West Somerset Railway General Discussion

If I may bounce in on this thread. I have restored one wagon which is now being used as the book shop at Corfe, am restoring a LNE wagon for Corfe Museum to act as a stores van. Neither will ever run in a service train, but will enhance the cattle dock area and create conversation and question, which is what education and charity status is about.

 

Intangible value.

I did this piece of signwriting in the Minehead run-round headshunt on 30 December 2018, as darkness fell on the WSR. This is next to the end of the platform where most people come onto or leave the station.



it was probably a couple of hours of sign writing but I was there for about 4 hours answering questions from the public on signwriting, wagon restoration, traditional skills, volunteering, the Railway, etc etc.

 

Freight stock is a vitally important part of railway history. Wagon restoration is cheaper, technically easier and quicker than carriages. The downside is that many heritage railways have lines of rotting wagons that will never see a paintbrush let alone run in a demo goods train. My weekend visit to the Dean Forest Railway reminded me of this.

 

On the plus side, there is an increasing number of pro-active wagon groups across our railways - often fighting against the odds to make it happen. The more people support freight specific events, the more we can do...

 

If I may also "bounce in" (and bringing in the dreaded NG element - I know - wrong thread, but I think relevant) - I am more than pleased to see so many of our heritage railways now taking goods more seriously. We are (almost) all charities, most of which include an educational element, so such activity is definitely an integral part of our work. Of course, it doesn't make money directly - but neither do many other parts of the UK heritage railway scene.
I say "more than pleased" because the importance of restoring/replicating freight stock to tell our stories is something I have been pursuing, with various teams, for a quarter-century - first at the WHR Ltd. - NWNGR replicas of an open, a van and a brake van - and then at two iterations of the Southwold (up to now three opens, one van, and soon a Cleminson MOY wagon and another van). All these wagons have been made on the basis of RNAD flats, re-gauged (in two successive directions, to 2-foot and 3-foot). We don't have any "rotting wagons", as there are none.....
Power to our SG colleagues! James

 

It was only in the late 70's (?) that passenger revenue overtook freight

 

The railways were built for goods, passengers were an after thought

 

That depends on your company!

(Pretty certain on the SR that passenger traffic generated more revenue than goods).

Tom

 

I can think of a case elsewhere where it would appear that the Charities Commission did at least ask a few questions, to which the Trustees provided some answers. Not surprisingly, the latter might be summed up as "nothing to see here". No one at the CC seemed to then ask themselves why it was therefore that they had been getting complaints :-(

 

I suspect I know whereof you refer...

There's an additional point, which is highly relevant, on top of the general ones about CC resources. Their guidance is really explicit that they do not see themselves getting involved to resolve conflicts within a charity; their job is about the charity's duty to it's objects. So if there's a dispute within a charity that manifests as being between two groups, where the trustees are one of those groups, the trustees are in an unreasonably strong position. The CC got their fingers burned recently with the Actors Benevolent Fund, where they did intervene - and got it wrong.

That means two things. One is that anyone hoping for the CC to come in over the horizon and fix things is deluding themselves! The second is that the internal debates within a charity really, really, matter because getting the right trustees in, who can lead the charity to deliver on the objects in a way that has the support of the members, is essential. Ballot box accountability is partial and limited - but it's essential. Create a barrier around the board, and you create the conditions for a culture of impuinity.

 

What happens if an interested party reports to the Charity Commission "The trustees of (XYZ Charity) have acted contrary to the Charity's documented objectives in respect of (such and such). This has been pointed out to the trustees, who have taken no action."?

 

The report is lodged, looked into, and may prompt further action. In the example raised by @RailWest, the questions were less about objects and more about quality of governance; as the reaction to posts by @Lineisclear has shown, there is also a broad range of interpretations of what objects are and how they can be fulfilled.

 

Pre WWII c. 75% of traffic on the SR was passenger ( I.e 25% freight )
During the War it appears that passenger traffic held up reasonably well
( primarily suburban electric ) but freight grew to such an extent that it
became c.60% ( No wonder the SR was short of locos during the War, despite
the Q1s, imports etc and at the end of the War had a very run down loco
fleet. The new Bulleid Pacifics were a savour )

Post end of WWII (1945j freight declined . I have in my mind for the
mid 1960s 23%.

The SR in 1938 was the most profitable of the Big Four ( It paid
5% on its ordinary shares, having made a significant recovery from
1931 The SR was fortunate to have had Herbert Walker at its helm.)

Michael Rowe

 

Most charities will try and have fairly broad objectives in the bit governed by the Commission, normally broken down more in the lower level rules etc which don't have to be approved by the CC only by the members. The big thing with CC at the moment is misuse of funds and funds going to banned organisations or people associated with them.

Sent from my SM-A556B using Tapatalk

 

In its 25 years of existence, the S.R. doubled its passenger train miles and halved its operating costs.

 

How?

 

I suspect electrification was key. Lots more commuter trains, running at clockface intervals, and the elimination of poorly utilised and expensive to maintain locomotive haulage.

 

Are you suggesting then that the answer to the WSR's problems might be to electrify their route on 750v 3rd Rail, what's that whooshing Noise, safety valves blowing at WSR headquarters? , This is a GWR railway, for GWR folk, we don't want your Southern types here

 

No - I think that would confuse the wagons conversation with others just a bit too much...

 

IIRC at least one of the complainants to the CC was an actual Trustee who was unhappy about the way that - at face value - proper governance had gone out of the window and the Board was being bent to the will of just one or two key Trustees, regardless of whatever the Trust's own Objective or Rules said.