CME Sat 6th August

If a diesel is an operational necessity it cannot be avoided as a modern fact.
The only thing that ought to change is the communication of the default position to customers in the advertising so they can choose for themselves the basis of their booking. If it is likely more often than not the booking information should say so and where there is doubt it should be treated as the default then if you get lucky it is a bonus rather than being disappointed the other way.
As regards yesterday a 5X would always have had a banker from Tebay with that load in steam days so nowt except the means of propulsion has changed.

 

As Big Al wrote in post 29, WCRC are desperate for a class 8 loco supply.

I agree about the communications. But if selling as a steam tour than surely the load should be set within the abilities of the loco on the day. It has been stated on other threads that some locos operate within their limits. That must be a good thing to ensure longevity of the machine. If the loco needs assistance than it is taking on too great a load. In that case either tell the customers well in advance or reduce the load. That may disappoint some customers, but then again, recently one tour did not even stop at Preston because they were a coach down and little communication on the day about it.

 

That is precisely my point. It seems more or less likely that a diesel will be required to assist or shunt in most cases so the advertising should be explicit. If on the day you get lucky its a bonus.
The now documented rules make it even less possible to evade the issue too so the demand for clarity is greater still.
Personally I have no issue with assisting diesels because I understand the many good reasons they might be included. What is not so plalatable is any opaqueness in the product being offered. Honesty is all that is required which does not seem an unreasonable expectation, does it, nor too onerous a burden on the seller?
If they fear adverse customer reaction the facts then speak for themselves.

 

Indeed. What have tour operators to fear from honest, open and transparent descriptions about the product that they are selling?

 

I go further because electing not to mention a factor that has a high probability of occurring on the grounds it may deter purchases would be highly unethical. To my mind the point has now been reached where a simple caveat should be routinely expressed that gives buyers the fairest idea of what they are purchasing. It does not need to be a detailed statement either just a warning certain facts could apply. The point @BigAl makes that NP followers know whats what is irrelevant. It is the ordinary uninformed buyers that need to be catered for. If they are indifferent to the possibility, as is assumed, there is nothing to lose and much to gain in other respects.

 

Reduce the load just like that? Haven't you heard the old adage that the profit is all in the last coach? On a prime route such as the WCML I don't think we will see steam only again for reasons which should be obvious.

 

It didn't seem to bother RTC and WCRC when a few weeks ago, without any staff on Preston Station that the train they had a valid ticket for was initially announced by the station staff that their train was cancelled only then to watch it steam by them and not bother stopping to explain. Reason, they had lost a coach en route.

What problem do YOU have with honest, open and transparent communications?

What problem do YOU have with a steam loco operating within the confines of it's reasonable ability?

Look at the plaudits for the Duchess and her run over Shap unassisted on 23rd July. So we HAVE seen steam only over Shap only a couple of weeks ago.

Price the tour according to the cost involved or be honest.

 

An often overlooked reality of steam days, but then the exhaust says Leander was certainly taking it's share of the load at Scout Green.



However much we may dislike the presence of a diesel in support ( and maybe moreso the lack of clarity in the advertising as to how likely that may be for operational reasons ) -- just consider whether 48 years ago this very weekend anyone would have even contemplated a steam hauled return trip over Shap yesterday?.

Let alone - Today - Two steam trains along the Dawlish sea wall, 60103 over the ECML to Carlisle and back, two trips to Stratford on Avon, two to Tweedbank and the regular service between Fort William and Mallaig.
If my maths are right I make that 12 steam hauled runs in total this weekend, with another three, plus 10 Jacobite runs, up to next Friday. It doesn't look like the majority of potential customers are bothered !

 

I'm not sure how much you know about steam locomotives but in terms of power output a Duchess is a totally different proposition to a 5X.
I cannot comment on communications in charter train or locomotive operations as like you I have no experience of either, rather than keep complaining on here I would suggest you do one of two things, 1 accept the world isn't perfect and be thankful that we still have mainline steam over 20 years after Dick Hardy said he could see it having to fold. 2 set up your own TOC or tour operation and show us how it should be done.

 

Another improvement that would arise from a default statement is that there would be no confusion or finger pointing when a diesel is used. Sometimes the TOC say the promoter requested an extra coach making assistance a necessity, other times the promoter says the TOC insisted for operational reasons. The 'why' becomes unimportant if it has been declared from the outset.
If a premium for steam only is viable then maybe double-heading could find greater favour. At least one loco owner would relish that!

 

Sadly tend to agree unless a reliable pool of class 7/8 is available. Perhaps when the LSL fleet is at full strength?

 

All terribly depressing when a box on the back makes as much noise, well not quite I guess, as the steam loco on the front. Surely, Shap is the highlight of this tour which is diminished by the Class 37. I know NR have rules so that is that. Solution? Reduce load and increase ticket prices to guarantee steam. I am sure passengers would pay more for guaranteed steam. Or postpone until Class 8 steam like the Duchess of Sutherland, is available. But even then, would WC still put a box on the back?

 

Let's get our facts straight here. Leander is not a 5X it is a 6P5F. There are many photos of Jubilees slogging up Shap unassisted in steam days with similar loads as yesterday's and I am sure Leander could have coped perfectly well with the load yesterday especially in such perfect conditions; dry rail and not a hint of rain.

 

But you miss the point. Of those 12 steam hauled trains, I think I am right in saying on one with Leander yesterday is or will have diesel assistance. That would make me very annoyed if I was on the trip over Shap to learn that all other 11 tours were steam only.

 

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, the Tweedbank job has a diesel involved but I suppose that illustrates the point of it being a fact made known during the booking process.
A Jub is no more capable in haulage terms than a 5MT and in some respects less suited to slogging uphill so it is sensible to treat as a 5 in my opinion. For load 11 unassisted up Shap I know where my brew can would be if I had the choice as a driver.

 

If you had read my earlier post, you would have seen me agreeing with Big Al that WCRC are in desperate need of some 8P locos. In fact as things stand this year. averyone would benefit. Of course I know the difference between at 8P and a 5XP. The obvious thing is the 8 can easily take a bigger load than a 5. So why burden a 5 with the load of an 8? The 8 was able to take CME unassisted two weeks ago. The 5 wasn't trusted.

Sorry but these tours are Commercial Businesses turning a profit. Misrepresenting what they are providing against what they are selling is just plain wrong. As 26D_M has said repeatedly, and I agree, there are times when the assistance is needed. What is so wrong with a profit making organisation being honest about what it is selling. Just like any other product. It should do what it says on the tin!

 

If you want to be pedantic the LMS Jubilee power classification was 5XP until 1951, 6P until 1955 and 6P5F thereafter. In steam days I think the unassisted limit over Shap was =9 but some drivers with a good engine would risk it with heavier loads. On todays railway such risks are just not possble.

 

Quite so and they continued to be referred to as 5X by enginemen long after notional reclassification. The ex BR men I listened to said that for anything but express jobs a 5MT is equal or better. That is not to say 45690 was not capable of managing solo yesterday either but as you say drivers have no discretion now, understandably.