If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Large and Small locomotive economics, ex-West Somerset Railway developments

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by GWR Man., Nov 8, 2014.

  1. Tiffer

    Tiffer Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2013
    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    316
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    retired
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Of course,shorter trains might mean greater frequency-restore the two passing loops, plus signalling,plus another engine in service plus fuel plus crew !
     
  2. moored

    moored New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    224
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    IT Support
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Just my opinion but using Bulleids as an example I cannot see what the problem is with using bigger engines. OK agreed they are not ideal loco's for the 25mph stop start nature of heritage lines. They were after all designed for express running. However, to travel on the mainline behind Braunton, Tangmere or Clan Line for example I would have to fork out up to £100 for the privilege. However, I can go to Swanage, SVR, KWVR or Mid-Hants and pay max £20 and have a just as nice a day out. Granted the speed isn't there but for someone who wants simply wants a trip behind a Bullied but can't afford the expense of main line running it is perfect. The same can be said of Black 5's and other engines that are represented on both heritage lines and the main line.
     
  3. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Easy then. Pay a surcharge to travel on a "big engine" train to reflect the additional fuel, lubrication and overhaul costs. It would be interesting to see the non-gricer take-up of this.

    PH
     
    jnc likes this.
  4. Neil_Scott

    Neil_Scott Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,155
    Likes Received:
    302
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Railway servant
    Location:
    Worcester
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I wonder what Paul's response to this is?
     
  5. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,944
    Likes Received:
    6,303
    The problem is that big engines cost more.
    1. Overhauls: Comparing locomotives in similar condition with similar wear and similar work required, a larger engine will probably consume more labour and certainly consume more materials. In addition it will require a bigger shed which is more costly to build, heat and light.
    2. Running: Larger engines will consume more coal and water and oil than smaller ones. The difference can be small, and there are occasions when in fact the difference is negative, because if the load is big enough the larger engine will be more economical.

    You are confusing what the market may want (to travel behind a BB for £20 / day) with what the railway can afford (which was PH's point). IF there are sufficient passengers paying their £20 / day not just to fill the train to the point that say an Ivatt tank could cope with, but fill it to the point that compensates for the additional cost of the BB, then all is well and good. Paul is trying (I think) to express the view that getting the right size engine and train for the traffic is very important (assuming that you have the equipment to give you that flexibility). He's right.

    Let's take a typical weekend in March on a "hypothetical" railway. We will assume that the middle trip accounts for 50% of the traffic on offer (typical)
    1. Passengers who will ride = 200
    2. "Average" fare = £15
    3. Revenue available = £3000
    4. Number of enthusiasts (will have rung to find out what engine is on the train) = 10 (£150)

    Service: 3 return trips of the line

    Train option 1: Class 2MT Ivatt plus 2 x TSO (64 seats) + 1 x BSK (32 seats) = 160 seats total
    Train option 2: Class 6 Battle of Britain plus 3 x TSO (64 seats) + 1 x BSK (32 seats) + 1 x RMB (32 seats) = 256 seats total
    Train option 3: Class 6 Battle of Britain plus 2 x TSO (64 seats) + 1 x BSK (32 seats) = 160 seats total
    Train option 4: Class 2MT Ivatt plus 3 x TSO (64 seats) + 1 x BSK (32 seats) + 1 x RMB (32 seats) = 256 seats total

    Just comparing coal (for simplicity)
    The Ivatt will burn 1.5 ton of coal including lighting up = £292.50
    The BB will burn 2.5 ton of coal in option 2 including lighting up = £495
    The BB will burn 2 ton of coal in option 3 including lighting up = £330
    The Ivatt will probably burn 2.5 ton of coal in option 4 including lighting up = £495

    If you have the equipment to do it then option 1 is clearly the best one, even before you consider the additional wear on the carriages (which is marginal, but it all adds up), and the overhaul costs.

    At no point have the trains been more that 2/3 full and some would have been way less than 50% full. Option 4 may not even be an option if the weather is bad and the line steeply graded, and unless the line is quite level there will be increased wear because to pull 5 coaches on the 1:60 of the MHR with the Ivatt is possible but requires a long cut off and full regulator. In other words the engine is working hard.

    Note that the value of the enthusiast market on offer (£150) does not cover the difference in coal alone between option 1 and option 2.

    Having said all of the above though, to justify having the ivatt in the first place there have got to be enough days in the year when the traffic on offer can be accommodated in the trains it can pull. If there are only 10 or 20 days in the year when that is the case then it makes more sense to accept that there are days when the big engine that can cope with all those other days is under utilised.

    Except at galas I don't believe that the enthusiasts spend enough to cover the cost of running a big engine where a small one will do, especially when there are an equal number of enthusiasts who want to ride behind a Terrier as want to ride behind a Duchess. I also don't think it makes sense to use a big engine if a small one will do the job, providing you have the small engine in the first place (see above).

    In the end running a railway is about finding the best balance that you can in all the variables of traffic, loco and carriage fleet, safety etc etc etc etc. Inevitably the balance isn't always struck.
     
    OldChap, Paul Kibbey and paulhitch like this.
  6. Neil_Scott

    Neil_Scott Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,155
    Likes Received:
    302
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Railway servant
    Location:
    Worcester
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don't think anyone is saying that railways should run A4s or Merchant Navy's on 2 coach trains during mid-March. People acknowledge that bigger engines have a role to play when hauling longer, heavier trains on some of nation's preserved railways. I agree with you that it only makes sense to match motive power to service requirement, that's good management. But Paul Hitch denies that there is a counter-argument that bigger trains need bigger engines and no-one can convince him, except when he makes an exception (ie his example of the P&DSR or the NYMR) to his own rule.
     
  7. Neil_Scott

    Neil_Scott Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,155
    Likes Received:
    302
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Railway servant
    Location:
    Worcester
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I did read what you wrote but I've used the example of A4s and MN rather than BoBs which only have a grate of 38.25 square feet compared to an MN's 48.5 square feet (I can't find an A4's details at present). There is big and there is bigger.

    I wouldn't agree with your analysis of PH's argument; it shifts and contradicts itself whenver the circumstances suit him which is why I think people find it frustrating.
     
  8. huochemi

    huochemi Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,751
    Likes Received:
    1,393
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The basic principle of not incurring costs needlessly must be correct but there is an income side to this. I think it would be useful if Paul could suggest an example of where he thinks the wrong size of loco/train is being used and then see what the response is from that railway, which hopefully will be educational. The logistics of adding or subtracting coaches has already been covered. I suspect we can all think of situations where, to the layman, there are locos which appear too large for normal needs (or simply too many locos / stock taking up valuable real estate, restored or not) but there is presumably a reason, which may come down to availability of locos. The 8xxxx tanks are often mentioned as being the ideal loco for many lines but paradoxically very few are currently operational and I guess there must be a reason why other locos are preferred in the overhaul queue.
     
    jnc likes this.
  9. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,099
    Likes Received:
    57,414
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The other issue is what is available. On the Bluebell we have relative riches in medium (class 1 - 2) engines (H, C, O1, E4, Dukedog etc) and ideally would have about 3 - 4 available at any one time, as well as a couple of class 0 engines available (we have three P class and two Terriers, with currently two available). Those engines get pretty extensive use (did anyone notice that in October, the two Ps ran 28 consecutive days each, about 1500 miles each, with only 1.5 days lost to a failure where the E4 substituted). We also have a decent amount of low tare, high capacity stock.

    But - and it s a big but - we are lucky in that regard. It's all very well suggesting that railways should run smaller locos - but in general they aren't available except for a few lines, which already make great use of them! (Last year, the highest mileage loco on the Bluebell was the H class). High capacity stock is also nice, and I believe an attraction in its own right, but again - where is anyone going to get a set like the Mets now? (And that set has been pretty intensively used this year, probably in service for at least half our weekend operating days plus a stint on the mainline). To bring this back to the WSR, it would in my view markedly improve the line if they could put out a proper GWR set. But realistically, that is going to change the train weight by about 4 or 5 tons per coach - say 25 - 35 tons for a set. That's welcome, but it isn't going to swing the balance very much in motive power terms - a Manor should cope with 7 Mark 1s, but would still probably be needed for 7 GWR coaches.

    I think those lines that are lucky enough to have Ivatt class 2s, or pre-group 0-6-0s, tend to be either using them, or getting them overhauled. But when all is said and done, the largest numbers of preserved locos tend to be larger, more modern types, simply because that is what ended up at Barry. It's pretty clear that, except on a few lines with very steep gradients, a Black 5 or a Hall isn't really going to be troubled by the likely loads on a preserved railway, but if the option is a Black 5 working easily or nothing, which should the responsible railway director choose?

    Tom
     
    jnc, michaelh, Paul Kibbey and 6 others like this.
  10. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Absolutely so Simon! Much better put in both your observations than in my postings. There is no arguing with gricers in starry eyed mode though.

    My concern is that when we have all been sprinkled on the rose beds in various crematoria, the successor generations will curse this one for having frittered away resources in wasteful operation rather than putting aside finance towards the major renewals that will be needed. Whether the imbalance in surviving machinery is due to chance as to what reached Barry or from a gricerish selection of what got there I could not say. Returning to our muttons, this sub-thread started because the WSR made the surprising discovery that it actually cost less to run a 45xx than a 28xx and various howls of anguish therefrom. Too many enthusiasts have an attitude to heritage railways like football supporters to the club of their choice.

    Paul H.
     
  11. Eh? I missed the announcement by the WSR of that discovery. Kindly advise where to look.

    Steve
     
  12. Paul Kibbey

    Paul Kibbey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    1,402
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Land of Sodor
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    With no real experience of a steam railway this is what I thought also. Years ago when I started driving HGVs 32tons was the max allowed on the road and most artics had 180bhp engines and they achieved 4\5 mpg. Now they run at 44tons and get 8\9 and more to the gallon. Not saying it the same for a steam engine just a thought.
    Paul.K
     
  13. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,802
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    Can you fit a tender engine with GWR mechanical auto-gear??? o_O
     
  14. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Look back in the thread.

    PH (positively my last posting on this sub-issue)
     
  15. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,802
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    Another factor to consider with the WSR which does not seem to have been mentioned so far is the potential for a variety of traffic patterns - it is not necessarily the case that all passengers travel from one end to the other and back again.

    The line tends to fall into two halves - 'country' and 'seaside' - broken by the loop almost mid-way at Williton. It is a long line, with the result that a round-trip takes longer than just a 'mere ride' and can catch people out (as has been mentioned elsewhere about those who fail to pay for long enough in the car-park at Minehead!). Then there is the cost - a return trip from BL to MD, or vice versa, for a family of four is not cheap, which is why probably there is quite a traffic (so I believe) in MD-WN returns by MD-based visitors. To be honest, having travelled the line from both ends on many occasions, whilst it is clear that starting from BL takes you to MD as a location where there are other attractions to make it a genuine 'destination', with all respect to those at BL it does not really qualify in the same way IMHO for those starting at MD. Hence another reason for those who take a shorter trip from MD, as a balance against time and cost. I believe there is quite an amount of traffic also for journeys such as Watchet-Minehead and return, or Blue Anchor-Minehead and return, starting from either end. I doubt that many, if any, do just (say) Bishops Lydeard - Williton, other than on Galas.

    My point here is that perhaps - and I am just speculating - there is some scope for the small engine+shorter train combination to do a more frequent service between MD and WN, interspersed with the large engine+longer train pairings doing the full-length journeys.
     
    nick glanf likes this.
  16. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Why bother?
    The most economical solution has to be a 14xx or 64xx & 2 auto coaches - seating for 140 (add others up to 4 total giving 280 if you really want) & if you use a luggage compartment space for refreshments on one of them!
    No facilities such as toilets but fold our steps for ground level halts.
    Loco wise these are very economical locos and at overhaul time they un-superheated and relatively simple and (as not yet mentioned) have the advantage of having standard pretty well off the shelf GWR parts along with many other types.

    Oh and you don't need more than a basic railway without run rounds, turntables etc to run them!
     
  17. I did, Paul, and have again, but found nothing. What message number?

    Steve
     
  18. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    It's there but part of a portmanteau posting and I am going to have to let you find it. I would not have become involved in this issue had it not been raised by another and it has had its time, for agreement will never be reached! Best of luck with the militant gricers.

    Paul H
     
  19. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,099
    Likes Received:
    57,414
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'll save Paul the effort. There were two posts, which were directly contradictory, so I think the jury is out - certainly no definitive statement by the railway that on equivalent loads, a 45xx uses less coal than a 28xx:


    So make your own mind up! I suspect there is not much in it except that for locos that are basically equivalent tank engine / tender engine versions of the same class (i.e. with the same boiler, cylinders etc) the tank engine normally scores by virtue of being about half coach lighter. Though interestingly the WSR converted a 5199 to a 2-6-0 tender equivalent!

    Tom
     
    West Somerset Wizard likes this.
  20. GWR Man.

    GWR Man. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,197
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Taunton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Or a 45XX 4575 fitted with auto fittings as some are.
     

Share This Page