North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Firstly, there has been rain on successive days in North Yorkshire this week. I'm not saying that should or should not justify the reintroduction of steam. Just pointing out different places have, you know, different weather.
On the subject of past motive power crisis, does anyone remember when things were so bad they even had to hire a 31 from Thornaby. Not much changes except the 31 has to come from further away now.
Going even further back with infrastructure deficiencies, there was the short platform at Grosmont, which if you were at the front of the train when it came in, you would have to queue 5 to 10 minutes to alight from train. Also the days when the loop at Levisham was so short, trains from Goathland would run into what was then the yard headshunt, before having to set back a couple of carriage lengths after the North bound train had left.
I suspect today's management would have tried to restrict demand to what the infrastructure could cope with then instead of spending to increase capacity and flexibility.

Sawdust.

 

Seems to work like that on the National Network. You basically have described DfT policy there.

 

I remember those well. No worries about coaches being off platform back then. That at Grosmont was before platform 3 was extended and the wall on the back of the platform demolished to allow platform 4 to be built, along with extending the platforms and loop to allow for trains longer than six coaches. Before that, long trains used to creep into platform 3 and, as soon as the last coach was clear of the crossing gates, the crossing keeper would pull the vacuum brake bag off the rear coach bringing the train to a stop. Go 5 feet too far and the train loco couldn’t get round. Stop short and the gates couldn’t be closed.
Setting back at Levisham with long up trains was common practice. The problem was there was no track circuiting and the signalman could pull off to allow you to set back then set the road and give you the starter whilst the down train was still foul of the crossover. Footplate crews had to be wary of this and not look out for the guards right away unless the down train was clear and the manoeuvre could be safely accomplished.

 

The below was posted on social media yesterday. “We aim to run mixed traction wherever possible.”

is that an admission that the NYMR doesn’t want to run solely steam each day, even if the locomotive resources were available? That seems a major policy shift.

 

The timetable with D, d or Autocar listed against virtually every service shows they don't have any intention of running a fully steam service, even if they had enough locos to make it possible.

 

I disagree. I can think of no reason why they would not run a full steam service if they had a fleet of serviceable locos. The intention is there but the fact is that there are no longer the resources available to deliver this. I think that they are facing up to the reality of the situation without actually admitting how dire it is. As for the future.......

Peter

 

At our much smaller railway whether we run steam, diesel or not at all is defined by expected passenger numbers. A DMU return trip is a fraction of the cost of a steam loco hauled service. perhaps the changed economics of 2026 are such that this now applies to the NYMR? I suspect the reality of the here and now economics is that no railway is now going to be able to operate how it did 10 years ago however much that is hankered after by enthusiasts.

 

I wish I could believe that was actually the case at NYMR. I've actually no problems with the use of diesels; my concern (as with others) is the disingenuous positioning of NYMR as routinely operating mixed traction when the image presented is of a steam railway, and the plan for 2026 was not based on diesel operation to anything like the extent that it has been.

The tell is how thin the diesel fleet is and has been, with seemingly very low priority being put into repairs and overhauls to core locomotives (notably the Type 2s).

 

The intention isn't there though. For several years now some services are booked diesel, either throughout or for part of the journey, and are shown as such in the timetable.

 

There is an message here for advocates of diesel traction, and those bemoaning the slow progress being made with D5032's overhaul and the repair of D7628 - these jobs are just as time-consuming, involved and expensive as maintaining the steam fleet, but without the visual appeal. There will come a time before too long when some of the present visitors will leave or get parked up in the Grosmont shed headshunt for repairs - what will happen then?

The fact would appear to be that the NYMR has run out of resources to maintain.... well, anything, across the board, actually - apart from staff wages.

 

Kidderminster TMD was an incredible investment by the SVR and associated diesel groups and has paid dividends in recent years by providing the SVR with a top notch diesel fleet in enviable condition.
But it is also an admission that without those facilities, diesels will become more and more difficult (& expensive) to maintain. A full overhaul of a diesel requires much specialist knowledge, skills and equipment, that are not necessarily related to steam locomotives - steam locos don't have complex electrical equipment for a start..

 

....unless they venture out onto the big railway!