMR when they're already down but was there no pictures of Thomas on their own railway they could use?

 

You would think that a fireman would know - The harder the engine is worked the harder he/she has to work.

Peter

 

I am pretty sure that all railways have to use images provided by Mattel. Just like Polar Express are not always of the railway the event will be at.

 

I dont think that "they" were around when Thomas last appeared on the railway. It was after all 30 years ago, 1996, now that he was last here.

Peter

 

Well at least I guess that finally answers the argument from some that Whitby isn't worth it

Jon

 

A Black 5 turns the scales at 125.5 tons, a 4MT tank at 86.7 tons. That’s a tad short of 39 tons the tank doesn’t have to move around (that’s about the same as a mk1 full of passengers) so will have to do a lot less actual work. They are both relatively modern superheated locos so there will be little overall difference in relative efficiency and that lack of extra weight to drag around will have a direct effect on steam and coal used, all else being equal.

 

I looked at all the other ADOWT events and they all had their own images. So it probably is doing the first Thomas in a generation rather than some copyright demand.

 

I don't think it's just that. They simply can't carry enough people with the current method of operation. The majority of the timetable at the moment is 3 x four coach trains per day, plus one return trip with the autocar, and an afternoon diner. I realise it's a simplistic way of looking at it, but assuming every seat is occupied from Pickering, everyone does one round trip, and everyone pays £25 each, that's about 770 tickets each day. A little over £19,000 in ticket sales per day. The reality is it's going to be a lot lower than that. In comparison, a seven coach train going to Whitby has over 400 seats - if every one of those was sold at full price, the income from one train alone is over £20,000!

Some days and some trains have been packed. There are photos of the platform at Goathland absolutely heaving after the lunchtime arrival, and videos of it leaving Pickering with every seat taken. Other days have been reported as very quiet. They're still using 4 locos per day but only bringing in a fraction of the income compared to normal operation despite having similar costs.

@M59137 asked why the pessimism on this thread, even with the good news about the teaks being used later this year. It's because it's the only bit of good news in a long while. If their figures are accurate, the bridge appeal is currently bringing about £1000 per day. It'll be October 2027 before they reach their target! But they're not advertising it enough and making an effort to raise the money. Scroll down the website, at least on a mobile, and the bridge appeal is the fourth item on there, after £750 driver experiences and £1600 GWR saloon hire. They should be constantly talking about, plugging the appeal every single day on social media. But no. What are they plugging? Bloody cat keyrings!

 

It's pretty stark when you put it like that.

When you look at the 2024 accounts, the staff costs alone (including pensions and NI) came to slightly under £10,000 per day, 365 days of the year. You'd better hope they sell a lot of keyrings! (To be fair, those costs had come down by approximately 10% from the previous year).

Allowing for the fact that a the railway probably only opens for half the days in the year, the current operation can't even cover the staff costs, even if it ran at 100% occupancy; you are already in negative territory on the budget before you even start on any direct non-staff costs, let alone any maintenance costs. It feels like a hopeless situation at this point, which is - when all is considered - a terrible thing.

Tom

 

When you read the numbers you do really get the feeling that the powers that be for this line are not in touch with reality. To repeat myself (and others) somewhat...

• Bridge 42 was known about long before the stoppage yet nothing was done in advance to raise funds towards it.
• The staffing costs have been incredibly high for a long time, some justifiable and some definitely not. Its justifiable to employ people for operational/admin/safety roles that can't be done without (or indeed anything else that brings in more money than the employee expense), that can't be completed regularly enough by volunteers. But I'd argue many of the employed are not in those roles at all.
• The Teak announcement is a welcome development but by the time of the steam gala it will be two-ish years since that stock was last used I believe, maybe more. This situation should never have been allowed to happen and the comment 'We don't need them' should never have been made. I'm sure the LNERCA 'don't need' the NYMR but they have stood with you and tried to work with you for a long time.
• 76079 is a disappointment but not a surprising one. Personally I will be gutted to see it leave but I'm glad it will be overhauled and used again, though its a long way to go to see it for me! If money is as desperate as I believe I wouldn't be surprised to see more stock/property sold, frustrating as it will be.
• I still struggle to see why they need to top and tail all trains, thus substantially increasing the cost. In my head you could run to Goathland where a spare engine was waiting, couple that up while the first engine is still the active brake, and once connected detach the original engine. If that's not enough safety margin due to the slope could you not put a second brake coach on for an extra hand brake (make it a rake of 5 but lock the 5th out to customers for Goathland, so if they use it they have to walk through) for the engine swap? The original engine then has plenty of time to top up water etc and provide an interest for passengers at Goathland between trains, and is on hand for the next swap to go to Pickering. And you get to see an engine in normal routine at Pickering doing the run round. But crucially are running less overall motive power.

If there are indeed multiple other bridges that require propping/repairs before the railway can open properly I struggle to see where the money is coming from. If they can't manage Bridge 42, and the price is ballooning as described, then what does the future really hold for this line?

I was brought up with the mindset that for everything you see that's wrong, there are 10 other things you don't. Just glancing at this situation there's Bridge 42, Goathland pointwork, Platform 4 at Grosmont, Grosmont tunnel, another known bridge previously mentioned (sorry I can't remember which one it was!), numerous bits of track work required. How much other stuff is currently unknown?

 

It gets worse the more you think about it, even using guesstimates, rough figures and trying to extrapolate from the accounts.

I can't imagine lighting up a 9F is going to be cheap with current coal prices, and an extra loco is lit up solely for the diner. What's coal these days, about £350/ton? 4 tons per day seems a reasonable guess for two locos (possibly on the low side), so £1400. There's also two diesels out every day, plus the autocar. The 37s average about 5 litres of fuel per mile. 28 mile round trip, 4 trips per day, 560 litres. Plus shunting to and from the carriage shed, idling, etc, the figure is probably about 700 litres. Add in the autocar, another 50 litres maybe? Roughly £1 a litre. So fuel costs for each day of operation are going to be in the region of £2,000. £10,000 for 5 days of operations, on top of the £70,000 staff costs.

Then add in all the other expenses - energy bills, water rates, loans, insurances, mortgages, paying off accumulated debts. Three years ago, the Bluebell's energy bills were about £250,000 a year, and SVR's electricity bill alone was £500,000. Even at the lower end of that scale it's £5000 a week. Once all the other items are added in, £100,000 a week in outgoings perhaps? That ties in with the previous accounts stating "cost of sales" was £5.2m per year against a turnover of £7.6m.

The diner runs virtually full. That brings in a pretty much guaranteed £10,000 per day in ticket sales, plus all the drinks sold on board too. But I'd imagine half of that 10k goes on food and its associated costs, and staffing. It also only runs 4 days per week, not 5 like the service trains.

At a very rough estimate, I'd guess at 500 £25 tickets sold per day for normal services. £12,500 a day, 5 days = £62,500. Add in £20,000 from four days of the diner, £82,500 a week.

These figures may be wildly inaccurate, but I don't think they're too far out. Even with secondary spend they'll be absolutely haemorrhaging money. Despite running trains, they must be losing a substantial five figure sum weekly because of the horrendous fixed costs. But they can't afford not to run, because it keeps the losses down. 20 weeks in to the year, fixed outgoings £2m, income from 8 weeks of running, probably in the region of £650,000. That's a massive shortfall, far beyond what the railway would normally expect.

Not running every day to save on maintenance costs seems ridiculous now, when those extra couple of days could make the difference between a stonking loss every week and turning a bit of a profit when it's needed most. And the worst part of it is that they've known for years the infrastructure needs investment, yet it's been put off and put off.

 

Not sure why a second loco would be needed. Surely all vac cylinders hard on and the train hand brake applied would be sufficient to hold the train?

If not then the brakes on the train must be pretty shoddy and the coaches probably shouldn't be used anyway.

 

This was dealt with way back in this thread.

 

As @std tank says, it was mentioned previously. The limit of the line at present is the signal at the north end of Goathland station, meaning there's no way of heading down the bank to run round. If they'd repaired the slip at the south end of the station rather than removing it, then propelling out and running round in the loop would've been possible. But it's not, so they have to top and tail.

 

Engine 1 brings train into the station.
Engine 2 moves from Platform 2 to Platform 1 and couples to back of train.
Engine 1 uncouples but remains in place.
Engine 2 then takes the train back to Pickering leaving Engine 1 in the station.
Engine 1 then moves over to Platform 2 using the South end points until the next train arrives.

No need to run round. That's my theory. You've got an engine in the way stopping anything running through the North end and acting as a brake until the second engine is coupled, and remaining in the way until the train departs.

 

Makes perfect sense, but does the signalling and/or rulebook allow that sort of operation though? There's also the problem of the diner occupying the other platform at Pickering as well for a lot of the time.

 

If you can despatch trains out of either platform heading south I can't think there wouldn't be signalling already there. With regards to the rule book, the right assessments and checks would need to happen first if it isn't there, but there shouldn't be anything preventing amends if those assessments prove to be sound.

The diner I think is probably a bigger issue (at least in my head!), though for the life of me I still can't work out why its sat there so much. When the carriage shed was build there was investment in there to be able to prepare the diner before moving it into Pickering platforms. I remember part of the tour video pointing it all out. Why they aren't using that I really don't know. Though I suspect someone on here might.

EDIT - the pullman part of the shed is from 3:08 at this link:

 

Whilst removing the need to top and tail trains seems like a sensible idea, and I'm not criticising the thought process, but I doubt it would save much money. If we say we want all trains steam hauled (I doubt this is a key nymr policy, but let's work with that assumption) then we now need two steam engines for standard services. For sake of simplicity I'll ignore the diner here. That extra steam is an extra loco, extra crew, extra coal, extra water. I don't know if the rear engine does any work, but if so, then removing it means extra work for the train engine. If the rear engine is dead, then it won't be using any fuel if diesel, and won't save any fuel compared to sitting there static if steam. I suppose the weight of the train would be reduced if no rear engine.

On the topic of running round, an extra brake coach would be extra weight to haul = more fuel = more money. Could a goods brake van be used? Also, could you attach something like an 08 to one end of the train, started up only at Goathland to hold the brake, then shut down after the steam has recoupled? What I mean is the steam would pilot the 08 in one direction, doing all the work, then the steam would run round and the gronk would stay on the back. Is that a stupid idea? (I suspect it is).

Top and tailing will reduce fuel needed for shunting, and gives diesel crews and to some extent steam crews a bit of a break - might this save double crewing? Also means more resiliance to failures (Lambton tank can tow the dead 37 on the back(!)). In some senses, it is the simplest way to run the railway.

Other idea: Each set keeps a steam loco to itself, which normally stays at the Goathland end. A diesel goes on the Pickering end. At Levisham, on the return trip to Pickering, the diesel comes off the front and goes on the back of the Goathland bound train, to top and tail and come back. The steam then runs round and takes the train to Pickering. At Pickering, steam runs round to be at Goathland end, and stick the diesel on the back as before. That means you only need three engines, but is a bit of a faff.

 

I fully get your points but to me £1000 a day for the bridge appeal seems pretty good for something that has been running a while. Trouble with appeals for large amounts of money is that the target either looks too far off or people get appeal fatigue. Not sure how you over come that.
Maybe the target was wrong in the first place (it now seems) but to be honest even with fixed price contracts from my experience anything that involves work on something that exists will only ever be agreed with a variation for the unknowns. So it may be bad estimate by the railway, or but the contractor or just the fact that when you start work you find loads of stuff you did not expect.
However if you are involved with the overhaul of steam locos for example this sort of thing should not really be a surprise.

 

The concept of dead diesel loco at the back of the train that would have no brakes doesn't work!

Still get the need for an extra coach to act as brakes when a 4 coach set with 8 vac cylinders and a hand brake is more than sufficient to hold the train.

Of course in reality this chat won't change the operation at the NYMR!