Steam hauled tours and the fire risk.

Massive claim for refunds? I would have been 1st in the queue is I was on board. Like I said earlier, should of been cancelled. I know the tact that is being played. If a tour is cancelled tour companies are obliged to give refunds. If it runs, but not as advertised, the tours companies start spouting the small print & wriggle out of it if possible. This is a general comment & not aimed at any one particular company.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

Once again, in the old days of SLOA marketing the late, and much missed, Bernard Staite tried to avoid running trains in July and August because A) with people away on holiday the loadings tended to be poor and B) to avoid the driest months of the year when fire risk was greatest.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

My 'sources' inform me that its been raining most of the day in Central Wales, with more rain forecast for tonight.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

That's good news.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

This is the 10 day MSN forecast for this area. As you can see not much rain mentioned, what is mentioned never happens. Watching the TV weather, the moving maps showing rain stop dead before it reaches here. All the grass/lawns are like dry straw.

http://weather.msn.com/tenday.aspx?wealocations=wc:UKXX0117&q=Reading,+GBR+forecast:tenday

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

My view is this about refunds:

If we want companies like Steam Dreams, RTC, UKRT and all the others to run mainline steam trains, then we need to accept that their businesses be able to pay their way.

For that to be true, that means they need to be sure of their income streams.

I know full well that the terms and conditions when I book a steam excursion include something along the lines of "we hope to run it as advertised, but we can't guarantee either the timings or that a particular type of loco will actually be on the trip".

We have to believe that they then do their best to keep their customers happy, ie they try their hardest to run the trip and make it attractive. But to run their businesses at all, they have to know that the income they projected for today's train will arrive.

We know that we take a risk booking a steam trip - the risk that they may have to change engine or timings or route, or put a box on the back, or as today and last Saturday put one at the front. Or in the worst case, run it without steam at all.

Look back on UK Steam and see how many changes of route and changes of loco there have been recently. When you look at the experiences of the last two months, just about everyone on every steam excursion that has run would have been able to find an excuse to demand a refund. That would put the operators out of business so they have to make the passengers accept the risk.

So go easy on Steam Dreams, it's not their fault. And I for one would like them to still be here next year.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

My one experience with Steam Dreams where steam was not available was a run a couple of years ago to Norwich when 45231 wasn't fit. SD ran the train with diesel AND refunded the whole cost. No wiggling here.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

But we now operate getting on for 3 times the number of trains.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

I find that worrying, if the train manager was speaking authoritatively on behalf of Steam Dreams. I would have hoped/thought they above all others would have started cancelling trips rather than running a box hauled trip with a steam loco on the front.

Yes. It is very hard for people like SD. But if your business is running Steam hauled tours then maybe your pricing should try and reflect the risk involved in running those trips? I don't have enough experience of UK steam yet to know if that is a possibility re fire risk summers.

I'm booked on the 9th July trip with 30777 so may still go on the down run just to visit the Swanage Railway, even if the fire risk is high and we have a box doing the work for 30777. If a Bulleid is running down there I may stay on and come back on a service train. I'm fortunate to have an all stations UK pass from a former life that I rarely use: not many others are in that position I know.

Other than that, I'll stop booking any more trips as from today until the situation changes.

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

So glad I didn't book on this tour - I was thinking of doing so.

I was just looking at the Steam Dreams Ts & Cs. They state that

a) In exceptional cases such as fire hazard it may be necessary to substitute a diesel loco. In this case a refund of £10 or £20 will be given according to class.
b) In some cases it is necessary to attach a diesel to the rear of the train - in this case no refunds will be given as the steam loco will still be doing the majority of the work.

Neither of these clauses cover the case of today's run with the diesel behind the steam loco, apparently doing most of the work. One feels that a) should apply but will they claim that it doesn't since there is a steam loco looking the part on the front?

I do feel for operators like Steam Dreams in these circumstances - to just say cancel all trips until the situation changes is going to play havoc with their revenue. Furthermore it doesn't make sense to say don't plan tours in July/August - knowing the weather in this country it could be tipping down then!

My personal preference would be to run with diesel only and accept a small refund rather than having this farce of a steam loco posing on the front. At least West Coast have some "heritage diesels" rather than Class 67s which really are boxes!

By the way....we used to run thousands of steam trains in this country. Was there no fire risk then? Or was it that the lineside vegetation was better controlled?

 

I think we need a separate thread for the discussion of the general issue of how tour companies should respond to problems like loco unavailability and fire risk, and keep the specific tour threads for more factual discussion of the actual tour. What do you think? Mods - can you arrange that, please?

 

Re: 1st July 2010 CATHEDRALS EXPRESS with 5029 NUNNEY CASTLE

In the old days a lot of the vegetation actually on the lineside on climbing sections was kept under control by regular, but smaller lineside fires caused by the locos. Smaller because the vegetarian never had the chance to grow much!

And yes, we do need a separate fire risk etc thread as we, (myself very much included) are taking this thread off topic. Sorry.

Maybe Ralph will be really kind and take some of this stuff and open one for us when he's finished taking his whippets for a walk! (wink).

 

It's interesting that 5029 had to run with a, sorry, simmer in front of a Class 37 today when Black 5 44932 was allowed out for a loaded test run yesterday. Has it been raining hard up North? Or is that region running to a different rule book?

 

Just to point out that I did not start this thread as stated. The mods created it with relevant posts from the 5029 Cathedrals thread & credited it to me.

 

Regarding compensation (for want of a better word), yes you can't foresee problems on the actual day ie failures etc but this weather has been on the cards for a couple of weeks now. Therefore it must of been known it would be a risky exercise. At least if a train is cancelled there are no running costs. I think a trip was cancelled at very short notice the other week because the loco failed its FTR the previous day. I think it was ironically 5029 with lubrication pipe problems. On the other hand I believe the TE was hauled by a skip or shed a few years ago due to fire risk.

 

I think the fire risk is proportional to how hard the loco has to work. So a fully loaded train up a bank at speed throws out lots more fireworks than a tootle round with a support coach.

 

I'm not complaining, just pointing it out.

 

Just another thought, what about the spark arresters I thought mainline locos have to be fitted with?

 

This is as much about managing the perceived risk of lineside fires as much as anything. Mainline locos are fitted with spark arrestors and ask pan grids or sprinklers. Nevertheless, the best such devices cannot totally rule out the risk of a fire. Indeed, it has recently been pointed out to be that stock with tread brakes can produce sparks from there also.

To me, adding a diesel seemed a sensible way of running the train. If the steam loco had been removed, then at what point would we get steam back on the mainline? After one night's rain (which the west and north should get tonight) - probably not. Steam only and a serious fire (and there have been a number this year that have closed main lines and caused serious disruptions) would produce a full steam ban until after a good amount of rain - as in several days.

Furthermore, it is generally accepted these days that many railtour passengers are not enthusiasts in the truest sense, and I do question how much you can hear of the loco on many tours anyway. I suspect many passengers will not have let the inclusion of the diesel spoil their day.

So I believe there is a choice - assisted steam or no steam (possibly no train) - which is it to be?

And, if no steam or train, that is lost income for everyone in the business - promotor, operator and loco owner. Likely end result - less promotors and less locos.

I am sure that is not the desired result.

Steven