The Red Dragon

Here is my video, hopefully it will be processed soon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqs6VKACbqM

If you look at the video at Swindon that was linked to earlier there seems to be a lot of steam coming from the left side. Is this just steam from the air pump or is it something more, as the comment was made at Hatton on the return that she sounded as though a cylinder "was blowing", which I guess means leaking slightly. You can hear this sound on my video. Perhaps this was the reason for the diesel assistance. :confused1:
(Please don't hold me to account for this explanation. :behindsofa: I'm not an expert its just some comments made by people at Hatton last night.)

 

Will they though? Probably a wall of silence as usual. Totally different to the MNLPS for example who give regular press statements about any issues with 35028 as recently seen.
I'm surprised the driver of the 47 wasn't lynched at the end of the trip, probably locked himself in the cab for his own safety. Apart from a blowing cylinder cock I don't think there were any other issues with 6201. We have had rain so I don't think there was a fire risk issue. You can plainly hear the 47 shoving up Hatton in campainr's video.

 

I think 6201 is renowned for sticking cylinder drain cocks. It was like this on the Bristol trip a couple of weeks ago.

 

I have emailed Vintage Trains asking for an explanation, if I get one I will let you all know. Certainly 6201 was not showing any signs of steaming issues as she was blowing of considerably! I don't like complaining about things, particularly a railtour such as yesterday which offered over 400 miles steam and as such was operationally risky. We need companies as brave as VT to promote such tours. I can understand the diesel being needed at Swansea and it is better to tuck it on the back to save a path- but to push us out of loops, stations and speed restrictions is totally unacceptable unless there was a fault with the locomotive. Lizzie is quite capable of hauling 13 carriages which is what the weight was equal too and does so regularly. I agree, we are owed some sort of explanation.

 

Not sure what to make of yesterday, I'll try and write something constructive when I am more awake. I did speak
to the fireman at Swansea, he was complaining a great deal about the quality of the coal they had. He said that he was having to use twice as much as he should have been. Whilst that was probably an overenthusiastic comment it may go some way to explaining events

 

Came on here this morning in order to vent my spleen also. However most of my points have been made earlier so I will not repeat them.
In short: stuck at the back all day in a stem/diesel HST. Not what I signed on for.
It's not so much the money as the time. My business leaves very little time at weekends and I resent the loss of time on a run which I so looked forward to and was so disappointed in. There probably was a good reason to use the diesel on Hatton and leaving Swansea but otherwise Lizzie seemed to be coping well so why? A letter of, well not complaint, but frustrated disappointment will go to Tyseley because if no-one expresses the pretty widely felt disappointment such thing will happen again. It will make me much more careful about booking with VT again and I say that with considerable regret. I think they are a great bunch and I have had great runs in the past. The wonderful run with Leander over Shap a couple of years ago comes to mind particularly. Although come to think about it the original plan I booked for had a Hall to Crewe which morphed into a 47. Hey ho.

 

I would hope they'll be a good reason for the 47 shoving such as this as i doubt they would do it without good reason, Lizzie complaining about coal quality could be one but hopefully someone will tell us the real story.

I woulden't worry too much about the New St - Euston trip, the southern WCML is hardley that challenging gradient wise and on the Crewe - Euston job in March, the 47's only involvement was a brief nudge on Camden Bank.

 

How do VT stand with trading standards or the trades description act over this? Worth investigating. They probably have some get out clause.

 

From the VT Terms of Booking: -

"Every effort will be made to ensure that locomotive(s), coaching stock, route and timings, some of which are hired in from third parties, will be run as advertised. However, Vintage Trains Ltd. (VTL) regret that we must reserve the right to alter or postpone trains at any time without notice, due to circumstances beyond our control, without being obliged to refund monies or exchange tickets.

On the day of the trip, all reasonable efforts within the control of VTL will be made to ensure that the train runs as planned, but VTL cannot accept any responsibility for delays, mishaps, alterations or curtailment of the tour from situations beyond the Company’s control."

This probably covers it. They also say that refunds are only available for cancellation, which didn't happen in this case - so passengers are probably not entitled to a refund.

 

But as I hope you note I DID NOT vent. I expressed, I hope with carefully chosen words, my disappointment in the events.

 

I wasnt on the trip but have just read the posts. It does sound like it was a very disappointing day for those concerned but as with the quote I've highlighted just above, to describe the above comment I feel is rather unfair to the driver of the 47. You have to remember that if assistance is required from the diesel, then it will come from the front, this case being Lizzy! I hope this certainly was a hot headed comment which I understand, but to pick out the driver in this instance is quite frankly, seriously out of order!

Lets hope an explanation will come out sooner rather than later for everyone involved!

 

Potentially a good trip yesterday,a fantastic performance from both locos. Ruined,once again by the train being turned.

The 47 was pushing,reportedly because the coal was low,with supplies apparently in the rear coach?


That comment about the 47 was way out of line. It would not push for no reason.

 

Diesel did not seem to be doing anything at all I was in the back coach and it was quiet.
Diesel did nor help on the restart from Warwick Parkway I was within feet of it having alighted there and OK 6201 had a bit of trouble getting away but the sound on a cold clear evening was memorable.

I for one enjoyed my day and would extend a big thank you to Arthur and his stewards for looking after me.

Thanks guys.

Cheers Dave

 

A good trip turned very average. The whole train being turned for an out and back enthusiast based tour really is not on. I would have thought that Vintage Trains, for all their years of experience in this market must have realised that a majority of their customers would not be amused. I must praise Vintage however for running a decent high mileage tour and will continue to support them but will have think twice if this happens again.

 

It was definately pushing at Budbrooke further up the bank at it roared past.

I'm pretty sure VT have no say in this whatsoever. Anyway, turning without turning the stock at Swansea would require a lot of moves, especially with a diesel on one end, that I'm sure NR would want to avoid. For NR turning the train makes an already difficult operation easier.

 

I think one of the main issues yesterday was lack of communication of information. If coal supplies were low and the diesel was pushing for this reason then tell us, if the train being turned was out of VT's control then say and not correcting the gaffe about Lizzie coming off at Oxford was totally inexcusable. On other trips where a loco has had an issue this has been communicated very quickly. There are stewards in all carriages, their job is to let passengers know!

I agree with the above comments that moaning on here won't change things, I have sent an email to VT asking for an explanation, I urge others to do the same. VT are an established operator with a very good reputation, i am sure they will get back to us.

 

For the thousands Vintage Trains pay to run the tour I am sure they do. There is no doubt that it is easier for Network Rail for the whole train to be turned however it was done with 60163 on the 1st March, which although was a DBS operation would of been done around a higher frequency of service trains as it was a weekday. As acorb says we will have to wait for an explanation for the events of yesterday before any conclusions can be drawn.

 

I thought turning was something that WCRC/NR were responsible for?

I don't for a minute blame Vintage for anything yesterday.

 

http://railways.mjspencer.com/gallery/v/June2010/IMG_8047.jpg.html
http://railways.mjspencer.com/gallery/v/June2010/IMG_8062.jpg.html

5043 at Banbury and 6201 at Shrivenham



Hopefully standard won't be at the back both ways for the Euston trip.