End of the Line

Coming back to this thread after an afternoon/evening doing restorationy things, I wondered what on earth had been going on! Then I realised that it was all my fault- I had suggested that fewer Gresley coaches had been preserved than might have been, because everyone had been busy buying Mk1 tin rot-boxes, just because they were ready to run, when they could/should have secured as many Gresleys as possible, thus providing the heritage railway movement with more vehicles with a real long-term, economic future, and more interesting and comfortable to boot. The opportunity to do that came when BR, in it's death throes, had a mass clear-out of departmental coaches in the '80s and early 90s, long after the matter of which steam locos could or should be "saved" had been settled.
But what chance has a discussion on coaching stock got, when we can all go off on sterile arguments about who bought what from Woodham's and why!

 

Err, not a lot from the sound of it, but wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments regarding the Teaks - most certainly an opportunity lost........... I remember them in the 80's running round the network in fairly good nick!

As for the "missed" chances of saving pre MkI, rolling stock - just where would they have all gone?.......... as has been alluded to, there were bugger all preserved lines in the beginning & BR would've wanted them off the network asap.......... I wonder how many prospective buyers had enough room in the back garden to lay enough track to "stuff & mount" all these gems....... never mind a tolerant wife?.......... if Beeching hadn't taken an axe to the network, and steam would have gone regardless, then just where would everything have gone?.......... nowhere except the breakers yard........... so love him or loathe him for what he did, he actually created the space for all us preservation nutters to actually bring a living history to the masses, oh, and somewhere to keep the stuff, be it the mighty steam loco, the essential coaches, the nice to have wagons and all the artifacts to go with them..........

From a personal point of view, I think we should be happy with what we've got - I look forward to one day seeing the Knotty coaches, I've seen & ridden the unique coaches on the BB, SVR & IOWSR, and I'm glad the MHR has managed to get its hands on some Bulleids - there's even a Maunsell to be done, though I believe that's private ownership, so who knows.....

 

Yep.

 

If I recall correctly the 80s for the preservation lines was really focussed on either extending or establishing themselves, and the money available to the heritage railways was much less (in real terms) than now (less income from operations, no heritage lottery fund, lower rate and amount of donations etc). Few had any significant overhaul facilities and those that did (SVR for example) were flat out with keeping the fleet going. Resources were stretched and the priority (rightly) was on securing the infrastructure and locomotives. Any board acquiring a fleet of Gresley coaches or LMS coaches, at a cost of say £2000ea with at least as much to spend on getting them into useable condition would have been quite mad given that they would have been unlikely to have the capacity or capability to restore them to service faster than say one every three years (if they were lucky). Against that backdrop the £4000(ish) for a Mk1 that could be used tomorrow was a far better use of the limited resources. It is incredibly sad that it is only really in the last 10 to 15 years that railways outside of the pioneers like the Bluebell and SVR have had the opportunity to look at the rolling stock, and now there is so little to be had.

I think we need more willingness to let vehicles be swapped, sold or leased to people / organisations that can and will look after them. More honesty about whether a given article can be cared for by one's own organisation or would be better moved on. The vehicles in store are not getting any better. The Bluebell have graciously leased a Bullied coach to the MHR which we will restore. We need more of this sort of arrangement. As an aside I think we also need more fluidity in the "allocation" of steam locomotives.

 

This assumes that in the case of privately owned locos, the support crew can also be "fluid" if any reallocation is of a long term nature.

 

You can follow the progress of the revarnishing programme on this Flickr page https://www.flickr.com/photos/128325479@N05/

Steve and Steph are leading the project this winter which releases others to deal with overhaul of LBSCR 9 compartment 3rd 2416 which was withdrawn in early July due to severe corrosion problems. In a week or two we will be craning its body back on after carrying out extensive steel replacement.

 

I wasn't taking that into account, more a sort of "ideal" rather than a developed thesis with ability to be implemented. However, it depends on whether the crew are both able and willing to continue to support the locomotive wherever it is based. We have already seen some sales as a result of such groups no longer being viable, and as time goes on more single loco owning groups will also find it impossible to sustain the flow of new recruits required. Some like Clan Line will. Others wont. In any case this thread is about rolling stock.

 

And that is a problem facing all loco owning groups.

 

At the time, those responsible for operating on the NYMR thought that the Lambton tanks and the J27 would be the mainstays of the service, and that anything bigger would be for "high days and holidays" - and for the first few years , when 4-5 coach trains were the norm they were right. Although 80135 was at the upper end of that power range it was a modern engine and being superheated was expected to be just as economical as well as being easier to maintain. In the event it has proved to be an ideal engine well able to handle the seven coach trains that are now the norm. the original plan was to buy two, but the funds weren't there - what a missed opportunity!

 

A big shame more Bulleid coaching stock didn't get preserved. I presume most of the Bulleid coaching stock was scrapped soon after southern steam ended due to the southern region not requiring loco haul stock.

 

Strangely some did survive, but off the southern. The electric stock and TC sets were not all new build, some being MK1 convertions.To source enough Mk1s there were swaps with other regions including Scotland. No doubt the not one of ours stance made them a bit unloved and would no doubt have been scrapped as new standard stock became available.

 

This clearly hits one of the nails on the head. The complex ownership structure on many lines needs unwinding so that railways can have effective rolling stock strategies. Such strategies would reveal surpluses and shortages and could be the basis of swaps or transfers.

 

Surely it has already happened a number of times, various wagons have been swopped between railways or single wagons transferred. The Mid Hants currently has a couple of Bluebell coaches. The Caley coaches that were on the Bluebell found there way back to Scotland. Some railways have looked at their fleets and thinned them out, but not every railway does take that sort of pragmatic view. It does take place but perhaps not quite as much as it should.

We are currently is the process of purchasing surplus, unwanted stock and spares from two railways.

 

The thing is when Fred Bloggs and at times his friends as well, buys a engine/coach/wagon and plans to restore it them/himself, and they/he finds it will need a lot of money and time which they/he hasn't got so it just sits there deteriorating, and they/he isn't willing to sell it as it they/his love and joy. Unless the railways tell the owner's to restore/remove it, it will just sit there, and other groups who will give it the TLC will just see it carrying on deteriorating until it is a hopeless case. In the case of GWR autocoach 169 the one man band, decided it was better to give the coach to a group with 6 people able to work on it as he decided he will never be able to restore it by himself.

 

Very true, just look at the amount of classic cars sat on driveways or in gardens.
'I'll fix it up one day'

 

Indeed, much to my horror when I joined the GWSR they were just getting rid of the last of the railway owned heritage carriages, a Hawksworth IIRC. There's still a couple of privately owned ones but they are decreasing in numbers too. As I've said before, it's a shame as I do believe that in a few years time we might have been in a position to start contemplating work on some of them.

 

Where is has happened it tends to be railway to railway. There are some examples of individuals / small groups passing equipment on, but at nothing like the rate that is needed to secure the futures of as many vehicles as possible. I know of one carriage (pre-nationalisation) where the owner hasn't spoken to the railway for over a decade. The vehicle lies on a siding rotting. The railway would love to see it restored but is powerless. In another instance an owner was eventually "moved on", but only after several years of attempting to support restoration and subsequently pressure to "do something" or "move". These sorts of situations are undoubtedly blighting numerous vehicles on many lines.

 

Stock does change hands but there are too many instances like the one that you mention.

It is very much easier here at the IOWSR as every single item of rolling stock and every Loco is owned by the Railway. Planning the work programme is does not involve multiple owners who do not have the finance or the ability nor the will to look after their vehicles.

The Railway has a clear policy to concentrate on stock that reflects the Islands Railways, the only things that do not fit in with that part of the policy are the essential engineering vehicles.

We still have our fair share of eyesores but we are slowly but surely reducing the numbers.

 

Why are they powerless? Is the siding space being paid for, and if not, can they not issue a notice of eviction or seizure of the item?
Can they notify the owner that they are clearing out surplus stock to make room for active restoration projects? Or contact them to offer a deal where the railway restores the item in exchange for use of the item for a predetermined period of time?
I don't know if the situation differs between different railways/organisations, but if I were setting one up now, I would certainly have a written agreement in place for every item of stock, whether owned by the railway, a group, or by a private individual. Thus, each party would be in no uncertainty as to the terms, which may differ from item to item, but if there is a contract arranged up front, then there would be clauses to prevent abandonment of these items.