West Somerset Railway General Discussion

As to playing the ‘Heritage Card’ there has to be a balance between recreating the past and providing visitors with decent facilities. As a member of the National Trust I find that their properties seem to successfully combine heritage with providing modern facilities (toilets, restaurants etc) which is what the general public expects. On a recent visit to the Birmingham Back to Backs there was an outside, uncovered unisex loo representing the conditions from the Victorian age. Are you suggesting that the visitors should use that instead of the modern facilities onsite? Surely not.

 

I expect it isn’t a septic tank then.

 

There are times when a replica can be appropriate. The goods office at Crowcombe Heathfield is a prime example. However it does need to be done properly not botched!

 

I would add someone who has proper experience of planning procedures in particular listed building consent.

 

Indeed. Heritage value aside, there's much from the past which is far better being left there. Recreating the appearance of the more mundane experiences of past eras for educational purposes is one thing. Exposing modern sensibilities to the associated stench, not to mention the full range of invertibrate and bacterial life associated with installations such the downright disgusting (and scacely unique) "boys playground bogs" at my sometime primary school isn't merely a step too far, it's an entire hiking holiday too far.

Authentic recreation needs sensible boundaries ... preferably by self regulation. The heritage movement is (IMO) about providing a reasonably realistic representation of a past which was no more universally wonderful than is the present, it should not be about some deluded attempt to reverse the entire passage of time. That way, madness lies.

 

I fail to see that not having a roof contributes to odour.

I have just been through all the reviews on Trip Advisor rating the railway as 'Average'(50), 'Poor'(16) or 'Terrible'(17). I have ignored those that say 'Very Good'(346) or 'Excellent'(1592).

Far and away the most adverse comments are directed at either the expense of the trip (28) or rude or inconsiderate staff (22). Late running (8) and timetabling issues eg long waits (9) come next with the state of the carriages (7) next. Grumpy Santas score 6 as do food issues. Lumping together all issues related to the locos steam and diesel (including facing wrong way and colour) gives 11.

Other issues that get one or two mentions are facilities closed (museums, stations, buffets), nowhere to go at stations, fellow travellers, insufficient explanation of history, dealing with complaints and a crowded train.

I believe that since the 2 complaints from disabled passengers more has been done in that area.

The only mention of toilet facilities is someone being denied access to Minehead toilets when no trains were running, There is no mention of the quality of the provision at all. Not at Dunster and not at any other station. Is this really the issue with the public that we are led to believe? I would suggest that if they are clean, effective and not an affront to the nose then the public are happy.

 

As if by magic:

https://www.wsra.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Synopsis-Board-Meeting-180122-V1.pdf

I wonder whether mentioning PDG will produce an instant result as well.....

Barrie

 

I didn't say it did. What I said was the boys urinal at my school had no roof and reeked to high heaven. Had it been roofed, it could only have been worse. I could cite other examples ad nauseum (quite literally, in the case of this subject). It's not an experience I would ever care to repeat.

If you feel that's a concept you can sell to your customers, all I can say is good luck!

 

Thank-you for the board meeting results, who-ever.

DJB.

 

It looks like another instance of too many contributors thinking with the gut.

 

One comment in particular gave me a laugh. It said

"Friendly staff, boring views"

 

My comment was not location specific, but referred to old urinals in general

 

We have read on this Forum before about the veracity of Trip Advisor. 400 people, for instance, on a train; one or two post on trip advisor. How relevant is that?

 

I would say very relevant. If your 1-2 in 400 is an accurate reflection of numbers, it means that the WSR (annual passengers around 200,000) might expect 500 - 1,000 bits of unsolicited feedback by real, paying customers every year. You would be insane to ignore it.

Tom

 

Plus the fact that people check such reviews before deciding whether to travel 200 miles to travel on the railway, in the same way they would check B&Bs to decide where to stay.

It's great that we have 83 average, poor or terrible but 1,983 very good or excellent. Now, about that 83, how can we reduce it?

 

Only one thing to do, in todays climate where to mention a colour or sex of anything brings instantaneous lawsuits down around ones ears, all loos must with out further delay be converted into unisex toilets.

As the 'Ladies' will then be unisex the Mens roofless urinals can then be altered into a non functional true heritage area without smells ( unless artificial smells are added to bring that extra sense of reality to the experience). Peace breaks out between heritageistas and modernistas and good will is spread amongst all peoples. I suggest a charge of 1d to access the urinal exhibits.

B

 

Why not a roofless ladies, in the interest of equality??

 

At what sort of exchange rate? Those old coin operated brass locks don't come cheap these days.

 

Ladies are allowed to wear our hats, even in Church...

Robin

 

I was in Minehead today.

A new WSR corporate structure diagram has been posted on a noticeboard in the loco. It says ‘proposed’ But I understand this was approved at last Friday’s Board. I regret that I don’t have a better copy to post.

Curious.

Robin