The "linear scrapyard" revisited

I'm involved with the NYMR, and it is only the recent opportunity to acquire a piece of land on long term lease that has opened up the opportunity of building a large carriage shed - which will not be enough, another will be needed at Grosmont, but it is a start. This opportunity has only arisen recently, with a different generation of landowner. Had it been there earlier I'm sure it would have been acted on earlier. Perhaps other railways are in similar positions!

 

I am sure you are right. However several narrow gauge railways had them twenty or more years ago. Of course there are differences in cost but differences in resources as well as priorities.
Paul H

 

There's also a n obvious difference in the size of narrow gauge railways, (so smaller sheds needed for smaller rolling stock) but also the fact that these always were self-contained and equipped with loco sheds, if not carriage sheds. Most of the standard gauge lines were part of bigger entities and so rarely had even engine sheds.

 

Nail on head.

Almost all British heritage railways started of by acquiring original lines from the national operator. By the time they were purchased, any surplus land, such as goods yards etc. and, in the case of more recently purchased lines, even station sites, had already been sold off, so the railway is forever restricted to it's narrow "right-of-way", to use an American term. Land prices, even in rural areas, are generally much higher than in America and planning regulations are more restrictive.

As an example of how different things are over there, take the lllinois Railroad Museum, which I visited in 2007. They claim to be the biggest in America and it is, indeed, vast, comprising a former farm of, I think, nearly 200 acres, plus about 5 miles of running line, alongside an existing freight-only former mainline which, interestingly, has been built on the disused right-of-way of an electric "interurban". The collection is huge, ranging from some of the largest steam and diesel locos and a large range of rolling stock through to interurbans, streetcars and buses. They put great store by being able to keep as much as possible under cover, and have a rolling programme- sorry, program- of raising money for and building huge, but I guess relatively cheap, wooden barns- I counted 14- which I doubt would get past UK Building Regs!

Their other priorities are interesting, too. They don't seem overly bothered about steam- when I was there there was no operational steam, although several were under active restoration, but the place was very busy, in spite of offering only diesel or electric running. But the abiding impression was of the importance that the IRM attach to cover, in spite of the climate in the middle of the American land mass being less destructive (in the sense of encouraging rust and rot) than here. Mind you, they still have a couple of sidings which resemble Barry scrapyard, though bigger, of course

And- perhaps the biggest difference with the UK- in the States and Canada preservationists are pretty much on their own in financial terms. You raise cash yourselves and accept your own risks- there's no HLF and if things go wrong, little hope of public bodies bailing you out!

 

John,,

There are, so I understand, various charitable bodies which exist to make grants to assist rail preservation projects although the sums dispensed are not large. Is the IRM in the charitable or (hopefully) profit making category?

With regard to climatic factors, the summer/winter temperature variations in the middle of continents away from maritime influence can be dramatic. Of course proximity to the ocean produces another winter problem in the north. It's called snow!

Paul H

 

It's not land, it's money. If one has vehicles on a track a roof can be put over it.

 

I think Sandstone in South Africa could also claim to be one of the largest steam centers around and self funding as well not only from the farm side of things But I believe he has something to do with Konica! Which is not a bad thing and a lot of UK ng lines who have any South African railway stock have had something from them in the past.

 

It is also about choices of where people choose to put their money. If I won the current big lottery prize for example would I give NYMR (of which I am a life member) £s to restore a loco or £s for a building? It ought to be for storage buildings/museum space like that at Highley or perhaps the once proposed John Bellwood centre at Grosmont but if it did happen funding Vera Lynn back to running condition would be very tempting as would a new-build B16 or A8. That is the dilemma line management also face and the locos usually win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I fear you are right but IMHO it really ought to change.

Paul H

 

@paulhitch and others who like me prefer the unrestored detritus to be kept out of sight where possible:
I was visiting a railway with my three year old earlier this year, a railway which normally does a good job of presenting a tidy front to visitors and keeping the tatty stuff out of sight. This time however there was some unrestored rolling stock in a siding we passed as we slowed for a station. Entirely unprompted my daughter said "Look Daddy, that's some yucky trains. They need to go in the bin."
Out of the mouths, etc.

 

I think it's necessary to look at the broader picture. The thing is that for many of these older items (especially pre-Mark I cars), once they are gone, they are gone forever - one can't just scrap them, and then pick up another one when one's finally ready to deal with it. Yes, it would have been nice if they could have all been restored by now, but many heritage railways are still building up their ability to restore rolling stock: investing in workshops, equipment therein, etc (and all of course competing with other resources needs - e.g. p/way maintenence, maintenance of current stock, etc). So in the future, there will be more capacity for restroring these currently out-of-service items - which can't be replaced, if they are discarded now.

So I think a bit of modulated patience is on order. I say 'modulated' because heritage railways need to be smart about this: e.g. try and keep 'to be worked on some day' stock stored in such a way as to minimize the un-sightliness, and also to try and precent any more degradation. And if a railway has a lot of this stuff, and after N years no progress is being made on it, they ought to think about handing it on to someone who can do something with it.

But, with such exceptions, I think it would be undesirable to discard something that could be salvaged - because once it's gone, it's gone forever.

Noel

 

Travelled on the Worth Valley today, they seem to have had a bit of a clear out of rotten stock, looked a lot tidier than on my last visit about 3-4 years ago. None of that made Steam Railway!

 

I agree with everything that you say Noel but many heritage railways have been in existence for 40 to 50 years now and should have been working harder at this. It is not easy. In our case we have been purchasing parcels of land adjacent to the original railway since the 1970s. This has enabled us to gradually move virtually all of our "reserve fleet" out of sight or into buildings where, paradoxically, it is on show to the public but clearly as awaiting restoration. We did have at least a 20 year period where some of these items were very visible in a field adjacent to the running line.

Achieving this takes very long term planning combined with taking the initiative or taking opportunities as they come up. Certainly we are seeing an increase in the amount of dedicated storage at heritage railways (the new carriage shed at Rolvenden KESR is an example) but there is plenty of scope for more.

 

Surely if as you say this railway "normally does a good job of presenting a tidy front..and keeping tatty stuff out of sight" and on this particular occasion it was on display, then it might be safe to assume that it was put there for a very good reason. Moved there in preparation for restoring something perhaps? You can't hide stuff 365 days of the year on a heritage railway if things need to be moved around.

You may think you were unlucky to been affronted by such unsightly rolling stock, but perhaps in the coming years your daughter may be lucky enough to appreciate the lesson in 'before and after'and gain a valuable insight into the efforts required for restoration.

No one really likes to see rolling stock in unrestored condition, (although they do tell a story of their own), but you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

 

Some of these places have been going for at least thirty or forty years and there has been a bit too much patience, modulated or otherwise. I would agree about the need to sort out the rolling stock which has half a chance and stow it away. But the rest! Identify components such as wheelsets, bogies, brake cylinders and the like which can be re-used.Tidy these up and scrap the rest.

I suspect all these "good" reasons for doing relatively little to tidy things up over the years are but an aspect of a failure by many enthusiasts to realise that tourist railways are just that, tourist railways. They are in competition with animal sanctuaries, stately homes and theme parks. Most people spending good money to visit these do not go to look out over grot.

PH

 

These are, I fear, excuses for disorganised untidiness. The point is the eggs aren't being broken.

PH

 

But are they a tourist railway or are they just targeting the tourist dollar as an excellent way to help keep heritage alive? Have you asked any volunteers if they like giving their time to "tourist railway"? There will always be an element of passion from those who are involved which in turn means that there will always be 'projects' sitting somewhere waiting for their turn. Which of your children do you give away? It makes little sense to have dilapidated stock on show if at all avoidable but as said up-thread, once it's gone it's gone.

 

It sounds to me like it wasn't disorganised tidiness. The point was made that the railway normally does a good job of presenting a tidy front.

 

Everybody belonging to National Preservation and who put themselves as active preservationists are directly involved in some way. Others may be. @cav1975 is one. Our motivation is as enthusiasts but we have to realise that these lines are not kept going by selling tickets to people who get over-excited about Splingeworth's radial valve gear. So the lines have to be reasonably clean and tidy and sport things like souvenir shops. This means they may not be terribly heritage in character which is why I feel it is more honest to call them tourist railways. Few rural branch lines had Pullman car trains for example.

You are the one who, I fear, was tending to make excuses for untidiness. @andrewshimmin was observing that one railway which had formerly been okay was showing signs of regressing which disappointed him. His daughter, with the directness of the small child also said what she saw.

PH

 

The first time I visited Woburn safari park I noticed that one of their camels has a rather wonky hump. It looks ridiculous, not at all how a camel should look. Perhaps they should have it put down? It is costing them money to keep it, after all.
The second time I went the animals had been moved around and I'm pleased to say the camels had been put in the furthest flung field, which you could just glimpse in the distance from the access road, so essentially these untidy looking creatures were not on display.