West Somerset Railway General Discussion

There is no argument that there was a major falling out between the WSRA and the Plc. Please, please note the use of the past tense. Many worked long and hard to heal the schism.

The signage issue has nothing to do with the WSRA, Plc, WSSRT or DEPG inter relationships. A section of the organisation responded to a perceived requirement, with hindsight there perhaps should have been more consultation.

Similarly the concerns of some as to whether relocating the Permanent Way to Norton is a current priority let alone as to any indication of costs, ( laying in sidings, turnouts etc to provide appropriate facilities appears to be a significant cost, greater than loos, wash facilities etc I suspect) has nothing to do with any Plc WSRA WSSRT or DEPG allegiances. Any more than the obvious requirement for a considered plan to be developed for the Norton site; a priceless asset for the WSR, thanks to the enthusiasms of a few in the past, one not to be thrown away.

I cannot but reflect on some past results of other enthusiasms eg a second set of totally dilapidated former GWR carriage stock sitting in Sherings Yard with no likelihood of any thing being done with them but meanwhile costing money simply to arrest further decay (its with hindsight not surprising that previous owners were so happy to pass them on to the WSR); then we have the Manor sitting in Swindon ( some 300 good souls voted by email/web forums to buy it and also dispose of GWR 'pannier tank' 6412, because it was believed by some that the Manor could run for some time and thus generate funds for its overhaul). I could go on.

(I do think, I emphasise, that Dunster Yard should be tidied up asap, there seems agreement)

Michael Rowe, active volunteer, Plc shareholder (member of the Heritage Committee), WSRA member (former Trustee, member of Fund raising and Membership Committee) etc. I am not given to egotrips but the suggestion that to query a hastily thought out proposal for Dunster "illustrates how the gap between organisations leaves space in which problems can fester and grow" is frankly insulting

 

It seems to me the WSR should be well placed given their location and the existence of the Big Lottery Fund’s Costal Communities project. The Vale of Rheidol for example has benefited greatly from this source of funding. An overall “plan” or vision should be very much top of the list, if opportunities are to be grasped....

Regards

Matt

 

Norton is not the place to create a new scrap yard, it would be visible to every passing main-line train & every in-coming & out-going charter. It is too far from the other end of the line, whereas Sherings Yard is ideal as it is midway on the line, most facilities are already in place & more importantly out of site from the eyes of all travelers. Ideal for the PW gang.

DJB.

 

This is exactly my point. The Bluebell has just invested a vast amount in a spanking new shed just to 'arrest further decay' in twenty 'totally dilapidated' carriages. Why? Because they are clear that this investment is essential to their core strategy. Unlike your expectations for the carriages in Sherings yard, they're confident these vehicles will be restored, again because this is their clear vision and strategy, their raison d'etre.

You seem to see the saving of these vehicles as a misguided activity that has resulted in unnecessary costs with no forseeable benefit, but those who saved them for the WSR must have believed that they were acting in line with the railway's overall goals. Does your attitude reflect the railway's priorities, or theirs?

Either may be right - I'm not arguing that the WSR should be a living museum (at one end of the spectrum), or a purely commercial operation like the PDSR (at the other). I know which I'd prefer, but I'm no longer a stakeholder so it's not up to me. All I'm saying is that until the WSR decides where it wants to sit on that spectrum and communicates it clearly, resources will be wasted because people are pulling in different directions.

 

Bill, we already had one seven set, (albeit I agree from a different GWR period) a significant challenge at the time. We still have that set as a yet to be started challenge. The acquisition of a second set was with hindsight irresponsible. We are expending money and effort on the second set that could have been invested on the first.

My attitude is totally towards an ever improving WSR. That requires IMHO priorities and planning in addition to enthusiasms. The Bluebell is I suggest a thoroughly professional and pragmatic organisation. It has always been so. The logic for not pursuing a K early in 1963 was entirely sensible (viewed from 55 years it could be conceived as tragic !), it would not have represented a good use of then current scarce resources.

We on the WSR have a unique feature, a complete major branch line 22.5 miles in length, from Main Line to Seaside. There is nothing else like it, but it costs a lot !

Michael Rowe

 

Unfortunate, inaccurate revisionism doesn't help.

Had certain individuals not heavily briefed against the reform vote at EGM1, that vote would have been won and the X6 would have been history much earlier and before unfortunate things happened with the 4160 shares and WSRA financial assets. A little humility from those who did that would go a long way.

To now brief against the opportunity that Dunster provides and the needs of the permanent way Department to have better, more appropriate facilities, is a strange approach when the WSR plc has started discussions with other organisations about an overall plan. I trust the lesson from the 'Station Farm' mistake of much work in secret followed by a 'hey presto' of something awful will be learned, and the value of wide and deep consultation respected.

The membership voted, after long consultation and for good reasons to dispose of 6412. (Get over that, Mike.)

The membership did not vote to acquire Ditcheat Manor. That decision was taken by the WSRA Board on advice from the Railway's engineering advisors. You are promoting fundraising in which DM is a target. Are you saying it shouldn't be? In the long run a much more useful Loco than 4561. Find another one.

The GWR coaches are a vital heritage resource and 6705 nears traffic condition. Statements like yours were made about the Minehead turntable for many years and look at that now.

We need to learn from daft installations like the crossing signs, and virtuous examples like the Minehead Box plate the value of working together.

That will not be assisted by demeaning past decisions or actions or the discussion of present options especially inaccurately and perjoratively.

I look forward to wide and deep consultation about possibilities to move our Railway forward.

Robin Moira White

(Who feels no need to set out my list of appointments and achievements and who values all contributions, even those which require a pin stuck in them to let the air out! )

 

;-(!

 

Can I make a suggestion........

The WSR needs more passengers.

The ability to 'grow' the traditional BL - MD market must be limited, so where might those extra passengers come from?

I suggest that means growing the market for passengers travelling to or from the intermediate stations. The obvious 'bit' to do that on is the coastal section between Doniford Beach & Minehead.

Of the destination stations, the attractions at Watchet, Washford & Blue Anchor are self evident - to those that know the railway. So we need to look at promoting those destinations and their attractions. That also means looking at the timetables to make the service as attractive as possible - for example running the afternoon DMU service more often, fare offers etc. Scenic Railcar Land Cruises anyone? Cheap afternoon fares?

I have already suggested promoting walks along the coast path between Minehead & Watchet also the old Mineral Railway.

As well as this, if we are looking at passengers heading to Minehead possibly stopping off at intermediate stations for an hour or so I suggest that timekeeping neds to be looked at as on my last visit an hour at the museum in Watchet was truncated due to a late running train.

Now, the odd one out is Dunster, by name an obvious major attraction, however over a mile from the village. Robins plan for the goods yard clearly provides a destination but we need to look at how to get passengers to the village? I might suggest that a tie in with the bus so passengers can perhaps walk to Dunster village then on to Minehead by bus.

 

The suggestion that the structure of the WSR was a significant cause of the “troubles” is very wide of the mark. The root cause of the troubles was that a small group of self serving, and very hard nosed, individuals made a concerted attempt to take over the WSRA and then possibly the WSR as a whole. That they did such damage is largely due to the supine attitude of the membership over a period of years and the failure of the Charities commission to adequately supervise the charity even though they had repeated warnings. What the critics of the WSR structure who advocate changing to another model such as the Bluebell Line conveniently ignore is the legal difficulties of changing it. Most of the track and buildings is owned by the Somerset County Council who lease it to the WSR PLC. None of the advocates of converting to the Bluebell model, or any other, have anything but a rather glib assertion that it would be better. If they believe that is best then let them put forward a proper plan with justification of what the tangible advantages would be ,and a plan as to how it would be implemented and financed.

 

Just a quick thought .... Does any research indicate what proportion of visitors to the area are aware of the WSR, beyond the mere fact of it's existence?

 

Sorry to be blunt but do you lot never put a sock in it!!!

PH

 

(Dons tin helmet....) Did it ever occur that some variation of 'putting a sock in it' may be what kicked it all off down Minehead way the first time around? (.... and ducks!)

 

Wouldn't have put it quite as bluntly as that but I do have to agree.

Whilst I'm all for 'robust discussions' the regular sniping on here certainly doesn't give the impression that 'everything is rosy..' at the WSR

It's no wonder some people are confused into thinking there are still some inter-organisation fights going on.

 

I couldn't agree more.

What was it Basil Fawlty said about WW2 to his German guests....?

Let's have some positive discussion about the way forward.

Robin

 

Well on a positive note, at Minehead loco today 22 people were signed in, around 8 paid staff, 4 6024 volunteers and 10 WSR volunteers

Additionally 3 members of staff were away on a boiler riveting course as part of the upskilling of the WSR staff and volunteers

Lots going on, good return on wage bill and the resource is being used for the benefit of the WSR

Jeff Price

 

You are making the mistake in assuming, wrongly, that disagreements on here are an accurate reflection of the general health of the WSR as a whole. Few people actually involved in the day to day running of the WSR reflect the robust differences that occur here.

 

I am fortunate in that, in giving legal advice to / acting in internal enquiries within virtually all the significant heritage railways across the UK, I have seen such organisations 'under stress' and have some insight into what works and what doesn't.

But I will keep my comments to the WSR.

The three significant bodies (WSR plc, WSRA, WSSRT) are very separate (from most railways, especially as far as the plc / WSRA are concerned and have the potential to pull against each other or in different directions.

That can be solved by having individuals in key positions who are determined to work together. That was true during Mark Smith's period as Managing Director, my period as WSRA Chairman when Chris Austin was WSR plc Chairman and there are hopeful signs that Paul Whitehouse and Alan Nicholson are working similarly.

I will refrain from setting out negative examples, but the gaps around the periods set out above might be instructive.

There are presently some contra-indications of residual arrogance, poor management and a and silo-approach at all levels but if the apparent virtuous circle above turns sufficiently, these should be dealt with.

(1) a common aim (something like 'preserving and enhancing a GWR / BR(W) branch line for the enjoyment and education of the public') and (2) an understanding that a balance between commercialism ('Thomas World') and heritage ('every rivet in the right place')
needs to be struck, will help.

I always travel hopefully. (If you have lived my life you have to.) Too often in the past the Railway has made progress in spite of its structures and management. Let's work to be in better times.

Robin

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now #128

Washford 1970 / 2017

A (to me) rather shocking photo of the basic Railway waiting for the axe to fall, contrasts with the site taken over by the S&DRT today.

1970


2017

 

Today's West Somerset Free Press reports that the entire Wansborough Paper Mill site at Watchet has been sold to a single, as yet unamed, buyer. It also reports that the WSR came joint third in the large attraction category of the Bristol. Bath and Somerset Tourism Awards that was won by the Wells Cathedral and Hestercombe Garden Trust.

 

I wonder what the Wansborough site will be used for. It might have been handy for a WSR engineering depot, etc. No doubt, there are plenty of reasons why not.