Cotton Mill 16th May

We might also remember that the organiser of this tour has had to deal with some difficult personal circumstances which put the idle speculation of this forum into some perspective.
It seems a very short time since this regular show was being praised to high heaven and endorsed by the various luminaries of the partnership as a long term commitment come what may. Indeed 5690 only got a look in last September due to unavoidable circumstances. Now the golden goose has lost its lustre and economics bite it might not be long before WCRC take it completely in-house when their full stud is available to provide as much variety as one could realistically hope for, especially as they 'manage' 34067 as well. The reason for opting to take the NYMR shilling is completely understandable; ELR simply could not compete pay wise. The geographical trade off at present is no motive power for the Cotton Mill. By the way, any answer on the hypothetical 46115 route approval?

 

That sounds a bit harsh to me.

'Riley' has given this steam fan some great moments with the Cotton Mills and I see no reason for this sort of comment just because a common sense business decision has maybe been taken.

 

To clarify who you were quoting...

And I think thats harsh... The availability of 45407 and 76079 have been spot on up to now. It is unfortunate that the rour is booked for just 3 days after another black five heads for Scotland. It is also unfortunate the mind of the man behind past time has quite understandably been on other matters.

 

Thank you Tracklayer - I will take any amount of criticism for what I do write - ( all of such criticism being completely misguided, of course) but I didn't remember writing that!

 

Ian Riley has come to the rescue several times when other locos have benn unavailable, the fact is they are his engines, he bought them spent money restoring and maintaining them, as he owns them he is free to send them to work where he likes, for you armchair ones go and get a life if you think you can do better get off your backsides and buy a loco then you can do with it what you like, and stop moaning about what owners should do or should not do with their own engines.

 

The Reliabilaty!!? I have barely (if ever) known there to be a problem with one of Riley's engines on the mainline?

 

I remember that. A fairly major problem to happen a few hundred miles form civilisation (well a proper depot facility, best not offend the people of Fort William) and sorted very quickly...

 

Hardly as much as some engines though!

 

Details were announced on this forum;

viewtopic.php?f=98&t=16074&hilit=45407+jacobite

I read the original 'reliability' comment as being related to the supply of locomotives rather than their ability to run.

 

That is exactly what I meant... if he cannot supply and your operator can what woudl you do

 

You are out of order with such a comment about Riley's loco's. His loco's more than anyone else's have been reliable in every way possible. It is extremely rare for one his loco's not to be operationally available outside the normal mainteance programmes.

Also for the last few years, both Riley's loco's have always gone to the NYMR at this time of year to earn extra & much welcomed income. In the circumstances, it not the case of not being available but being pre engaged already to honour agreed commitments.

 

Was the Cotton Mill programme not an 'agreed comittment'? Perhaps earlier cancellations by the operator have required a revised outlook from the loco provider though.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

 

As far as the May "Cotton Mill", no, as I understand the loco allocated for the cancelled trip was the "Jubilee" anyway.

 

As far as the May "Cotton Mill", no, as I understand the loco allocated for the cancelled trip was the "Jubilee" anyway.[/quote:3hwta3u6]

That was also my understanding for this Cotton Mill.

This forum continues to suprise me for comments from some members, it seams as soon as people know Ian isnt about as much they can publicly slate probably 2 of the most reliable loco's on the mainline in the last 5 years. Then again they havent got the courage to say it when hes about.

Alex

 

I believe my posts have slated nothing and no-one. All partnerships in this sector are delicately balanced and it means that all railtours to some degree are unreliable. This is because all partners are subject to prevailing economic facts which will ultimately be more influential than any good intentions or sentiments. Any accusations of unreliability levelled at 45407 & 76079 are utterly wrong. The only misconception has been that all the Cotton Mill programme was based on Riley as loco provider when it was announced, coming off Bury. I was unaware of any other planned loco usage so guess this must have occured after the programme was announced, due to the additional change in base of 45407.

 

](*,) Quoting the above in full so as to try and give an alternative interpretion rather than the toys out of pram cries that the past two pages has been.

I think the point that was trying to be made has been that the Riley fleet has gained much work due to the unreliability of 'A N Other's' locos over the past few years.

As and when WCRC has their own go anywhere do anything fleet, economics and sound business sense would dictate that using their own locos to cover for failures is the sensible option.

At no point as I read it did it make any comments regarding Riley's fleet reliability or their work on jobs originally booked for them.

Now can we all calm down

 

Why bother reading a post when you can just hit reply ? ](*,)

for the record... I do think Ian's locomotives are superbly maintained and he has been the rescue guy a number of times..

but..

if you book a trip and dont provide the engine because you got a better offer..
or
you decide to make the locomotives less available then they have been previously because you have a new direction..

You cannot expect everyone to sit and wait..

Especially if there are a stream of other engines coming down the line all eager and hungry for work.
Maybe i'm blurring the line between locomotive owner and railtour promoter but from a non-locomotive owning CUSTOMERS point of view...3 canceled out of 4...doesnt look good.

let me put it another way...

if you order a pizza and it doesnt arrive, then you order another the week later but they ran out of toppings then you order a 3rd one a few weeks later but this time the shop owner sold your pizza to someone else..,
now next door there's a new Pizza restaurant opening with guarenteed delivery and lots of exotic new toppings..

would you keep ordering pizza from the older one no matter good the food ?

I will wait a little longer before I book a ticket + tickets to travel to Manchester + Accomodation + food + potentially a day off work just incase the locomotive owner gets a better offer to go somewhere else leaving the trip without a loco.

but for now i'll sit back in that armchair some people think I live in.

I dont want to start a war, if you feel i'm wide of the mark.. hit the PM button and shout at me there.

 

The sensible thing would be to cut the number of cotton mills to say one every 2 or 3 months this would help with filling each tour as more time in between to fill seats. Hopefully giving confidence to people thinking of booking knowing they will be guaranteed to run. Alter the frequency now for the whole year. As to availability of locos book them now in advance, unforseen problems of course couldnt be planned for.
Brian
Brian