The Cumbrian Fellsman 7th Feb

The problem is that the system for operating railtours is completely and utterly barmy.

The promoter - PTR, RYTC, SD - whatever - has absolutely no contact, or contract, with the provider of the route, or timings, that any tour will need.

That link only exists formally between the operating TOC and NR and the TOC is very much the junior partner - even though they are the paymaster.

The people involved are hard working and decent people, but they are screwed by the system, hence why I keep banging on about a proper business dialogue to get it understood between them, especially with Steve Cornish's gauging and timing colleagues the business they they are in.

As James rightly says - Promoter X gets a nod that a proposal is OK and for their business to survive they have to get on and sell it - even though it does not exist either in detail as to timings and route or legally as a contractual arrangement.

That is wrong - fundamentally and undeniably wrong, but NR say that is how it is and it cannot be changed. I say bowwox to that - anything that is a system can be discussed and refined, and the continual practice of an unsatisfactory system does not make it either legally or morally acceptable. It simply makes all parties complicit.

The attitude to the tour market stinks. It is regarded as peripheral, dispensable, and not as a core activity of Network Rail overall. What a state of affairs!

The railway exists to move traffic, not to provide civil engineers, timers and gaugers with a living, or so that they can take the easy option of applying a blockade as seems to be de rigeur now.

The fact that tour operators are on the sticky end of this does not help their business or our hobby, and to refuse to contemplate it changing is not a stance that I take in my affairs - as NR and others well know, because when they try to put one over on me - they don't get very far.

 

The system for operating the whole railway (not just charter trains is barmy). Sadly, the system imposed by the Railways Act and the Rail Regulator can't simply be changed without the approval of the Dftr and ORR and both have indicated that they will not contemplate major changes to the track access conditions at the moment. They have also made it very clear that the charter market is not a core activity in the operation of the railway and that the franchised TOCs who pay the most money have first pick and charter train operators come last. Unless those in charge of the industry change their minds the status quo will remain. If it is changed, operators like WCRC and DBS may be faced with having to pay commercial rates of track access and contribute to the fixed access charges like the main TOCs do with the increased costs being passed onto charter train promotors and onto the passenger, hence no one wants to rock the boat too much for fear of what might happen.

John.

 

I am agitating for contact between the parties to improve how the system that is in place is run, not trying to get a clause in a Railways Act. Besides - NR doesn'tcomply with its responsibilities under those anyway. Network Change by sleight of hand for example.

Of course there comes a time when banging your head on a brick wall simply makes your head bleed if there is no will amongst the parties to mend a system when all parties know full well - It is broke - and it needs mending!

No-one shuffles paper more than NR with its supervision, registration, FTRs, route availability, timings etc, etc, that are imposed on loco owners and TOCs working on their infrastructure, but their own service to these clients is in a league of its own - and its not first division.

It doesn't need a revolution to make improvements - but one could be forgiven for thinking so given the lack of will apparent at present, and for many years past.

 

The point I am making is in response to...

...Surely this phase of planning should be complete before Past time release any details of the proposed charter.

 

Well, it doesn't work that way....that bit comes much later i'm afraid, TBird has it in a nut-shell really..........

 

OK, I was just going by what the guy in charge of West Coast Railways wrote...

 

Hadn't realised he had posted anything.

 

When D7076 writes "Hadn't realised he had posted anything" I despair"

I should think that when you read :

James Shuttleworth
WCR

at the bottom of a posting something should stir within the clockwork !

 

To me an alarming aspect of all this is that Steve Cornish is quite open that he sees the way forward for steam tours in a quite limited way. An example of his ideal tour would be the Cotton Mill Express. A tour that is repeated at intervals through the year over secondary routes that have otherwise unused capacity. He sees the opportunities for irregular, longer, faster steam tours over mainlines as becoming much less common. The best tour for me last year was the Coronation, despite 9's unfortunate failure. A4s ran over the route they were designed for at almost their historic timings. I think room for this sort of adventure has to continue to be found or gradually the whole mainline steam market will gradually dwindle. Although the Cotton Mill, the Torbay and, of course, the Jacobite are great trips, I would not want to do them more than once a year. I am also losing patience with tours that start at 6.30am, finish close to midnight, but only cover 200 miles.

Cheers
Alan

 

Not wanting to go too far OT on this thread, but isn't ETMRS (hoping I've got the letters right) going to limit secondary routes in the long term? I read yesterday that the Cambrian will not be able to run steam after summer 2009, because of incompatibility with the new system. If the Cambrian pilot for ETMRS is successful, it will presumably be extended to other lines.

 

QED - if the operators - the businessmen - were in control, the engineers would be told to go away and play on such as the Old Dalby test track - not mess about on the network!

It is widely accepted that ERTMS is unworkable - but the NR Mad Professors need to be allowed to convince themselves - at our cost.

The railway is upside down adminstratively. It wasn't run by General Managers and not engineers for 170 years for nothing.

The wheel will eventually turn, but we are still in the nonsense phase - albeit that it has lasted fifteen years so far.

 

The tail is so obviously wagging the dog.

When Gresley introduced ( first ) his P1 then P2 designs he told the LNER Board what the new engines would require in terms of track and the LNER Board ordered the Civil Engineers to ensure that the track was upgraded accordingly.

When Gresley designed the A4s - again - he informed the Board what was needed to ensure the high speed performance, including straightening out a few pieces of track, and the Board told the Civil Engineer what had to be done. Unfortunately Peterborough was the one "kink" that for various reasons couldn't be done but the remainder were cleared under direction of the Board.

What would have been the consequence had the Civil Engineers provided the track they wanted to maintain and imposed the restrictions on the trains which could be operated ? - I suspect we would just about have reached the point where they would have suggested putting a leading 4-wheel bogie on Rocket to make going round the curves a little smoother for the crew !

 

Fred Kerr,as a railway journalist I despair that you don't know who the guy in charge at WCR is.
As a guide try www.companieshouse.gov.uk

 

Depends who in the organisation has the upper hand - the LMS Civils rejected Stanier's first designs maintaining that hundreds of platform copings would have to be set back. He sent a Crab with lead 'fingers' all over the system and found just a handful a platforms needed modifying, and it was done.

Dave

 

On the contrary ERTMS Levels 1 and 2 are already in quite widespread and successful use in Europe and elsewhere. There are something like 3500 vehicles and 11,000 route-kms currently in service in Europe using ERTMS of one form or another. Switzerland has been using ERTMS Level 2 (as planned for the Cambrian) for some time, including for the new Lotschberg tunnel route. The Italians are currently commissioning ERTMS Level 2 on the new Bologna-Milan High Speed line. ERTMS is almost certainly here to stay, although ERTMS Level 3 is still some way off. Just hope they manage to miniaturise the equipment for steam engine use. The equipment I was shown was very bulky and power hungry and would have to go in the support coach !

David

 

I think ERTMS is being pushed so hard by NR because it wants to use it to replace RETB, so hopefully there will be a less power-hungry version by the time the West Highland upgrade comes along...

Chris

 

As a journalist I know precisely who is in charge - and I also know who is authorised to comment on the company's behalf. Said person will only comment if the person in charge - known to be extremely publicity-shy - gives permission so that it can be read as coming from the top; I have spoken to him in the past and respect the fact that he wishes to remain in the background hence the acceptance of any communication issued through his spokesman.

Dissemanating information from a company is the normal role of a spokesman but it may be that in the rush for pedantry you have overlooked the important fact that any comment issued by / on behalf of WCR can be deemed to have come from "the guy in charge".

In fairness to WCR they are a commercial business with little need to pander to the enthusiasts' desire for ever more detailed information about the company's activities - many bordering on the commercially confidential - and its about time WCR were given acknowledgement for what it achieves even if it does fight shy of "blowing its own trumpet" on the basis that the results speak for themselves.

 

Heard a rumour that SG could be doing a test run on wednesday round the Carnforth Hellifield Blackburn loop back to Carnforth. Anyone any more details? Noticed UKSteam has a blank spot waiting for info on wednesday.

 

Well spotted John. It's still blank on UKSteam. Could it be 850 (if it's 'gauging' issues have been resolved) or has that sneaked away from Carnforth? Having the Preston-Carnforth stretch of the WCML near to the office does tempt you somewhat. Best charge the camera just in case...