Steel Steam and Stars 4 - March 6, 7, 8, 13, 14 and 15 2015

This effect has already been noted by the KWVR which has identified the problem in terms of the Diesel Gala which has now proved more expensive to organise thus generating less "profit" for the KWVR and subsequently focused attention more on using their own diesel locomotives to greater advantage. On the basis that it's only the enthusiasts that "know the difference" and that the enthusiast represents around 10% of attendees at any one event it may be that creating events around the home-based fleet might be more profitable by attracting growth from the remaining 90% of attendees.

In terms of steam "attractions" however it may be worth looking at site visitors being contracted to stay for a season thus minimising the transport cost but maximising the opportunities for recouping it - especially if the timescale allows for a couple of photographic charters during the period of the visit. The sort of possibility could be the loan of 30926 to the Bluebell by the NYMR; the loan of 7820 to Llangollen for a season; the loan of the SVR's 43106 to the North Norfolk; the loan of North Norfolk's 76084 to the ELR - in essence a move of locos to areas where they once operated especially if their current home base is no longer within those areas.

The owners of 7820 have already confirmed their intention to "visit" during 2015 to garner extra income, the NYMR s finding that steam operations to / from Whitby have increased income, the Fellsman has now became a successful operation and there will be much comparison of financial results to see if the proposed WCRC S&C tours in 2015 are a better commercial operation than the Scarborough Spa operation. For the latter the only problem I envisage is the lack of parking facilities at both Hellifield and Settle where I suspect a large customer base could be quickly built up but that is for the rain operators to judge; based on the success of the "Jacobean" however I see no reason why the proposed S&C "Dalesman" shouldn't prove equally successful.

The opportunities are there but are the heritage lines and locomotive owners able to look beyond the "immediate" and look to such new opportunities ?

 

I'm not sure I completely underestimate - simply making the point that if you have, say, a 10% fall in price of a commodity that itself is less than 10% of your expenditure, then the impact can only amount to tenths of a percent of your gross revenue - it is less significant than people might hope for. Of course, in a heritage railway where the annual profit margin may also be tenths of a percent, it will be significant, but the saving isn't necessarily transformative. (And on the Bluebell at least, our annual coal bill is less than 10% - maybe we need to stop putting champagne in the loco boilers!).

The rest of what you say I'd wholeheartedly agree with, and particularly the possibility that the biggest impact of lower oil prices might be on the ability of passengers to get to the railway. I also feel (and I stress this is a personal view) that mega galas feel very risky when you look at the cash required up front to "assemble the cast" against a very uncertain likelihood that they will attract sufficient visitors over and above what you would have expected on an equivalent weekend anyway. I think increasingly we will see many railways step away from enthusiast-led galas, towards special events that try to attract a non-enthusiast audience who might not otherwise visit a railway at all. If hosting a food fayre or a collectors weekend attracts just as many extra visitors at lower cost, what do you think a prudent management should do?

Tom

 

That presupposes that the donor railway has motive power to spare, and the host railway has a shortage. While there are examples of both being true, they don't necessarily neatly match up. And if the host railway has what it considers sufficient motive power to operate its services, why would it want to go to the extent of hiring additional motive power - the money could be better invested elsewhere. (Coming back to the coal discussion - hiring a mid-size loco for a season could cost middling five figures, wiping out the entire annual surplus of most railways. Unless hiring a loco is essential to keeping the service running, that money could be better invested in-house).

Tom

 

Certainly, we usually aim for visitors to do more than just the Gala on the NYMR, especially the Autumn event which is just one weekend. (The Spring being two weekends is in itself controversial). The risk is that you spread the income by it not being a case that you have to be there for the Gala to see or ride behind the visitor.

I suspect we will more head towards periods of having a guest loco for a few weeks rather than maybe 4 or 5 guests for a Gala except at maybe one or two lines with a track record of this providing sufficient return. They will probably wonder if less guests would affect the income by as much as it reduces costs, but will have to judge whether to take the risk.

The thing which worries me most about the non-enthusiast type events is whether the railways can attain the standards people will be expecting. It is clear that public expectations for such things are high (and rising?) and when you see the extent to which a poor event can be "flamed" on social media (there have been a couple of high profile cases this last week or so), I do worry that one day that may be an unfortunately steam railway, trying to diversify its appeal and struggling to fill what even for a shortish line is quite a wide "canvas" in support of the advertised theme.

Steven

 

Which is why I foresee that railways will invest in 1 locomotive for a season to give the best chance of attracting custom throughout the season. I take Jamessquared's point about railways needs and motive power availability BUT consider the NYMR School going to the Bluebell as a case in point.

To the Bluebell Railway it will fill a gap in its current Southern Region motive power collection and allow that railway to operate a series of "special events" around it - howzabout the "Dunkirk Retreat" instead of / as part of a WWII event for example. In essence however it will give Southern Region enthusiasts based around the Home Counties but with little chance of visiting the NYMR an opportunity to savour the locomotive during its visit thus increasing the flow of enthusiasts; the offering of "special events" could increase footfall and - I'm sure - that photographic charters of the visitor will add to the kitty. For the owners of the School it offers a source of extra income during a full season of (agreed) running and for the NYMR it allows a locomotive an opportunity to gain work if less be available at the home site. Additionally it has the potential of creating a gap in the fleet that could be filled by a visiting locomotive that would be local to the NYMR but is currently based elsewhere some distance from the NYMR catchment area.

The one difficulty that this "armchair warrior" can foresee is the willingness of lines to countenance such locomotive visits allied to the willingness of host lines to make best advantage in marketing the opportunity that such visits offer. The latter point may be less of a problem if the host lines are sufficiently commercially aware that they are now major players in the leisure industry and will market visiting locomotives in the best markets available to them BUT I think this is one suggestion that merits consideration.

The only question is which locomotive(s) to select and which line(s) to host them, so for starters I offer :

30926 from NYMR to Bluebell
46447 from East Cranmore to East Lancs
43106 from Severn Valley to North Norfolk
73050 from Nene Valley to Severn Valley

as examples of locomotives "returning" to earlier locations where they operated during their BR days; I'm sure other can think of other suitable "visits".

 

Going that way, presumably all Castles/Halls and 14xxs + autocoaches and railmotor to GWSR? And all the GWR prairies to SVR...

 

name the date!

 

The Ruabon Re-Opening Gala...

 

Don't hold your breath then!...............

 

I still think you are not taking the cost into account. Hosting a loco for a year could easily cost £30k - £50k in steaming fees alone, depending on the number of days contracted and the daily rate. While that might be necessary in the case of a motive power shortage, no line is going to engage in that sort of expenditure if it is not necessary. A few photo charters and a couple of themed events isn't going to get close to recouping that outlay. If the loco is needed, then it pays it s way on regular service trains - but not if it effectively displaces a home fleet loco to a year of inactivity.

(And ps - a Schools hardly fills a gap at the Bluebell, seeing as we have one of our own under overhaul at the moment! And any Home Counties enthusiast currently suffering "Schools Withdrawal Syndrome" can see one running right now on the Mid Hants).

Tom

 

Is that Truancy in management speak ?

 

Costs are NOT the only factor in the equation. Whilst accepting that the Bluebell hire of the NYMR's Schools is unlikely but on the assumption that it does take place there is the other bonus points that might apply. For the owner there is the potential that Bluebell engineering skills might gain some value in terms of repairs and overhaul expertise whilst for the Bluebell it might offer the chance to release a locomotive for repairs or overhaul. Agreed that a simple hiring arrangement in itself might be an expensive proposition but it is the "detail" which provides the value of any hire-in whether that comes from the the operator's side or the owner's. In terms of the owner's options it may suit him for various reasons to agree a hire for reasons totally unconnected to the pure railway costings and those factors will be known only to the contracting parties.

As I noted in my previous post these suggestions re season's hirings are made as one of many thoughts that guide the movement forward as many heritage lines make the transition from "playing trains" to "commercial businesses"; such moves means that heritage lines need to have ideas on how to increase their footfall and whilst the proposed "hirings for a season (or more)" work for some it may not work for others.

That is no reason however not to consider the idea.

 

The fundamental flaw in your idea is that you can't put two tenders on a low loader. It is down to weight and not length, otherwise a complete tender loco could easily be accommodated on one low loader. If you go over the max permitted gross vehicle weight, you have to take steps to minimise this. Because a loco and a tender are separable items, they have to go on two separate vehicles. That's the law.

 

When I worked in heavy haulage, over certain total weights, the Road Fund Licence was hugely reduced (to just about the level of a car) if you were registered as "Special Types", but this meant that there was a restriction on loads such a tractor could haul and this included there only being a single load on the trailer. The system looks somewhat different on RFL now but the types descriptions quoted suggest that similar restrictions will continue to apply.

I realise that Fred is using Repton as a "for instance" but has probably underlined that it tends to be one of the "forgotten locos" of UK preservation.

Firstly, as Repton is owned by the NYMR, I think "the owner" may well consider running its own services (30926 is a Whitby approved loco) is the best use of the loco. Secondly, I suspect at present the Bluebell's own Schools may be somewhat more advanced than 30926. The NYMR's loco has been stripped for assessment and a start made on firebox repairs using apprentices following full inspection. Whether the boiler overhaul is continued in house or contracted out is still be to decided and with major work continuing on 34101 and 80135, the route followed could dictate how rapidly Repton returns to traffic.

The loco's past wanderings do add another interest aspect to the "Gala guest" equation. I won't name the visit, but a few years back, Repton went for a Gala weekend to a Railway. The NYMR was still running daily services at the time of year in question, although the host Railway wasn't. By the time Repton had been checked over, allowed to cool down, transported there, run the weekend and gone through the same process, returned, and was ready to haul trains on the NYMR once more, at least 8 days running (resulting in the need to hire an alternative) had been lost. So, it isn't just the cost of a short visit to the hirer in terms of haulage etc. - the owner also potentially loses far more income than even a premium gala guest rate will make up for.

SSS IV being run before anyone will be doing daily services (as the West Somerset Spring Gala tends to be) adds weather risks but does mean for both owners of guests and the host Railway, the income generated may be compared with zero rather than an actual normal figure from the home railway/ordinary operations. It is always difficult to identify how much a comparable ordinary weekend would have taken (especially with Galas always being the same weekend if possible), but the aim of the extra cost of a Gala must be the generation of extra net income in addition to that generated by a normal service. I believe this may be achieved less frequently than a straight "surplus against direct costs".

Steven

 

The maximum gross vehicle weight allowed on British roads is 44 tonnes. Anything over this is classified as an abnormal load and there are requirements for their movement. One of the conditions is that the load is 'indivisible'. A Class 46 is indivisible but two tenders can quite sensibly be moved as separate loads so you cannot move them as one. I believe that, in the past, people have tried to move a loco and tender as one load claiming it is indivisible but have fallen foul in so doing.

 

The Port of Par twins were moved as one load, and from memory the IOW terriers to Bluebell..

 

Possibly just shy of the 44 ton mark?

 

Thanks, I did wonder about that, which is why I asked, clearly not feasible then.