Swanage Railway General Discussion

As has been said previously, SRT SRC is compelled to operate two trial services one of 60 days and one of 90 days in compliance with the terms under which the trackbed lease was granted in 2014.

A failure to comply could have serious consequences. "Could" rather than "will" because the Landlord DC as successors to DCC could choose not to enforce the condition.

SRT SRC could choose to ask to be released from the clause (indeed they may have done so) but in the absence of DC agreeing to release them from that clause SRT SRC is compelled to operate the second trial (the first having been operated in 2017).

There is a widely held belief that operating the second year of the trial service will result in a significant loss for the service for the numerous reasons which have been articulated on this forum many times over.

Operating the second trial would at very least (1) mean that SRT SRC has complied with the condition and thus the threat of compliance action being taken is removed (2) provide an extensive data set upon which to take a view of future operations of a Wareham service and for discussions with DC PCRP and others.

 

Although (as discussed in the Project Wareham thread) seems most of the loss was having to rent in stock and pay WCR for the operation.
Next year SR will use its own stock and volunteer crew. Although getting TOC registration and insurance against potential ticket revenue might be tight, depending on economic conditions?.

 

Regarding the previous discussion about smoke, I (And I,m sure many others) watch the Swanage railcam on a regular basis (for my Southern steam fix!) and I have been really impressed by how little smoke is emitted......very well done to the crews.

 

To add / repeat previous postings the "new costs" (ie costs which were rolled up into the fee charged by WCR) but SRC will now face include insurance, track access and station access charges. Of these I think insurance could be the most challenging.

On the revenue side the split of "totally new passengers" (where all the ticket value can be ascribed to Wareham) and "would have gone to Norden passengers (ie where only the difference between the Norden fare and Wareham fare can be ascribed to Wareham) will be crucial.

As has been said on many occasions only running the trial will provide actual experience / results. It will be interesting.

 

Insurance, track access and station access are quantifiable before you turn a wheel. The big nasty is the delay penalty mechanism. One bad afternoon and the Swanage Railway will be no more.
Pat

 

The cry will go up "Defend the Gates! Defend the Gates" Over our tortuous insurance policies and access charges they shouted. Nary a fare paying passenger from north of Norden shall cross!

 

I think we just found the answer to “what do you get if you cross a troll with a pillock?”.

 

Actually i used to live under River Frome Railway Bridge but there was so little traffic I gave up!

 

And you would deal with those costs how? When answering, and workings are required, please work on the basis that access to Network Rail metals requires both and that they cannot be magicked away.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Isn't it obvious? You pretend that they don't exist! In just the same way as you pretend that any other issues don't exist and need to be sorted out in the face of a slow moving bureaucracy! The thought that the reason for slow progress might possibly lie elsewhere with organisations for whom it is not a priority never even crosses your mind.

It's a wonderfully simple life living as a troll under the River Frome bridge!

 

Or you can just stick your fingers in your ears and go ‘la la la I’m not listening, because various things that didn’t exist in my 41 year old document now happen to apply in 2022’

 

I now have a certain person on "Ignore". It can sometimes be a likttle frustrating reading responses to posts that are invisible, but in this instance that seems to me the lesser of the evils.

 

Too right. Same here.
If others would do the same, the oxygen that trolls need would disappear.

 

Whilst I agree, I think that most of us on here are ignoring the ignorant by just not responding.

 

I'm pretty sure that open access liability is capped, it certainly seems to be for freight companies. Just saying.

 

In the one case that I know of, my manager told me that an incident involving a salt train left DB with a (capped) bill for £1m. It was a shocker, mind, but these things quickly affect all manner of services, which all have a call,on the delay compo.
Pat

 

A couple of images from the Jubilee weekend operations.

 

D6515 working 0Z33 a WCRC operated move from Corfe Diesel Depot (having moved from Swanage earlier) to Dereham, which is a circuitous route to the KWVR, so presumably collecting another loco. A departure around 17:40 gave an arrival in the small hours.
Seen here at Corfe Viaduct and Holme Lane.
It is only due to a recent thread on wnxx I have noticed the bars over the route indicator numbers before not being that into diesels. I am not sure of the relevance of 21 even having checked the sremg website.

 

Schedule 8 Performance Regime Insurance cover is available to operators (and owners where this is passed contractually) which will protect their liability up to their incident cap. It is written as an extension to an engineering policy consequent upon damage to rolling stock.

 

I wonder what (if any) the additional premium is particularly say for a heritage railway where schedule 8 cover isnt currently required?