recreating the past or enjoying preservation

I would - what a fabulous idea! At least it would keep the racket of the school parties down a bit...

 

Given that back on page 2 of this thread it was you who said...

... I'm sure you can come up with some piece of Latin from your 'classical' education to sum up the phrase "And I'm just as guilty as anybody else of dragging it on."

I think this entire thread can be summed up by the old (non-Latin) saying "Opinions are like arseholes - everybody has one, we all think ours smell of roses and that everybody else's smells of s*@t".

 

Duplicate post

 

Absolutely spot on.

 

I don't think there's anybody saying that such items wouldn't be seen in 'the old days', it's just that during "the steam era" any luggage and parcels etc. wouldn't look as though they'd been abandoned in the same place for the previous two decades! You can seen milk churns whose contents must be more than a little sour judging by the lichen growing around the base and on the platform around them. Parcels remain unmoved from one visit to another with labels clearly sun bleached. Packing trucks in some cases are a shade weathered from living permanently outdoors.

Unfortunately the set dressing and ambience which was created when such things were first placed in position fades over time and is lost by the fact it is artificial. Newspapers might be dropped off in the morning and have gone an hour or so later. Trunks would be unloaded from one train and depart again on another, or collected from the station the same day. A 'preserved' railway can't effectively recreate any of that simply because the luggage isn't real - it isn't in transit from one place to another and it remains where placed indefinitely and doesn't change.

If you're looking for a preserved railway to deliver historic accuracy, then this is one of those pedantic details that will trip you up in your quest. If you're happy to indulge in a slice of nostalgic essence of how things sort of were, then such details don't really matter.

Whilst I might be prepared to point such issues out in a discussion here, does it play heavily on my mind and ruin my enjoyment on visits to such railways? No, of course not, but my reasons for going to a preserved railway isn't to see any form of authentic historic re-enactment. I'm just interested in the sight, sound and smell of a steamy engine. ....yet some other people seem to froth at the mouth about the smallest of details out of place on a locomotive for not conforming to their perceived idea of 'original'.

 

The IoW has been held up as a prime example of a railway adhering to historical accuracy. So Austerity tanks saw regular use on Island trains in R days did they? This is not a criticism of the IoWSR by the way as I love the line but it just goes to show that even a railway that strives to recreate the past as near as possible has to make compromises.

 

It's all very well to moan about luggage stacks on platforms and from an historical perspective I tend to agree, but they are not necessarily just "set dressing". At Loughborough Central, at least, the old suitcases are used to store coal for the waiting room fireplaces...

 

That explains what was going on during the winter gala. Thought I was seeing things when people started shovelling coal out of a suitcase.

 

My original comment about abandoned luggage was just one amoungst a number of comments highlighting why preserved railways are fine for nostalgic remenicance, but a bit lacking for historic accurate reinactment. They weren't intended as a moan or gripe, just a statement of how things are.

I have to say I fell about laughing at the use of suitcases for storing coal though!
I guess in that case the luggage is actually used and gets moved about to access the contents.
I now have visions of suitcases waiting at the end of the platform to be loaded onto the next train to be refilled, returning later for some poor porter to lug a platform trolley laden down with them back to the waiting room.

 

Well, if you didn't keep posting I wouldn't keep replying.

P.H.

 

Obviously a clasical education dose not assist with common sense and maturity

 

On the subject of rostering suitably-sized motive power: Broadly it looks like a relatively simple problem - just match up the locos you have available (always accepting that Barry didn't necessarily deliver 200 perfect locos for heritage use) with the traffic on offer. If you are in the position where most trains are of similar size year-round, there are no doubt efficiencies of having lots of similar-sized locos (thinking, for example, of lines like the WSR where trains are pretty much 6-7 coaches whenever they are running a service).

However, things get a bit more complex when your service is more variable. For example, on the Bluebell our commercial department seem to be able to sell everything from 300+ seat service trains to shoulder-season trains of just one (high-capacity) coach, and a lot of things in between. In turn, that means we have available motive power ranging from a couple of class 0P 0-6-0Ts of about 7,000lbs TE all the way up to a class 6 mixed-traffic 4-6-0 of 30,000-odd TE. Given the loads on offer, we can probably provide trains that cause any of our engines to work hard up to about a class 4. Even then, things aren't quite so simple: A Wainwright P class on two Bulleid coaches for the Autumn Tints service is fairly extended without being right on the limit; if the load went up to three coaches, it would almost certainly be over-extended, especially with regard water capacity during the steam heat season, and might struggle for traction on the 1:55 bits at times of less than ideal rail conditions - such as, erm, Autumn! So the reliable limit is two coaches - which is still profitable.

And that's before you try and think of how carriages will dovetail with locos. We typically run two service trains each weekend, ideally of 300+ seating capacity, with (ideally, though not always possible on both sets) wheelchair space. In practical terms, that means a Mark 1 / Bulleid rake on one train (220 tons or so - definitely a class 4+ duty) and one of two different vintage rakes on the other - one of which is 185 tons and really needs a class 4 engine, but the other is about 110-125 tons and is within the capacity of a class 1. The carriages have maintenance schedules (which defines when sets get swapped) based on mileage; the locos have washout schedules based on days. Oh, and the smaller tank engines probably won't do three round trips without a trip during the day to the yard for more coal and emptying the ashpan, whereas the larger tender engines will.

Keeping all that in sync is a serious logistical issue, even before any problems caused by unplanned failures etc. Which probably explains why sometimes sets have locos on them that potentially look a bit big. In the end, reliability is an important issue for passengers: better sometimes to have a loco that will definitely do the job that one which might lose time if conditions aren't optimal. Plus, as others have mentioned, a small engine worked right to its grate limit is getting more wear and tear, and losing more coal up the chimney.

As an example, two photos from Western Bulleid of the Bluebell last weekend. I'll leave the experts to ponder why the 23,800lb TE mixed traffic class 4 had a load of about 125 tons tare on the second service train, while the 17,400lb TE class 1P had a heavier load of 134 tons tare on the afternoon tea train!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/davestubbings/14097771624/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/davestubbings/13910742358/in/photostream/

PS - as an addendum, neither of those trains is exactly realistic! But I'll leave others to judge whether the problem is mismatched liveries between rolling stock and locos, a set of London Underground coaches in deepest Sussex, or a pre-Beeching closure branch line needing the capacity to deal with 175,000 passengers each year!

Tom

 

Well "common sense" is only another way of saying "in my opinion".

PH

 

As some who recently said;
"As I suspect you will always want to have the last word I am going to let you have that, regardless.
PH"
is it do as I say not as I do?????

 

PMSL

Let me guess what gem of maturity comes next... your Dad's bigger than my Dad?

 

These rather nasty comments show exactly why this thread should be brought to an end.

PH

 

Interesting comments in general, with several differing points of view.

I must add that I think PH should be allowed to express his views without being hounded. I myself have had conflicting views to those expressed by PH, but never the less I respect his contributions. How dull and boring if everyone agreed ! Like G-FG, some may consider some of his views controversial, but they are also generally knowledgeable and contain elements which are undoubtedly correct.

 

exactly what is it we are trying to recreate? you can never recreate a time gone past exactly how it was, you can only go as far as your availible assets will let you, for example most branch lines would have not seen mk1 coaches or express pasenger locos, unless on diversion. but go to most preserved lines and you will most likily travel in a coach that is not typical of what would have run ,back in the day, or had the same motive power, stations are no longer as they were, barrow crossings replaced by foot bridges, platform extensions , new buildings where before there would have been none, but it all some how fits in,

 

Because you are creating an "aura" - an "ambience" in which historical accuracy is mainly irrelevant. There are purists who will decry the lack of "historical accuracy" and in certain cases that may be relevant but to the public in general the trip is about that "ambience" they recall from their younger days. Laugh if you will but these "Memory Evocations", as I like to call them, are a major if not THE major, source of incentive for the many visitors to heritage lines.

The same applies to main line running where the average traveller is only concerned to savour haulage by steam - to see the exhaust swirling past the coach windows - even if he can't hear the locomotive at the front too often. Once again it's the "ambience" that is created and for which the tour operator is able to generate an income to cover the cost of providing the "steam experience" and the colour, shape and historical connection to the train being hauled is totally irrelevant to the experience being savoured.

I think it's called "catering for the market".

 

There is a place for all types of preserved railways in this country, for example The South Devon Railway & The Dartmouth Steam Railway. These railways are less then 10 miles apart and are both different in the style of operations.

The South Devon is what you would call a 'true(?)' heritage railway. I.E. It's run completly by volunteers, hosts multiple galas a year and is near enough historically accurate.

Where as the Dartmouth Steam Railway as you all know run for profit by a PLC. Yes it's not historically accurate but in recent years has made improvements (e.g. 7827 now in BR Black, D7535 now in BR Blue, Mrk 1 coaches in new livery etc...). It is also run alongside their boat fleet and bus services.

These two heritage railways are different in operation but complement each other because they are located so closely to each other which I think works well. It's good for heritage railways to be different from each other as you will appeal to multiple target markets which means more people will visit therefore more profit.