CVR and Cauldon Lines

I got the same impression as lil Bear that forays onto the Cauldon - Leekbrook - Stoke line would be the exception rather than the rule with Leek - Froghall/Alton forming the core heritage route.

If MCR have designs on Oakamoor & Alton Towers then i'd suggest allowing a certain number of each other's Trains onto their metals would be in both parties best interests.

Quite excited in seeing this projcet take shape, will be quite unlike anything else.

 

What the others have said about operating a core route that is not greatly extended, then that is a logical step. Expand in small steps and build up the facilities rather than doubling the line.

But your point about "zero cost" is basically rubbish. There may not be capital costs but there almost certainly will be hidden costs - increased maintenance for example, so to work the increased income must cover the increased cost in order for it to work.

Running freight in conjunction with a preserved line is nothing new - the GCR(N) have been doing it for years. But the difference there is that the the non-profit preservation group owns the track and leases out paths for the British Gypsum trains. The MNR also allows the MoD to run trains. Any profits from the railway side of the business are recycled back into the preservation scheme.

But in the Valley of the Churnet, the MCR has to make a profit from the railway activities. This raises the possibility that it will turn round and screw over the CVR if it sees it can. Similarly, what happens if MCR goes bust?

 

Why be so pessimist? MCR didn't have to let CVR use the Cauldon branch for November, but they are doing. Everything that has happened so far has shown a positive relationship between MCR and CVR, with both parties seeming to want to develop their relationship further. I really don't think MCR are after CVR business, CVR are there as a tourist attraction, whilst MCR are there to move freight and eventually provide a commuter service to Leek and bring visitors into the area by rail. This will surely only benefit CVR by providing them with a mainline connection both for customers to arrive from and to bring in guest locos for galas etc. Also seeing as we have been told the main men behind MCR are also CVR members then I can't see them wanting to take money off "their" railway.

Everything that we have seen as outsiders from this has been of a positive nature, why are you so determined to find fault with it?

 

Do you know the layout of the railway???
http://www.churnet-valley-railway.co.uk/mcr/index.htm here is a map if you dont.
As you can see MCR plans to do the extensions and pay for them. Yes your right about all the extra wear and tear on locos/stock but the extra passengers who will visit will pay for the costs im sure. May i ask how the mcr would possibly screw over the cvr? the cvr owns its own land and although the directors of mcr also sit on the cvr board there is no reason why the cvr will loose out. I might mention that a couple of weeks ago Mcr ripped up all the sidings and loops that were down at the junction and GAVE FOR FREE 40 lengths of good rail (alot of the rails there were poor condition)to the cvr to swap with there old rail that is no use. This helps the railway cut costs already. And there is many more things to come out of this working relationships. I really dont see why you have to be so down on peoples hard work. They give up there time to support something so either come down in Nov to support the railway or if your not bothering to come down i dont see why your posting on this thread. Im off to bed as im up in the morning to help replace chairs on the cauldon section so all you lovely people who do come to support the railway can go on a section of line many people havent ever been on.

 

The MCR and CVR are doing amazing things with this project,some people posting threads on this site are very negative and think that MCR and CVR have not got a working relationship between them.This is not correct. Congratulations should go towards all the people who are spending many hours of hard work down at Cauldon be positive.

 

Gav, I'm not deliberately being negative. I'm trying to be realistic. Why are people so blindly optimistic about a potentially risky project? If what you've said is true, and it continues, then great, the CVR will do well. But it's a big IF. What happens when the MCR does go bust and all its assets end up in the possession of creditors? People fall out over silly things all the time -- what's to say the CVR directors and the MCR directors will continue this love-in indefinitely?

 

Have you actually spoken to the guys in charge? For if you have, you would be aware of how much effort has been put in behind the scenes for a long long time. This isn't something that has been agreed with in the pub on Friday and put into practice come Monday. The guys who have created MCR have done their homework and have it all planned out. Having spoken with one of the guys and some of the CVR volunteers they know exactly what they want to do and how to go about it. This is only the beginning. At least give them some sort of chance especially when you don't know the full facts.

 

That is a very pessimistic post there Tony! From the information that I’ve read that has been published in the public domain, Greg Wilson has been supporting the CVR for many years. I also believe that Mr Wilson owns several engines including the 8f and at least one if not both S160's (please correct me if I’m wrong), therefore providing some of the CVR's mainstay locomotive's together with investing in the future!

It all appears to me that the MCR has been set up by true supporter's of the CVR who can really make a difference to CVR at there own expense! Having to run trains commercially over the line is only logical to justify the investment, I’m sure it wouldn't have happened otherwise! Likewise it is only fair that those people who make the investment receive the benefits and I’m sure elements of this will still be reinvested back into the CVR, for instance ploughing money back into Mr Wilson's locomotives to ensure their long term operation.

It is only natural that there is risk involved with a major investment such as what the MCR is undertaking, therefore one of the reasons to do this extension under the MCR banner is to isolate the risk to the MCR whilst not risking any of the CVR's current setup! Therefore if the MCR was to fail the CVR would not be affected in any possible way and the CVR would revert back to the form that we all know at present.

The biggest risk I would have thought the CVR will be subjected too is the risk of being able to manage the increased demand over the CVR in terms of volunteer resources.

I am not in anyway connected to the CVR or the MCR but I have been actively following their progress for many years now and I wish them all the best in the future in what is probably the most ambitious current project in UK railway preservation! (Bearing in mind the WHR is almost complete!)

 

Tony, what you are saying is a contentious to say the least, saying "what happens when" is rather sweeping and some have said irresponsible. If you do not have any hard facts to back up this statment then I suggest you think again and edit or remove the remark.

Ralph.[/QUOTE]

I see that Tony as of yet has neither edited or removed the remarks on his post. As no hard facts have come up yet, I suggest that an apology to MCR is in order.

 

I see that Tony as of yet has neither edited or removed the remarks on his post. As no hard facts have come up yet, I suggest that an apology to MCR is in order.[/QUOTE]

Demanding apologies for legitimate comment and debate? What is this, a totalitarian state? Have you been promoted to admin-god? You can suggest all you want matey but you've no chance. My posts were made on the basis of the facts that anyone can see. How many businesses have you ever run? pathetic.

 

What's pathetic is that you have mouthed off whilst having no knowledge of MCR plans / current work and are writing them off before they've even begun. Show us these facts that we we are all missing to prove you statements or at least retract your statements made and give the guys a chance to prove themselves. SVR / NYMR / WSR etc all started with very little, and CVR have only been going since 1996 (?) whilst MCR 2009! Those of us who have spoken to the people concerned have a little more faith and patience than those who are making assumptions. As I said previously, at least give them some sort of chance before writing them off completely.

 

Things seem to be getting a bit heated here. Would you like to take a step back before any more posts please?

This was a thread on progress with the work that is going on there... :focus:



Thanks, Neil.