Flying Scotsman

If the objective were to maximise the number of people who can experience the loco, then I’d do it by a combination of visits to heritage railways and periods in light steam with cab access at major railway centres (Shildon, York etc).

In raw numbers, operating at a heritage railway will always beat mainline hands down.

I’m not saying that would be my preference - but if you put a premium on accessibility, that would be how to deliver it.

Tom

 

12 months?! Im counting since 1998, how many failures have we seen on any of Rileys black 5s? I cant think of one...

 

They may well have done - and if I'd been preparing the tender I'd have looked closely at what worked in the Riley's relationship to ensure that it was carried forward. By any reasonable definition, the tendering process has failed given how little understanding of Flying Scotsman's availability or operating model there is.

That doesn't alter the reality of public sector procurement regulations, under which the sort of arrangements you advocate are rightly very heavily restricted.

 

And given what we are reading on other threads, if that supported the heritage sector around the country, that would be very positive for the NRM wider mission.

 

Who knows who tendered and why the outcome was reached*, unless someone sticks their head above the parapet we will never know. Not sure why WCR are now getting stick from some quarters (possibly a rhetorical question TBH) for making a commercial decision not to choose to operate it, looking at SM there seem to be be many who would be prepared to lay the shooting of JFK at the feet of Mr Smith!

What is going to be interesting is when she goes mainline what is she going to physically haul, with the demise of Rivera who hires out stock for the use of other TOC's these days?

*FWIW having had several years of experience of public procurement from both sides of the fence, if someone has set up a tender assessment criteria which ties you to going with the cheapest price whatever the results of the other criteria they have royally dropped a whatsit and deserve the inevitable stream of compensation events which will invariably follow....

 

I have just wasted an hour searching through available policy statements and similar documents published by the Science Museum Group and found nothing useful regarding a mainline operating plan for 60103. However there is much to suggest that it has a very low priority. My hunch is that Tom is correct and that the likelihood is that there will be no mainline running this year and quite possibly thereafter.

 

I seem to recall picking up a rumour at Strathspey last year, or whenever that was, that FS wouldnt do any more mainline running, hence the adventures north, as it was deeply unlikely to happen again.

Pure speculation on my part, but if that was the intent by the folk issuing the tender, then it does beg the question, would Riley's even bid.......?

 

I'm fairly sure that the "rumours" were just that. At the time, there seemed to be a lot of grumpy folk on Twitter with a grudge against FS--either enthusiasts who think the NRM spend too much money on her, or mainline drivers who resent the trespass she causes--and once they saw the Strathspey incident, they started muttering "hopefully this will be the last time that engine ever runs". Inevitably, Chinese whispers kicked in and some people started to think there was a real threat that the engine would be permanently withdrawn. I don't believe there ever was. As I told those grumpy folks at the time: engines are not usually written off by rough shunts.

Sent from my SM-A125F using Tapatalk

 

Public procurement in this country has a very poor reputation for choosing the lowest price regardless of all other possible criteria*. It is reassuring (slightly) to learn that some consideration can be given to those other criteria. I wonder how often that actually happens: apparently it didn't in the case cited in post #8795.
* All please note that "criteria" is originally plural, the singular being "criterion". Now that many people are using "criteria" for the singular, what will happen for the plural? Will it become "criterias"?

 

I think it's common. In research contracting you might get say team quality/experience 30% ; bid quality 30% ; price 30% ; stakeholder engagement plan 10%.

For something like bus service contracting you would have some essential criteria like must hold an operator's licence, designated licensed transport manager etc. Then you would have some specification of the required service provision eg if a school bus it must arrive at 0815 and depart at 1545 and must have minimum 50 seats. Then subject to all that you would likely be bidding on price.

 

Criteriorum?

 

Criterii?

 

No, it'll remain "criteria" and become one of those nouns that is both singular and plural in form.

 

If the only mainline requirement is going to be in steam transit from NRM location, to mainline connected heritage railway then I guess that DB could make sence, no tours as such, just light engine and coach , Does the science museum actually have a policy about active museum pieces? and the custodianship of them? It may very well be that its planned that 60103 does spend this year on a tour of heritage railway sites, all to do with rail 200, but why hasn't it been announced by the NRM, that would make a lot of sence, not to say good publicity, and then, draw up a full agreement that will include a certain number of steaming days with WC, Vintage trains etc, but the doubt is there, that some with in the Science Museum group, do not intend for 60103 to have an active retirement, but that the ticket will be drawn down, and then the engine placed on static display.

 

Someone on FB posted a comment (which has since been deleted it seems) on a post by Riley’s saying everyone in the industry knows why Riley’s lost the contract suggesting they should stay quiet and keep their heads down. The post in question criticising the NRM’s decision to get rid of the workshop. Two things which are both my opinion and my opinion only:
1. Getting rid of the workshop was a terrible mistake.
2. I can’t see Northern Steam fulfilling the whole length of the contract. I wish them all the best but I can’t help but feel this will go badly wrong.

 

Well if that is like the numerous engineers in my company who claimed to know why commercial decisions were made, then I would not put too much weight to it.

 

Regarding (1), a cursory read of Bob Meanley's report on the overhaul of Flying Scotsman suggests that far more than having/not having a workshop is required for NRM to deliver complex work.

 

All tenders over £100k have experience questions in my LA, including if you wish to join a framework. We are also require a certain number of registrations, levels of insurance etc.
We are often criticised for making it too difficult for local SMEs to bid for work, indeed one contractor once told me it costs them around £10k to bid for a LA contract.
I would suggest public sector tenders are far more rigorous than the private sector.
And no there are no diversity rules in place, however, on large contracts we do request a certain amount of community benefits for local groups / charities.

 

Like you I could find nothing, and strangely on those sites that list awarded Science Museum Contracts, numerous NRM projects but nothing on the recent custodian tender.
Mind you maybe it is just my computer set up but I cannot access the NRM website at all, just get an "Error 405 Not Allowed" on the main page or via any attempt at their press releases. Perhaps they have moved from the Science Museum to MI5 and not told us.