If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Peak Rail Annual Report and Action Group

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by huochemi, Aug 11, 2017.

  1. JayDee

    JayDee Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2017
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    272
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Swadlincote
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    They've looked into it before, said it would cost a bomb to run, have to be heavily subsidised after Bakewell and basically isn't worth it.
     
  2. estwdjhn

    estwdjhn Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    641
    Occupation:
    Boilermaker
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'm bemused by that conclusion. I know a lot of people who drive Buxton to Macclesfield fairly regularly to catch London trains. I would have thought that getting a similar journey time to London via Derby, and without the hassle of parking in Macclesfield would be a pretty popular service.
     
  3. Forestpines

    Forestpines Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,681
    Likes Received:
    2,438
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Somewhere in the UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    But would a Derby-manchester service include a Buxton stop and reverse?
     
  4. JayDee

    JayDee Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2017
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    272
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Swadlincote
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Its probably because they have to consider the catchment of the whole line, and depending on who's doing the study this catchment can be rather elastic.

    That being said, there's really not many people along the long stretch between Bakewell and Buxton, so the business case likely isn't very good at all no matter how rosely tinted you look at it and hope. As a tourist line, that is ideal (no housing estates in the way of your nice views) as a mode of transport however...
     
    John Baritone likes this.
  5. Vulcan Works

    Vulcan Works Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    711
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes, that appears to be a strong motive. Most of the Plc Directors have been in post for quite a while and they (probably genuinely) believe that they're the best people to be leading the organisation no matter what the evidence is to the contrary.

    Peak Rail's constitution makes it very difficult to remove poorly performing Directors unless they choose to step down themselves. On the flip side, the Directors haven a long history of resorting to disciplinary procedures and legal letters to drive away staff and Directors who pose a challenge.

    The 'divine right to manage' and the inability to entertain alternative points of view is an incredibly old fashioned approach but I've got to say that it has proven effective for the Directors so far because they are well entrenched! They have managed to divert attention away from the underlying organisational weaknesses and blamed some named individuals for PR's current woes. I'm genuinely surprised how many shareholders seem to have accepted this crude version of events, which will only have reinforced the Board's behaviour.

    It's perhaps wishful thinking to hope for a radical change of managerial culture in the near future so I can't see how the Board will heal the rift between themselves and the disgruntled Shareholders and supporters (who are a minority, but nevertheless a sizeable minority). Likewise there's a need to keep supporters of the current regime on board amidst the ongoing legal action.

    This is going to rumble on for quite some time...
     
    John Baritone, TommyD and jnc like this.
  6. snappertim

    snappertim New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    472
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Yes I suspect it will rumble on for some considerable time for the following reasons..

    Taking a very quick at the filing history of PR plc, as a non legal reader, in 2002 the plc filed an amended M&A which adopted Table A of the Companies Act 1985 "Regulations for Management of a Company Limited by Shares". Under section 84 it is quite clear that although directors must retire by rotation this does not apply to Managing Directors. - in PR's case Joint MD's so are safe from re-election or otherwise. I have no idea if this is common through the Heritage Railway movement. In the case of larger HR companies such as NYMR they employ a General Manager, and clearly shareholders can't remove him/her from office.

    If I read Table A correctly under section 38 the calling of an EGM requires a majority of shareholders, but with a nominal holding of not less than 95%. That is a mountain to climb.

    Whilst I am not entirely clear on the local geography, having only lived in Matlock for some 3 years, the proposed extension north, it seems to me to be very complicated and makes the current Brexit negotiations look like a walk in the park. Many people have come unstuck by the HR movement confounding the doubters , so "never say never". PR is not in control as far as I can see, as there are much bigger and more powerful players involved, who will , rightly, look after their commercial interests as a priority. Then there will be the objectors. Looking at Hassop station, this is now a café, shop and a very large bike hire operation. I really cannot see the trackbed being shared by walkers and cyclists with freight trains, commuter trains etc. Then there is the money - where is that to come from?

    If you look at the HUGE amount of work and very considerable expense undertaken over a number of years by the Lynton & Barnstable railway, just to get to the planning stage, or the RVR trying to bridge the mere 2 mile gap to the K&ESR, which as now gone to local public enquiry, then it can been seen that even these much simpler enterprises, which are well funded, take years of careful planning and negotiation and are not assured success.

    In summary, for the reasons above, I agree with much of the previous postings, and I cannot see any real change in PR's fortunes in the immediate future. I would really love to be proved wrong - maybe I will be.
     
    John Baritone and JEB-245584 like this.
  7. ikcdab

    ikcdab Member Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    1,849
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    WSRHT Trustee, Journal editor
    Location:
    Taunton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Tim, I'm not sure your suggestions about the EGM are correct. I am scarred, of course, by my WSRA experience. The Companies Act 2006 section 303 says that a general meeting must be called if at least 5% of members demand one. The company articles can say whatever they want, but they cannot overide the law or make things more strenuous than the law!
     
    35B, Greenway and snappertim like this.
  8. snappertim

    snappertim New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    472
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Many thanks Ian for your timely correction.
     
  9. John Baritone

    John Baritone New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    134
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Buxton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Looking at an OS map, it certainly appears that the land (and the bridge over Bridge Street) is still available for a spur into Buxton, turning off the line which is still in place along Wye Dale from Topley Pike. But if the idea is for a high speed rail link between Derby and Manchester, I really can't see any TOC wanting to do a stop and reverse for the limited number of passengers they could pick up in Buxton - and they could also point out that people in Buxton already have a train service into Manchester. I grant you that would be less than convenient for anyone travelling north who wanted to alight at Buxton - but I'm not sure that the numbers would be enough to sway the TOC's opinion. TOCs are after all, in the business of making money, rather than providing a social service.

    In fact, if the TOC's main aim was to provide as fast a service as possible between Derby and Manchester, they might opt for turning north off the original Bakewell / Buxton line at Topley Pike, and going up the existing freight line used by the limestone trains through Great Rocks Dale and Dove Holes Dale to join the Manchester / Sheffield route at Chinley.

    The problem with that last stretch on the original alignment between Topley Pike and Buxton is twofold; firstly, it's used by very heavy, slow moving freight trains hauling stone westbound from Topley Pike Quarry - and secondly, it's built along the shoulder of a typical glaciated valley; narrow, with very steep sides, and as twisted as a barbed wire fence struck by lightning. Trying to add even a single extra road (so that passenger traffic could have an up and a down road, with freight workings on a seperate goods line) would be a mammoth undertaking - just take a look at how tightly packed the contour lines are on both sides of the line on this last stretch east of Buxton, and you'll see what I mean:
    http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?...erbyshire+[Town]&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf

    And that's always assuming that there would be sufficient track capacity for all the stone trains on a single line. The other route up Great Rocks Dale is also used by heavy freight trains from Tunstead Cement Works - but, if you follow round the map I linked to, above, you can see there's lot more wiggle room that way.

    Having said all that, though, I still see the biggest problem facing Peak Rail is not rebuilding the line north of Rowsley (though that would be a major undertaking, even for a railway with rock-solid finances) - it's sorting out the internal politics. It seems to me that since I stopped working there, the poor communication and lack of trust between the management and rank and file volunteers has got far worse, and brought the Railway to a point where it's hard to see how it can be sorted out at all.
     
    Bluenosejohn and Forestpines like this.
  10. estwdjhn

    estwdjhn Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    641
    Occupation:
    Boilermaker
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I thought that the Wye Dale stretch was originally built double track - certainly the steel truss bridges in Wye Dale appear to be double track width. I think the only area where there was been loss of that formation is on the curve into Buxton itself, where it looks like the bridge deck over the A6 has been singled (although the abutment width suggest it was built for double track).

    The Wye Dale stretch of line isn't particularly heavily used as far as I can tell, living almost in sight of it - it's also only about 2 1/2 miles long. I'd be very surprised if you couldn't path a more or less hourly passenger service in each direction around the existing freight flows between Buxton and Great Rocks Junction without any difficulty at-all - and with the whole point of the Buxton-Matlock route being to send the current northbound stone traffic southwards instead, presumably the end result would be fewer stone trains needing to use the route anyway...
     
  11. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,493
    Likes Received:
    23,730
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Largely agree, but thought the main use of the line is for Hindlow traffic, which wouldn’t be affected by any southern route.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  12. sleepermonster

    sleepermonster Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    1,024
    The Wyedale stretch was double track, but the remaining single line has been eased for clearance, especially around the curves, so there is no complete spare formation. The A6 bridge at Buxton was replaced with a single track steel deck when the old arch got taken out by a bridge strike. Peak Rail did operate Sunday DMU services down Ashwood Dale from Buxton LNW in about 1988 but eventually there was a ruling that the signalling system in the area was OK for emergency/diversion workings, but not scheduled passenger trains. Hence the very short lived platform at Blackwell Mill.
     
  13. John Baritone

    John Baritone New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    134
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Buxton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    But if you send the stone traffic south towards Matlock, instead of having to fit both freight and passenger trains along a 2.5 mile stretch from Topley Pike to Buxton, you'd have to have sufficient capacity for both all the way from Topley Pike through to . . . where? . . . Derby?
    I also wonder how much of that stone traffic actually needs to go west to reach the quarries's customers in Manchester and Liverpool, rather than south?
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2018
  14. John Baritone

    John Baritone New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    134
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Buxton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I can't help but compare this situation with that of the Bluebell, when they decided to extend to East Grinstead. Although they got off to a rocky start by announcing it in a press release before even contacting the relevant land owners (let alone gaining their agreement), thus kicking up some very determined opposition, most of the infrastructure was still in place, apart from Imberhorne Cutting (though was a sizeable obstacle!). Even more important was that the Bluebell was on a sound financial footing, with a lot of very supportive active volunteers and armchair members solidly in favour of going for it - if what I've been reading here is anything to go by, Peak Rail is nowhere near so well placed.
    Very much so - and National Park authorities have a great deal of political and legal clout.
    Especially where it goes through tunnels and over viaducts - such as at Monsal Head.
    Even to get over the A.6 at Rowsley needs not just a new bridge, but a sizeable embankment both sides of the road. As it was before closure, the A.6 dipped where it went under the line to give sufficient clearance for high vehicles, and the dip was constantly suffering from flooding. That's why that bridge was demolished after closure, so that they could raise the road and eliminate the dip. To get the line over the road now requires a sizeable embankment north and south, as well as the bridge itself, just to reach Rowsley village - and some ten years back, I was told the bill for that job alone would be well into seven figures.
    Nor can I - to me, sadly, it looks like an immovable object faced with a far from irresistible force. Frankly, I think any funding PR has would be far better spent on a couple of steam locos and improving the facilities for running into Matlock - preferably enabling passengers coming north from Derby and the Midlands being able to board by walking across a level platform, instead of having to cross a footbridge.
     
  15. Lax ambition

    Lax ambition New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2018
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    21
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Loughborough
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    You can never rule out a grand plan like the Peak Line rebuild, the crux of the matter today is will Peak Rail PLC survive for long enough to be a part of the project? Having thought about it long and hard, the "heritage train operation" part of the plan could be there to create a soft public face on the hard commercial part of the consortium, give the peak district a much needed way of moving tourists / walkers into the corridor of the line to replace the Monsal trail that the public will lose. Having said that, I would avoid walking on the Monsal trail on any bank holiday, sunny day etc, as there are just so may bikes using it now, it was so much better before the tunnels were opened.
     
    City_Steam likes this.
  16. Miff

    Miff Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,857
    Likes Received:
    2,793
    Does the Action Group have an Action Plan following the AGM? There was previously talk of an EGM but seems to have gone quiet.
     
  17. FearOfManchester

    FearOfManchester Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Peak District
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    If they do I would be disappointed to see it being discussed in detail here, it's clear that rather lengthy discussion of the plan of action for the AGM on a public forum worked to the disadvantage of the opposition, certain members of management were keeping a close watch on this thread so knew what the state of play was, I would hope in the future to see less discussion on here, a 'no news is good news' scenario, as we know PRAG is active so no discussion doesn't mean nothing is going on.
     
  18. In this day and age, subtlety and tact seem to have been completely lost in the desire of people to have every last detail laid bare in the most public way possible, in 'real' time. Very few people seem to understand the huge value of working away quietly behind the scenes any more, not yelling everything from the modern-day equivalent of the rooftops all the time.

    Knowledge is power ;-)
     
    Bluenosejohn, oddsocks, 35B and 3 others like this.
  19. Lax ambition

    Lax ambition New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2018
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    21
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Loughborough
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Lets keep "the dead cat" on the table and go OTT and say all out for a passenger service made up of 3 x two car 156's that splits at Millers Dale, two cars going to Buxton and 4 cars going to Chinley, stopping at Peak Forest and Chaple en le Frith! On the basis that most two car Derby to Matlock services have a good loading, potential to fill another two cars between Matlock and Bakewell. Beyond Bakewell, train becomes "scenic cruise / walkers" service, as most of the stations are well away from their namesake villages. Such a plan could certainly ease a bit of pressure on a small town like Bakewell, of course all these passenger trains would get in the way of the primary reason for re-instatement on the 25mph LRO proposal, therefor a 50mph scheme would make more sense from a cost to earnings point of view....
    Meanwhile, should we dust off our cheque books and buy a few thousand shares each just to keep what's already there?
    Or get some "bums on seats", and put some cash in the tills, ref my post #288!
     
  20. Breva

    Breva Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    3,790
    Location:
    Gloucestershire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'm not giving them any more of my money, they wasted it (and continue to do so) on court cases and legal fees, instead of building the railway that I had imagined.
    No more money from me, until there is a change in the leadership.
     
    The Dainton Banker and jnc like this.

Share This Page