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.

Swanage Railway General Discussion

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by Rumpole, Oct 10, 2012.

  1. 73129

    73129 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    885
    Location:
    Winchester
    76017 derailed at Whitchurch in September 1954 and six years later February 1960 76026 also derailed at the same trap points.
     
  2. 73129

    73129 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    885
    Location:
    Winchester
    The only time I can see a 78xxx BR Standard worked on the Southern was on a rail tour. 78038 worked part of the LCBG Surrey Wanderer rail tour in 1964.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2021
    torgormaig likes this.
  3. nickt

    nickt New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    450
    Likes Received:
    138
    Gender:
    Male
     

    Attached Files:

    Nick C, Will RL, oliversbest and 2 others like this.
  4. Standard by 4

    Standard by 4 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2012
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    32
    There is photo of 76017 at Swanage in the Swanage Railway Album from 1977.
     
  5. Dunfanaghy Road

    Dunfanaghy Road Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2019
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    823
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Alton, Hants
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
  6. nickt

    nickt New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    450
    Likes Received:
    138
    Gender:
    Male
    Mikey D likes this.
  7. Monkey Magic

    Monkey Magic Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    3,227
    Likes Received:
    6,469
    Location:
    Here, there, everywhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Not a 78xxx but interestingly according to SREmG, 77014 was transferred to Southern region in 1967.

    https://sremg.org.uk/visitor/3mt.shtml

    A colour photo of 78038 on it's visit to the Southern appeared on RMweb

    [​IMG]

    When the 84xxx group have finished someone will have to do a comparison between it and the 78xxx. (That and take it to the IOWSR for a what might have been visit).
     
    Johnme101 and marshall5 like this.
  8. Andy Moody

    Andy Moody New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    166
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    71B ex 71A
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Or to the Swanage railway.
    Indeed 77014 was transferred to the Southern Region and had the dubious honour of being the last steam loco to work on the SR, working the 2150 Bournemouth Weymouth Parcels on the 9th July 1967
     
    torgormaig likes this.
  9. Standard by 4

    Standard by 4 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2012
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    32
    May be the next Swanage restoration project?

    BjFpKdCIYAAQGxS.jpg
     
    Monkey Magic and Matt37401 like this.
  10. DcB

    DcB Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2018
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    241
    Location:
    Surrey
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    May have to wait a long time?
    There should have been 4 working steam locos this summer, so SSL sent Sir Keith Park to the Spa Valley Railway to earn revenue, but 34070 Manston''s overhaul has been delayed by Covid and 34072 257 Squadron’s boiler needs a new steam pipe. So fortunate 78018 was available to rent, otherwise the railway may have found itself without enough steam locos again and need to run diesel trains during the daytime.
    (good to see the time table for the evening DMU service appear)
    Looking at various websites:
    80104 has had a large donation, but needs more to finish the overhaul and will be asking for more donations via the Swanage railway.
    30053 owned by the Drummond society might be back 2022?
    563 now owned by Swanage trust, still needs more donations.
    31874 Mogul awaiting overhaul of boiler and from the trust pages https://www.swanagerailwaytrust.org/giving “we urgently need your help to restore 'N' class, no. 31874 built in 1925, and then 'U' class No. 31625, built in 1929, to fully operational condition. All engines will be overhauled to mainline standards to enable them to operate to and from Wareham and beyond in future”
    Then funds will be needed for 30120 T9 and ideally a new larger engine shed to keep all the locos in good order.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2021
  11. DcB

    DcB Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2018
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    241
    Location:
    Surrey
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    So a 2nd Carriage Shed and a proper workshop will be needed?, especially if the railway gets a third operational set C of Bulleid/Maunsell coaches, plus the dining train set D and the 4TC set?
    Although the 4TC set has made progress with 3 carriages, one is still seen in a siding awaiting restoration, one carriage is rotting as a spares doner (along with one DMU carriage) which may be scrapped soon?, and a buffet one carriage has been brought from Dartmoor for long term use, so presumably will be stored off site
     
  12. oliversbest

    oliversbest New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    75
    Interesting post. The question ?? Is the moment of truth dawning for some HR. Ageing motive power that costs a fortune to repair. Infrastructure that cost an equal fortune to maintain to acceptable safety standards. The diminishing resource of donations as appeals are spread further over an ever decreasing resource. Stagnation at the ticket office. When we see TWO (that we know of) major HR in some form of distress it would seem that things have to change. Reduce Steam operations and run some type of railway that is more true to its function as a public service. In other words hand over track maintenance to NR or GBR which does its bit to build back better by providing a community asset. HR have to approach survival in a realistic manner.
     
    3ABescot likes this.
  13. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    21,530
    Likes Received:
    40,703
    Location:
    215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    So which of those two alternatives do you choose - hand over maintenance to NR, or approach things in a realistic manner?

    Tom
     
    Sunnieboy, ghost, 61624 and 7 others like this.
  14. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    16,708
    Likes Received:
    13,678
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Why do you think that maintaining infrastructure on a branch line closed as part of the national network 50-odd years ago, rebuilt on a much more extensive model than equivalent "surviving" branch lines, would be beneficial? The railway is itself an attraction, providing a highly seasonal service - wouldn't NR/GBR simply apply a maintenance holiday and limit maintenance to the minimum required to support modern DMUs?

    I'm not sure how this helps either the community or provide the public service that the SR has been providing for many years now.
     
  15. A1X

    A1X Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    639
    Occupation:
    Generic IT bod
    Location:
    Chuck Norris' beard
    Sorry quick question, is the statement in bold referring only to the moguls as the "mainline" fleet or any returning locomotive (maybe even a mainline T9)?
     
  16. Bikermike

    Bikermike Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2020
    Messages:
    857
    Likes Received:
    902
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Thameslink territory
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I suspect Bettridge's law applies here.
    The fact that there is a long mist of things that Swannage know they could spend their money on is more proof of knowing what they are up to.

    Which 2 railways? The WSR yes, but then where? Llangollen has taken it's unpalatable medicine and has got rid of the liabilities dragging it down.
     
    35B and Bluenosejohn like this.
  17. DcB

    DcB Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2018
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    241
    Location:
    Surrey
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Think the aim was to have 2 mainline certified Moguls run the Swanage Wareham service as a tourist attraction with DMUS as backup?.
    If Project Wareham was being planned now, with the change of the Government's attitude to railways, the SWR part of "Great British Railways" would probably be putting in a bid for cash for a modern shuttle? But a vintage DMU plus steam!, and volunteer run service may cost less?
    I also notice a blog this month about the Wareham link allowing him to leave the car at home so he can have a drink!.
    https://m.facebook.com/RailReviews/posts/2709238379373893
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2021
  18. Gladiator 5076

    Gladiator 5076 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Messages:
    2,639
    Likes Received:
    2,076
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Swanage
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Apart from the very valid points made by @35B how many heritage lines actually run to a population centre that would warrant them joining the national network (GBR if you prefer) on a 365 day a year basis? Maybe the ELR would fit that bill as it is on the edge of the Manchester conurbation but most of the others rely on seasonal traffic and have no big popuklation centre around them. GBR is going to have mammoth challenges if it is ever going to get off the ground without recomissioning former closed branch lines. Then if the government is only vaugely genuine in its green targets it will require some form of non diesel rolling stock, which means capital investment for which I suspect the business case will not provide a decent ROI, if it does at all.
    Taking Swanage as was raised on this thread, yes there are many new houses being built in Swanage, but not Harmans Cross or Corfe so any home based market will likely have to be commuter based (forgetting what WFH may or may not do to commuting post C19) and only then those in Swanage. The council are not proposing supporting any more bus services off the back of this new influx (or really any other services for that matter) so the likelihood of local finacial support is close to zero I believe.
    Yes lines wil be upgraded/ reopened when there is a robust business case (a la Oakhampton) but that is going to need a big guaranteed demand from a TOC or FOC.
    GBR has such mammoth challenges to suceed that branch lines will be a long way down the list of opportunities, although I will admit it would likely be easier than getting the RMT to agree to the new working practices proposed.
     
    Bluenosejohn and Paulthehitch like this.
  19. 5914

    5914 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    307
    With a non-heritage hat on there are only two scenarios that I can see occurring if GBR becoming involved in branch-lines that are currently heritage lines:
    1. making these lines efficient and economical to maintain - which would involve relaying with CWR, minimal signalling and operation by units maximising the efficiency of diagrams (i.e. non-dedicated rolling stock).
    2. being dependent on the cost-savings of volunteer labour to mean that services could run on the existing inefficient infrastructure - which would involve the heritage railways in a huge commitment that would have to be funded from any additional revenue.

    All of this is exemplified by the Coleford to Okehampton scheme, where I assume that the unit workings will be integrated with the existing Exeter/Exmouth/Paignton/Barnstaple services and the infrastructure has been upgraded for easy maintenance. The railhead at Okehampton serves a wide range of smaller populations centres so that car-borne traffic can be transferred easily from road to rail for the Okehampton to Exeter portion of a journey from any of the West/North Devon villages/towns.

    By contrast, any Swanage scheme of handing over to GBR would offer very few benefits in terms of commuting:
    - catchment area for Swanage is very small. Anyone who is thinking of travelling by train from anywhere in Purbeck already has the option of transferring at Wareham - the incentive to use a train from Swanage (where parking is not easy) will in all likelihood be restricted to those living within the town. As someone who lived in Harmans Cross, the reality is that most people will jump in a car to get to the most convenient station - which for most will remain Wareham (If you have jumped in the car there is no incentive to drive the wrong way to Swanage, to Corfe where there is no parking, or to Norden where there is a longer walk from car to train than at Wareham). The natural hinterland for Swanage (by comparison with Okehampton - that area beyond the railhead) is the English Channel.
    - there is no suitable rolling stock working locally. Having a dedicated set would increase the overhead operating cost (albeit that a two-hourly cycle of one set is relatively efficient)
    - upgrading the infrastructure is a non-starter if the heritage railway is to be sustained. To upgrade the infrastructure to 'basic railway' standards would loose the ability to operate the existing services - which to contribute significantly to the seasonal transport needs of Purbeck. (It should be noted that many of the local bus services are only funded seasonally - which is replicated by the existing SR and proposed Wareham services, which are required to operate with no operating subsidy)
    - replacing the heritage railway with a national rail service would require subsidy. Given the issues mentioned above over catchment area and rolling stock provision any local service would be unable to cover the whole cost of even a simple railway.

    There may well be places where handing an existing heritage railway over the GBR might work - but Swanage would not justify investment by GBR (unless it was on the back of the heritage operation covering the overheads, and the GBR operation probably being seasonal), and any venture that did end up being handed over to GBR would find it very difficult co-existing with the financial imperatives of an operating model so radically different from its own.

    For those suggesting that the ideal is a year-round service from Swanage - it is worth noting that non national operator has shown any interest in operating anything other than a seasonal service using spare capacity (be it, in turn, VT, SWT1, FGW, SWT2, SWR). That is the reality of the business case from a national network perspective. The only rational way of achieving a through service from Swanage to Wareham is a seasonal service that can minimise its overheads, run when there is sufficient traffic, and not negatively impact on the existing heritage services (on which it will be dependent to cover at least a significant proportion of its indirect costs)
     
  20. DcB

    DcB Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2018
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    241
    Location:
    Surrey
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The heratige DMU should get it's first passengers for the evening service later this month (they could have also run it for the Folk music festival as they have done in the past).

    It's been 8 months since the Swanage Railway got a Government grant for an updated business case for the Wareham link.
    https://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/ne...-feasibility-study-into-wareham-train-service
    Hopefully the figures will be good for a 90 day trial aimed at tourists starting April 2022 (Easter) or May?.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2021

Share This Page