If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

5972

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by neildimmer, Jan 27, 2014.

  1. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    35,121
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Varies from railway to railway. Not many locos can command £800 a day and not many railways could afford that on a regular basis. I'm not at liberty to divulge how much 34081 will be paid per day but it's nowhere near £800.
     
  2. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    And this 800 a day is free and clear, and there are no incidental expenses on maintenance, insurance, staff, inspections or anything else? I don't know the first thing about the finances of steam locomotive operation, but somehow I doubt it.
     
  3. Andy B

    Andy B Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    477
    Likes Received:
    585
    Location:
    Bristol
    It's a case of how much use the engine will get. Generally the bigger railways running more days and using several locos a day will be able to offer many more steamings and a minimum figure will usually be stated in the contract. more steamings usually equates to a lower rate per day. The owners take all this into account and will have a figure that they think they need at the end of ten years. (Just to add I heard of one ex br engine that managed 195 days in one year and know of several with 120 +)
     
  4. agalpin

    agalpin Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Bleeding 'ell Essex
    As I quantified my earlier statement with planned preventative maintenance.
    That costs money.
    And the amount will vary from year to year.
    It should also reduce the overhaul costs as not everything will be life expired, in need of total overhaul at the same time.
    Expecting a maximum transfer of steaming fees earned to overhaul fund is complete and utter nonsense.


    As for steaming fees, I will not divulge the numbers that I know as it is not my place to but, there is a large range of fees being charged out there and some quite frankly ludicrous fees being asked too.

    There have been figures quoted for sums spent annually on main line locos planned preventative maintenance too and they certainly seem to pay off in terms of reliability too.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  5. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There are too many variables involved to reach a single figure conclusion or even a realistic spread. Some agreements relate to daily steaming fees, others to mileage payments, some a combination of both. Is an agreement for 100 days at £500 a better bet for the owners than one of 30 days at £800? (Not many railways could offer 100 days, in any case.) Then there's the question of running maintenance. Who is responsible for boiler washouts, changing brake blocks, etc, etc? Who pays for broken springs/brake blocks/firebars? What are the liabilities if the loco/owner fails to deliver? If a railway is relying on its hired in loco to run some of its services and it isn't available because the owner can't keep it operational, what does the contract say? A loco where there is little in the way of obligation isn't going to command as much as one with a firm commitment; and that works both ways. The contract might be for 5000 miles/60 days steaming but, if the loco isn't available on the days the railway wants to use it yet is available on other dates, who, if anyone has failed to supply or use? Is the owner supplying a 'minder' to look after it al lthe time it is in use or is he going to have to make a 500 mile round trip if anything needs doing?
     
  6. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There is quite a case for developing a "model" locomotive long term hire contract to cover all these considerations. No doubt one off existing agreements already attempt to do this but it would be a good HRA exercise to standardise things to meet a limited range of situations.
     
  7. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,106
    Likes Received:
    57,443
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer

    What advantage is there to having standardised agreement? Given the range of variables outlined by Steve (rate, either daily or mileage or per thermal cycle, or some combination of all three; who carries out and pays for running repairs; number of days and whether they are guaranteed or not; who compensates for non-availability; whether the loan comes with a reciprocal return visit etc etc etc) and given that in a negotiation between host railway and owner, both will have certain conditions they absolutely want to meet, and others they are prepared to compromise on, I'd have thought that the best option is simply to let owners and railways get on with coming to mutually agreeable terms.

    For example, a few years back, 9017 went to the SVR. The SVR got a preferential rate, but in exchange for doing some P&V maintenance work. Because 9017 is a GWR engine and the SVR had experience of such engines and suitable tools, it was easier for the SVR to do the work than the Bluebell. So, win-win: the Bluebell got some work done that needed carrying out; the SVR got a desirable gala visitor at minimal cash cost. I suspect it would be very hard to cover that sort of arrangement in a "model" agreement, yet clearly it was a deal in the best interests of both railways.

    Tom
     
  8. ADB968008

    ADB968008 Guest

    The rates I have to hand are 20 years old, but it sounds like they haven't gone up much.
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The HRA already does have a model form of contract if you want to use it but I don't know if anybody does. Contracts aren't the sort of thing that get made freely available to non-interested parties. I've never used it.
     
  10. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Tom - my suggestion was for a long term agreement (say a 10 year one). There IS merit in a standard agreement which is properly & evenly designed for the important legal aspects. Variable factors such as steaming fees, target number of steaming days etc etc are easily covered using individual annexes to the core agreement. It would also be useful for the HRA to arbitrate in the event of disputes.

    The 9017 SVR/BR arrangement was a one off "win/win" & there will no doubt be other future similar situations which can't be covered in a standard way.

    Steve - I am aware of & have seen a HRA hire agreement but the one seen was for short term hires such as for Galas. If there is another can you post a link to it please?
     
  11. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    35,121
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer

    Even if you did start off with a "standard" agreement, circumstances differ between different railways and loco owners so you'd end up negotiating details between the two parties anyway. What may suit one railway/loco owner may not necessarily suit another. There are so many variables that I think it's almost impossible to have a "one size fits all" style of agreement.
     
  12. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    35,121
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer

    Not everyone may want to commit to a full 10 years. I know of agreements covering an initial period and then renegotiated if both parties are still happy with each other's company. So much can change so quickly.
     
  13. Fred Kerr

    Fred Kerr Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    8,239
    Likes Received:
    5,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Freelance photo - journalist
    Location:
    Southport

    Not so sure that that is viable given the variations that can apply such as ;

    (1) Railway hires specific locomotive to attract custom (e.g. Embsay & Bolton Abbey hires 30585)

    (2) Locomotive owner accepts lower fee in return for overhaul facilities

    (3) Locomotive Support Crews provided to hiring heritage line

    (4) Locomotive Support provided by hosting heritage line

    (5) Hiring railway has entered charter agreements to fund hire fees / movement costs

    These are only the immediate ones but - given the personal nature of many agreements between locomotive owner and host railway - I am sure that there are sufficient variations to make a standard contract difficult to create. There is also the example of the current NRM A4 Agreement in which 60010 has been "hired" on condition that it returns to Canada in its 1937 condition with blue livery, valances, single chimney and donated bell - provided at NRM expense.

    That said there is no reason to create a "Framework Agreement" in which the Terms / Conditions of locomotive hire could be identified and hire contracts could adopt / ignore specific clauses that best meet the situation and the the HRA could well specify legal factors that will apply (e.g if SVR hires D49 246 from Bo'ness is the agreement under Scottish Law or English Law ? ).
     
  14. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The HRA contract can be used for both long and short term hire, that is if you want to use it! As has been said on here by several people, there are that many possible permutations that almost every contract is going to be different. Another factor will often be down to who writes it. If the loco owner is the originator, it will almost certainly be biased towards his preferences and vice versa if it is the railway. Often past experiences will play a large part. For example, I've had experience of an agreement between two groups for a restoration and run but ended up with the loco being abandoned at the premises of a third party who was owed money by the second party. The HRA model form runs to three pages; I've seen a loco hire agreement run to over thirty pages.
     
  15. david1984

    david1984 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,910
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Birmingham
    According to Steam Railway, David Smith has basically loaned it to Warner Brothers place near Watford for 2 years, it has not been sold and there is no intention to, with an intended resumption of mainline duties on it's return.
     
    S.A.C. Martin likes this.
  16. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Excellent news. A loan sounds good to me and I am grateful to hear that she'll return to the mainline afterwards. Thank you for sharing the news and well played Mr Smith.
     
  17. 26D_M

    26D_M Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,416
    Likes Received:
    1,681
    Hopefully the ultimate return to the mainline will be more frequent if its the end of the potter restrictions, assuming that's what's limited its outings. Sure it could be a useful addition to the wcr pool for Fellsmans and the like.
     
    Moylesy98 likes this.
  18. david1984

    david1984 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,910
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Birmingham
    Have the Tyseley Halls been over the S&C ?, I know Shaps been done.
     
  19. Moylesy98

    Moylesy98 Guest

    From what I last heard 5972 is now at the Warner Bros museum in Watford, but as of yet no photographs have been found of her being inside the museum or even being on display. I Will be paying a visit to WB's museum for my 21st birthday and we will soon see if this is true or not. With regards to her overhaul in 2016 she is planned to be out shopped in BR colours but we don't know if it will be black or green.
     
  20. ghost

    ghost Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    3,967
    Likes Received:
    5,064
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    N.Ireland
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Source please?

    Keith
     

Share This Page