Steam engines available for traffic in 2014

Those who decry the "rusting wrecks" and want to scrap them to tidy the various railways up make me wonder why they are bothering to read a forum entitled "National Preservation". The coaching stock world is often the target of such comments. On the NYMR we have a set of teak coaches that will total 8 by the end of the summer, with restoration work about to begin on a further two - almost all of them were "henhouses" a few years ago. Similarly, with every passing year we see more and more ex-Barry locos being steamed and if the restoration site they are on is overprovided they spill over onto other sites, and I think that in general once locos and carriages have been restored to working order they do not revert to anything like Barry condition as more and more covered accommodation is provided. There is no doubt that in both fields there is progress being made, why be pessimistic?

 

Well, something that is rusting or rotting more and more as each year goes by clearly isn't being preserved now is it? It must be especially heartbreaking for the carriage restoration folks the way something that wasn't in bad condition can go downhill very fast with water penetration into the wrong places...

 

Could you just put my mind at rest by, as schoolmasters say, showing all working. Was the number of ex-Barry engines steaming for the first time last year really greater than 2012? You seem to be very confident, whereas I am burdened by the ignorance of not actually having the cold hard numbers. I would like a few cheering ones because the ones I DO know - cost of a 10 yearly for a Class 5 complete with all fittings, cost of contract restoring a Barry wreck with none, daily spot hire of a tank engine, are all utterly terrifying. And there seems to be a national shortage of gullible millionaires...

 

Surely each year there would be less and less barry wrecks steaming for the first time, for the simple fact that there will be less? And RE JimC, just because something is rusting more and more doesn't mean it will never be preserved, you can only say that for definite when it has actually become part of the earth again... And yes, it can be heartbreaking if a coach, say, bubbles litterally a couple of days after it comes out of the paint shop, but that's life/mk 1s!

 

Dumping old wrecks is not "preservation". It is dumping old wrecks.

PH

 

The OP cited the HRA for there being "1032 preserved standard gauge kettles in UK." I seem to remember that 200-odd locos went to Barry and eventually came out again. Where did the other 800 come from?

 

There is a valid point here in that too many preservation projects do look like a dump of old wrecks. Some lines make efforts to make sure that those locomotives awaiting their turn in the overhaul/fundraising queue are under some measure of protection. The situation with rolling stock is not as good and items can stand for years, poorly sheeted up with no visible sign of progress. Items are saved but then the problem arises as to quite where to store them and so we get preservation sites that are more akin to the property of Messrs Steptoe.
Money is another factor. Saving heritage is the easy part but restoration and conservation drive the bills. As locomotives and rolling stock get older they tend to cost more and more to keep running. To those who think that the rebuilding of 4472 was very expensive, well it was, but the future will show that we have not seen anything that will prove to be unique.
In the future railways will have the minimum of engines in working order because they will be unable to finance more. The state of the nation and the shape of the economy of the same means that fewer individuals will be able to significantly finance projects. As the years pass fewer will remember the railways as we now preserve them and so the future could be most perilous.

 

A few SG locos were preserved direct and never went to a scrap yard and then there's the small army of ex industrial sg locos.

 

i think we will see more lines only using steam on high days and holidays, with the staple transport being dmu or deisel hauled, if only because of ever increasing cost of coal and less engines availible, the large players will i think still be mostly steam, they have the income to finance overhauls etc, but the smaller outlets will i think be in for some very lean times, as its a vicious circle, you have fewer engines in trafic, so have to rely more on deisel, the public come to see steam, so go else where, your income drops even further, so you cut back even more, before you know it you cant put any steam out, and your at the point of no return because the public, who pay for your hobby, just go else where, there are more attractions out there than 20 years ago, but still the same market.

 

You miss my point. The percentage of the locos extracted from Barry that have been steamed continues to rise year on year - it will probably rise this year as 4270, 35006, 46447 and perhaps others join the list. It's a one way curve unless they return to the same derelict condition (which isn't the same as stored awaiting overhaul because they will not be robbed for components such as rods, tenders etc., and there is a fair chance as time goes by of them being stored under cover. I'm not saying that the percentage available for traffic has risen because I don't have that data but my intuitive feeling is that numbers probably are slowly rising as more railways open and locos migrate.

 

It is both surprising and somewhat amusing to see PH and GF-G having an open and agreeable love affair on Nat Pres. I'll get my tin hat !

Jest aside, the points made by both in their differing but usual entertaining way requires serious consideration. It is not just standard gauge steam locomotives that are becoming increasing expensive to maintain, but the greater heritage movement in all its manifestations. Financial income is typically generated from three main sources; revenue, charity in its many guises and the public purse. These income streams appear fairly static and unlikely to grow at a rate which will match inflation. In addition, the public purse aspect must be in decline. With costs rising at an alarming rate, some difficult decisions are going to be required in the future.

I am a great admirer and supporter of the initiative, vision and effort of both individuals and groups. Some of these have survived and become stronger, whilst new vibrant groups have formed. Some unfortunately are but shells of their former selves, but this is how society evolves. Historically as a whole they have bought the movement a considerable way in fifty years, and I see no real reason why many of these initiatives should not serve the movement well for the next fifty. Of course there are problems - there always has been. The one real cause for concern is the rate at which costs are rising. Did the pioneers at Barry ever consider as they scrapped together their hard earned couple of thousand quid for a locomotive, that within fifty years a heavy general could cost north of half a million. I doubt it very much, and if they had known what would have been their reaction. I suspect they would have shrugged their shoulders and carried on regardless, they were never deterred by the simple problem of finance ! Put into a general context, an average heavy general equates to what, about seven miles of P-way replacement. The concern should therefore be greater than just future locomotive costs.

Consider and attempt to manage the financial future yes, worry too much no - worry will not generate finance. Forward planning, good housekeeping and good management are going to be required. There is no doubt that some of the smaller railways are going to find the future very difficult, but sometimes a slimmer market opens up many opportunities for those who have been smart enough to survive.

 

Dumping old wrecks or destroying priceless assets? A pointless debate. I'm normally on the side of the pragmatic, but there is one absolute truth - once its gone its gone. Steam engines are almost unique in their ability to sit around for half a century and then be put back into service with a significant percentage of the original parts. So, keep them. But do try to make them look presentable or hide them away - coaches even more so, since they deteriorate faster - much faster in the case of BR Mk 1's!.

How many of the Barry wrecks will never steam (in any form, there are the ones being 'morphed' into other locos))? I don't know. Probably about 20. Not a bad percentage at all out of 200 saved.

A bigger worry is probably the industrials - an equal part of our heritage, but much less 'sexy'. My first firing turn having been on an Austerity, I have a fondness for them , but few railways are really interested in them.

 

It all depends on how you define an old wreck, doesn't it? I don't suppose you term the field of decrepit bodies at the IoWSR awaiting restoration as fit only for the firewood pile? The LNERCA has its fair share of decrepit looking coaches on the NYMR, but we are steadily working through them and trying to conserve them in the meantime. Do you suggest that we give up and torch them?

There seems to be a steady stream of industrials moving on to new homes, and as long as people are intent on setting up new railways I think this will continue to be the case as there just aren't enough ex-BR engines to go round, and the railways that have them try to hang on to the ones proven to suit their needs. I think we'll see the trend of railways buying up locos owned by individuals or groups continuing as they try to gain more control over their destinies in the form of provision of steam locos. The NYMR has been doing this, the Swanage seems to be starting to do so and I'm sure there will be others.

 

Regarding the total no of locos extant, in the case of main line locos this site has a comprehensive listing http://www.worcs.com/railway/preserved-steam.htm
Copying it to XL allows a very rough count = approx 450 so about double the Barry number, which surprised me slightly.

Personally, if it came to the crunch, I've no desire to see money spent on reviving yet another GWR 2-6-2T or 4-6-0, SR WC and even LMS Black 5s. I'd much rather see another lost class recreated, particularly if they can fulfil a useful function either on a heritage line eg 82045, G5, or mainline eg Patriot, Clan, P2 etc (and as exceptions to my previous comment GWR Grange, Saint and County).

 

And you have it in a nutshell. No matter how much PH et al talk about restoring what we've got rather than build anew, you cannot dictate which project an individual should support. Nor can they assume that if project B was consigned to the scrapheap, supporters of said project would automatically throw their hard earned at Project A. I will support the P2 but am not interested in supporting the restoration of a 45xx and there will be fans of the 45xx who wouldn't dream of supporting the P2 and so on. But we've been here before and I suspect we'll come here again ere long.

 

This is interesting. Firstly the IOWSR (which I am not connected with) owns all its own equipment and can prioritise where its money goes. No Byzantine structures here! Secondly it has been restoring the various garden sheds/summer houses, what have you, for nearly thirty years and there is absolutely no doubt as to the ability and commitment to carry out this work. Moreover, once restored, the stuff gets maintained.

Now there is more covered accommodation the pace seems to have quickened and has been extended to include freight stock. All this is to be exhibited to the public in a purpose built building together with a carriage specifically to be retained in its "holiday chalet" state to demonstrate the use sold off carriage bodies were put to. Everywhere has a collection of stuff in less than desirable state but here it has not been allowed to accumulate in a "linear scrapyard" in full public view.

PH

 

Thank you Gios, PH and I are indeed the odd couple, and the love that dare not speak our name! You are as always the voice of reason; panic helps nobody and I wasn't trying to start a fire...just to understand what shape the business will be in 5 and 10 years hence. I am not suggesting an apocalypse, just that of the Fifty Shades Of Grey we operate in, the shade will change. Not too sure there is a consensus understanding of special railway inflation is widely understood. The economy, which drives the three sources of income, grows more slowly than our costs rise. We appear to be unable to control those costs, so something has to give. I think we are starting to see that making itself felt, across the movement, most visibly in MPD. I think, and so far no-one has produced any hard evidence I am wrong, that the number of steam engines available for traffic is actually in decline. So the remaining ones do more work and fail more often and scheduled diesel turns are, by stealth, becoming normalised. No-one, anywhere, actually understands what impact that has on the market, or recruitment and retention of volunteers. The laws of supply and demand are starting to affect spot hire fees and the burden of 10 yearly overhauls is already insurmountable for some much loved engines. But as you rightly point out Gios, loco costs are a drop in the bucket by comparison to infrastructure liabilities. Does anyone have any spare Tramadol?

 

Disagree with me by all means but please disagree with what I actually say. A new 3MT or G5 will provide useful power for a 25mph tourist railway. Similarly a P2 or some such stands some chance of being able to earn its keep with the enormous trains that will be necessary in future to keep mainline operations viable as pathways over Network Rail get ever harder to arrange.

My problem with "stuff in the middle" is twofold. Firstly, it is too large for the needs of the average tourist railway. Secondly, it will struggle with mega trains on the mainline.

Those of us who drive will have followed those motorists who are interested in everything outside their vehicles except the road ahead (or their rear view mirrors)! There is some similarity with new build projects unless they are both well schemed and managed.

PH

 

Exactly, it all depends on the ethos of the railway. Some regard themselves primarily as working museums, with a responsibility to preserve and conserve items (not just locos) which fit in with their collecting policy, whether they actually work or not. Others regard themselves essentially as operating railways, where anything that cannot haul or carry paying passengers is of little importance. In between there are those, perhaps the majority, which cannot make their minds up as to what they are.

What is important is public perception. I find it interesting that the most popular "railway" attraction in the UK only operates trains on a minimal and irregular basis, whilst one of the largest operating heritage railways appears to struggle in a state of permanent financial deficit. So does "running" really matter? Does it really matter how many working locomotives are available? Obviously there must be some, but is it not better to concentrate on maintaining those which can be kept running, and getting through their "10 yearlys" quickly and at the least cost, in the long term, whilst sidelining the others.

This raises the problem of what to do with those that are sidelined. The current situation on most railways is that once the boiler ticket expires, the loco is parked in a siding and forgotten about, pending a long period of fund-raising. It's not long before it starts to look unkempt or even a rusty wreck, a serious "turn-off" to the customers (if you don't believe that this matters, take a look at the Tripadvisor reviews for some railways!) "Dead" engines can be part of the attraction, provided that they are displayed, rather than being dumped. It dosn't require a SVR type museum shed (excellent though that is), just a lick of paint, a wash and avoidance of the temptation to start premature dismantling. If a railway can't manage that, then it should get rid of the loco/wreck to someone who can.

Oh, and I particularly like Steve's last paragraph!