Diesels on steam tours

After several different threads have touched on this, where do you stand on having diesels as part of the formation of steam tours, almost always tagged on the back?

Do you feel it is a necssary standby in case of failure, or is it just an unneccesary burden on the steam engine at the front with extra weight, or do you fell it detracts from the whole experience as the engne is not doing the work?

Opinions please (but try and keep it civil)

 

I have no objection if they are there as a reserve - it is to me part of the price we have to pay for continued steam on the mainline and it is a relatively small price to pay.

3 steam specials in London last Saturday - who back in 1968 would have thought nearly 40 years later that would happen.

As some one who's interest runs to railways not just to steam - in some ways I see it as an added bonus - the crompton at Kings Cross being an example.

Clearly use of the diesel when it is not require may detract from the experience of those on board but would they rather there was no steam at all?

 

Personally i don't have a problem with there being a diesel on the back of a tour as they do come in useful.

Having a diesel on the back is the way to stop steam getting themselves introuble with blocking lines if a problem occurs etc.

I think its something we have to accept and its about time all this "idiots" saying "well i am not going on that tour because there is a diesel on the back" grow up because if they don't the tour industry is going to stop. This year alone i wonder how many tours people havent been on because there is a diesel on the back.

Alex

 

Absolutely hate it -

There is no reason why stock suitable for steam haulage cannot be steam heated - knocks that old chestnut on the head - but it does mean that rolling stock hirers need to keep their standards up - but at a seemingly minimum retail hire rate of £70 per seat per day surely something warm and watered is not too much to ask.

For shunting purposes??? - well - just possibly - but only where there are no loco release roads and as for this busy infrastructure - its another case of if NR shout it loud enough we'll all believe! - just like the atmospheric CO2 jerks - thirty years ago we were all going to freeze in the new ice age - now we are going to fry - pass me the cinders and the willow - I need some thrash - yeah!

The capacity to use loops and to couple and uncouple in less than half an hour seems to be a lost art these days.

Note to tour operators - if you are running stock light to a start point for collection by steam - please run the heat on the way out at this time of year.

 

I think you've got to look at this case by case. York to London is every different to Scarborough York...

 

There seems to be a certain amount of inconsistency between when diesels are used and when they are not and the reasons for using them are not always apparent. There also seem to be different policies between the various TOCs. There are still tours that do not use a diesel such as last Saturday's run from Minehead to Paddington (ironically it could have done with something to give it a shove up the West Somerset gradients).

While some must dismiss those who object to diesels as "idiots" I feel they are entitled to complain if they are the paying customers who are shelling out £50-80 for what may not be an authentic steam train experience. Even having a diesel idling on the back ruins the authenticity for me. Would it not be possible for the railtour organisers to make it clear in advance what the policy is going to be for a particular tour? That may put some people off but at least no-one could say they weren't told and we wouldn't have people feeling ripped off.

 

why not put the diesel inside behind the steam engine, as the train engine then the steamer would have no need for otmr etc (runs to air raid shelter). The problem with modern management is that interval timetables have made them all soft, they do not like spanners in the works such as specially pathed trains, they just cannot manage them. How often do we see footplate staff on mobile phones telling control 'we are here, surprise, surprise' I can imagine the fat controller say 'where the flip did that come from?'

 

Reasons given for Diesels included on the rear end in the past maybe people have thoughts on each point.

1 Shunting at a Terminus
2 ETS (either for train heat or Air Con)
3 As a rear end barrier vehicle

4 TOC/NR feels the need for Diesel Assistance on steep parts of the route
5 TOC/NR feels that it lowers the risk of blocking a major route in the event of failure

 

Contrary to the impression given by some posts in this thread, the majority of steam hauled tours do not include a diesel. Tours in former Southern territory may be the exception to this observation, but I don't have any detailed statistics on this.

David at http://www.uksteam.info

 

Just out of interest might it be something that you could add on the UKSteam website. I know its a bit outside the remit of the already extensive (and still free) 'service' you offer.

 

I can live with it. I like trains.... if we are being more critical - standard gauge in the southern area. Steam, diesel, electric - it's all good. So for me, if a tour has a short section of diesel haulage - bonus, another loco I have been hauled by.
If there is to be a diesel loco, my preference is of course for something a little bit heritage or unusual. Unusual would be something like either 67005/6 (Royal engines) or 67029 (EWS executive silver loco).
I can understand the operational reasons for a smelly on the back of the train, and am just glad that there is a kettle at the front.
However, I can appreciate how some people could be upset that when you are travelling by steam you suddenly notice there is some assistance from the rear and it is not the steam loco doing it alone.

 

As this thread has been started because of my comments I suppose I should reply.
If a tour is advertised as steam hauled from the outset,it should be steam hauled and not assisted in any way.I would be happy if the advertising for a tour indicated that diesel assistance will be necessary but this does not happen at present.This is wrong and should not be allowed to pass without something being said to the Rail Tour Organizer or TOC.
It seems to me that the practice of a diesel at the rear of the formation is happening more and more often now.We did have this situation a while ago on some major routes but it seemed to have stopped only now for it to return with avengence.
My comments are aimed at trying to get this situation changed.If you want to put diesel assistance on the train,tell us in advance,then you won't get any complaints.
This will be my final post on this matter.

 

i did a tour a few years back, the diesel leg was D9016 still in purple out of exeter bank, that was the best bit , the deltic going up the hill faster than the kettle down the hill.

 

I don't think anyone can argue with that - seems a sensible approach.

 

I have no problem but I wish they would use heritage Diesels intead of 66/67 rubbish. If its steam, Its heritage, so why use modern Diesel's Also it would be nice if these heritage diesels were in a heritage livery. There is alway's though a clause in the small print 'subject to availabilty' But I think if they are sudstituted by Diesel, perhaps some sort of part refund should be available.
I wonder if there'l ever be a diesel railtour substituted by steam lol

 

There is! Cannot remember the exact details off the top of my head, but D1015s first railtour after a few years now has 6024 substituted in for part of the trip.

 

It has happened a few times...

A few years back the diesel which should have worked a Daylight Railtour's trip from Alton to Woking failed and this leg was worked by the steam loco (73096?) tender-first.

Last year, Vintage Trains trips to Melton Mowbray were originally advertised as steam and diesel top-and-tail, but then changed to 45305 and 5690 top-and-tail. (The Leander over Shap trip earlier this year was also originally advertised as diesel-hauled to Crewe, but this changed to 5965, but was later changed back to diesel).

A Steam Dreams trip to Weymouth a year or so back should have seen 6024 removed at Yeovil and then be diesel-hauled to Weymouth, but 6024 worked through to Yeovil when it became apparent that the FM Rail 31 was not fit to take the train from Yeovil to Weymouth. Unfortunately, this meant that there was insufficient time to service 6024, so the return trip was diesel-hauled.

 

At Past-Time Rail we do at all costs try to avoid a diesel in the formation of our trains and if the route/tour does require a diesel in the formation we say so in our brochure etc. As EWS currently operate the majority of our trains then a class 66/67 will be used. We do have our trains preheated with either the diesel on the ECS/Loaded section of the tour and also run a generator on the steam section. But please remember that we do not own our own rolling stock but hire this in from the TOC's or Rolling Stock Providers. The previous post is so inaccurate - jonwright87 please be accurate in your postings.

We are very aware of our families tradition in the railtour market and try to promote steam tours in their purest form. We will not run trains with a diesel in the formation for as long as we are able to!

 

I remember seeing that 73096 on the Daylight Railtours set actually stood in for a service train once, I think it was something like Bournemouth - Weymouth or something

 

They're still skips, and they still produce that infernal yinging no matter what colour they are.