West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Surely as they have an extra axle then with the weight distributed over another pair of wheels the axle weights will be reduced unless the Pacifics are grossly overweight ? I will now check up the weights of Kings and A3s .

 

Having tried to get out of Brislington Retail Park onto the Bath Road in Bristol on Friday, I wished that traffic lights didnt show green when there isnt anywhere for you to go....................

 

Was that the knock-on effect of the evacuation of the Galleries due to the fire or just usual Saturday mayhem? They probably closed some of the roads for a time

 

The only roads past the Galleries aren't really through routes (although I have to admit I use the road under the Galleries as a through route more often since various movements were banned in the Centre a few months back).

 

Sadly, I fear you are wasting your time. for it seems the WSR is firmly in thrall to "big chufferitis." The work of @Robin White in refining the visual impression given by the railway is not really assisted by "swallowing the camel" of over large motive power for a secondary (?tertiary) line.

PH

 

Youve got to have loco's that are sufficiently big to pull the trains we now run economically. Also people like to see big engines!

 

The Railway is not stuck in the GWR loadings world. Things move on. History continues to be made. The last forty years are just a development of the railway line which was built to carry passengers and goods. That is still the purpose of the line. In the beginning it was broad gauge 4-4-0s. And then all kinds of small/medium powered machines. Later it was standard gauge 2-6-2Ts. Nowadays, as ever, it needs motive power that suits the the traffic. So forget "route" of any colour - it is no longer relevant in a historical sense. The line was upgraded to 22.5t more than twenty years ago and this work needs to be reviewed and renewed. So if the traffic demands a "Castle" then fine. If it demands a "Small Prairie" then fine. And all things in between. For the record, my observations suggest a "Manor" is more than suitable for today's traffic demands (although this class never worked the Minehead line in GWR/BR days) along with the large and small Prairies (which did work the line back then). The WSR's 2-6-0 also does a fine job. When these machines are not available then larger GWR types will be better than none at all. And they do look and sound great - and most fare-paying people will happily board a WSR train headed by a "Castle" or a "Hall" or a "King". And they are the people that really matter.

Steve

 

If you are to be a "tourist" railway, then fine. However, if it is to be a "heritage" railway then not fine. Actually, I favour calling them tourist lines as (a) it is fundamentally more honest and (b) there are bound to be anachronisms somewhere.

You would be surprised how many people, without being knowledgeable enthusiasts, can recognise something reasonably kosher when they see it. It is gricers who get blinded by big chufferitis. They ought to know better.

PH

 

I don't see the WSR as a "tourist" or a "heritage" railway. I see it as a railway that moves passengers and goods from one end to the other. Just as I did when I first set foot on Lydeard station in 1976 when the words "tourist" and "heritage" were not in common use for such railways. I think I have been sufficiently involved in this business to form an opinion about how people feel about the loco up front, so sorry, Mr H, I would not be surprised. Much of the traffic has indeed been "tourist" and that moniker fits well for me, too. But not exclusively. The WSR has a strong "heritage" element too. With much more to do in that area. Most of the "tourists" come for the "heritage". That's why most people who pay to travel on the WSR are happy to see a "Castle" up front. And equally happy to see a "Prairie" up front. I really don't think WSR management plans on current/future locos are made with "gricer" intentions - on the contrary, plans are usually made with careful respect for availability, reliability, hire costs, power, attractiveness (to the majority of fare payers). That said, I am concerned about the apparent shift of focus away from 4561 and 7821 which are both very suitable machines for our line.

Steve

 

To add to what Steve WSR Wiz writes, many I believe would also like to see 4110 back in steam; another suitable loco.

 

What "goods" does it carry as of 2018? Very, very little I would think. No problem. It survives on its carryings as a visitor attraction.

This proposed use 0f an express loco. to run tender first on a tourist line at 25m.p.h. would be akin to my saying "wouldn't it be nice" to drive to work in a pre 1914 Rolls-Royce. Both would involve pointless expenditure.
Please be realistic. If you run a country branchline, run a country branchline.

PH

 

Couldn't agree more...... and I'm one of those who finds it a shame the small locos and their couple of carriages simply can't cope with the levels of traffic on many preserved former secondary and branch lines. It is sheer fantasy to pretend otherwise.

Turning out a station to represent one period of a line's life is one thing (and even better when passengers join the fun in period costume), but the notion of strictest historical authenticity across the board isn't illusion so much as delusion. There's very practical difference between catering for the tourist element, which pays the bills and the heritage/educational functions which many lines do undoubtedly strive to fulfill ..... and which tends to be somewhat less remunerative.

Yes .... there does need to be a place for heritage aspects, yes .... these are very important (and not just because of the preferential tax regime which comes with heritage status), but don't forget from where the overwhelming bulk of the money comes to pay for it!

To no small extent, much of that which exercises the purists among our number is a direct result of the very success of the heritage movement.

Permit me to quote from the late Tom Rolt's forward to "Railway Adventure" (1960 edition): "Despite our pride in what has been achieved, some of us cannot help feeling a twinge of nostalgic regret as we recall the pioneering days ........ such a condition of romantic decrepitude could not be perpetuated. The choice was between death and a new life and although the .... railway of today has a new look the old spirit lives on as strongly as ever." .... and that's just as true today.

 

In which case you can send most of the larger locos to the museum and save a few for the Great Central. All of the industrial 0-6-0's can be mounted on plinths in public parks as the collieries and steelworks have closed.

On the other hand, we could be grateful that people had the vision to rescue their favourite locos from Barry and we can now look forward to another Castle back in preservation. I wonder if it will have air brakes and a turbo generator ?

 

We've been through this ever so many times. The irony of heritage railways is that they cannot ever reproduce what they seek to achieve, if they did they would go bust just like the original effectively did. The need to adapt to visitor facilities to todays standards of living and for each line to be more or less self-sufficient in space that was relatively limited when intended for low-ish levels of goods traffic compounds the problem as the two entities normally are located cheek by jowel. Then, lastly the need to provide far more traction and rolling stock than was ever originally needed leads to the use of whatever is available. Thus only a pastiche of the line as it was is possible - thinks of the Tallylyn or Welshpool & Llanfair - almost as pure as it is possible to be, but nothing like what it was!

 

H0ward, I think you could do with visiting the Dartmouth Steam Railway to see that a severely graded tourist railway does not have to employ express locomotives. Yes I don't like the plethora of "names" (one of these is risible) very much but, in general there is an absence of fussification which a lot of supposedly heritage lines could copy.

Of course number one priority is earning money but number two (probably joint No.1) is not spending too much in order to do this. No. 3, is "heritage" and it is surprising how acute some visitors, without special knowledge , can be. Even more surprising are the visitors from other railways who are not exactly "enchanted" with how their own line tackles these issues.

PH

 

Our Heritage Railways are all in the Tourist trade, Some are lucky enough to be able to Authentically recreate past scenes from what their railway would have been, some have had to make do with what is available, but the bottom line is every railway has to pay its way, it has to make enough to be able to afford keep on running and to re invest in what it can offer to both staff and customers, that will mean doing things that were not done in the past, such as having add on atractions, running dining services where there is a market to do it profitably , footplate experiences, to a lot of railways its the cream on the cake, its that extra bit of income and it makes the difference, thing is to not lose sight of what industry you are in, when you look at what our industry has created, over time, for instance the ability to enjoy a leasurly very good meal in luxury whilst watching the scenery as you trundle past, dining as a leisure pursuit on a train unlike as being an add on to a jouney from A to B , Santa specials, Santa isnt just in your shoping centre , now he, or she are at a heritage railway near you also, So its more than just a journey now it has to be an adventure, it has to be something that bit different than your average day out.

 

I do hear you regarding the DSR Paul, however not every loco owner is happy to subject their loco to such heavy loadings over such severe gradients.

 

They own a high percentage of their own motive power, one unit of which is undergoing major overhaul at the admirable Cranmore at this moment. Beware of infection with the dreaded big chufferitis; it's rather contagious!

Paul H

 

Whenever I see 4277 I always think ‘what a small, historically appropriate loco for this line’...

The whole argument is bs because a line has to be drawn arbitrarily in the sand.

Indoor toilets are historically inaccurate, ‘oh no, in 1917 there was only an outdoor privy at the station. No indoor plumbing for you. Here’s a copy of the daily mail from 1916 for you’

Adapting carriages to allow disabled passengers to ride is historically inaccurate, using vounteers is historically inaccurate, perhaps ‘heritage railways’ should only use paid staff and employ them on rates of pay and working conditions appropriate to the time period being recreated?

Women loco crew - historically inaccurate.

Intensive timetables... historically inaccurate.

Bottom line compromises with historically accuracy have to be made in order for the railway to function. If the railway doesn’t function then all you’ve got is a disused trackbed. You’d have to be pretty perverse to want a railway to create the conditions where it is unattractive to the majority of users in the name of heritage fundamentalism.

Heritage is always selective anyway, it is only ever the ‘nice’ bits of the past that people who scream ‘historical accuracy’ demand be preserved.

 

And that is of course the solution to that, but for various good reasons (and there *are* good reasons Paul, despite the potential downsides), not all railways choose to (fully) go down that route.