Project Wareham

You’re clearly prejudging the trial for some reason. It could be a glorious success and among other things attract an additional demographic, deepen the employee and volunteer experience, knowledge and skill pools and be part of a solution to reducing vehicle traffic on the A351.

The ladies and gents involved in running a heritage railway largely do it because they enjoy it. I love the expression ‘run it and they’ll come’. For over fifty years Swanage and other heritage railways have been driven by people with ambition, ingenuity and passion. Engineers solve problems, it’s what they do best.

I’m sure DCC didn’t ‘invest’ in a group of people who would give up when things got a bit difficult. “Here’s your train back, sorry.” DCC invested in a group of people with a track record for making things happen, making things work.

 

And why would Swanage want to be in a position of being treated as though part of the national network, subject to the obligations imposed by national regulators and ministers for GBR, rather than able to manage their own assets?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Okehampton and Swanage were not in comparable situations. In all fairness to Okehampton, the heritage set-up there could be best described as "nascent", whereas at Swanage it is well-established. At the former there was next to nothing at risk of being lost, at the latter a great deal.

 

You are very right in what you said in your middle paragraph. However, these people are ageing rapidly and I get the impression that the younger volunteer of today doesn't have that drive and expects things to be on a plate. Not all people but a good majority.

 

That's exactly what my father used to say ..... half a century ago!

 

"Being treated as part of the national network....." is an "interesting way of describing the situation."

Firstly the fundamental aim of the SRT and its predecessors has been to restore the link between Swanage and the national network at Wareham. As the track between Worgret Junction and Wareham Station is part of the national network mainline a train operating between Swanage and Wareham operates on the mainline and thus has to comply with the rules and regulations laid down for operating on the mainline.

Secondly to operate trial services between Swanage and Wareham is, afaik, enshrined in the 2014 lease agreement between DCC (now DC) and SRT. SRT / SRC have to meet their obligations under the lease unless the other party to the agreement is prepared to waive this obligation.

As it stands at the moment it is my understanding that SRT SRC is legally obliged to operate the trial. Once the trial has been concluded DC and SRT SRC can consider / discuss what happens thereafter.

To respond to one other point it would be wrong to prejudge the trial however if the next trial operates on similar days (of the week), at similar times and at similar fares (adjusted for inflation) to the 2017 trial it is challenging to see how the outcome would be significantly different*. If anything the average daily passengers and revenue would be less because in the 90 day trial there are more non peak days than in the shorter 60 day 2017 trial.

* From a revenue point of view. The costs may vary because on the one hand there are no rolling stock hiring in charges but on the other hand SRC has to bear the cost of access charges, higher mainline insurance premiums, maintenance costs etc.

 

I was responding to a post suggesting that the responsibility for running through services be transferred to SWR, as a mainline operator - something that implies far more (especially following the Shapps-Williams report) than the obligations associated with SRT running over Network Rail tracks.

I am familiar with neither the agreements that SRT have entered into, nor any discussions that may be taking place or have taken place between them and other parties. I therefore have no idea what may be brewing in terms of fulfilling the 2014 deal, or what DC might now want from it. As others have commented, the £3m that has already been spent is a small sum in the wider scheme of things, and the perception of ongoing costs is likely to have shifted, especially given the impacts of the last couple of years.

My personal opinion is that the value of a regular service between a preserved railway and an interchange station on the main line is generally over-estimated. I also observe from this discussion that there is a school of thought who see the fundamental aim of the SRT as only being met by running regular services, as if part of the national network. Those views, and the sometimes fanciful interpretations of how income might be drawn for this, suggest to me a threat to the future of the railway as the mainline connection tail starts to wag the tourist railway dog. My conclusion is that the future of the link between Norden and Worgret has greater value as an access point for occasional services than as part of a regular service between Swanage and Wareham.

 

So as I read this your are proposing that if the service is found by SR to be uneconomic then the government takes it over? Because that is what in the 2022 railway world transfer to SWR means. What rationale could be provided to make the government want to do that? I can not see what cost benefit analysis you would be using to come to this conclusion. If it was uneconomic for the SR then it is sure as hell going to be uneconomic for a national TOC with all the extra costs they have.
Look at how many years it took Corby to be reconnected to the national network when some of the infrastructure was already in place (yes I know electrification complicated it, but there is a parallel) and at the time I believe the population was around 50K (now 70K). The population of Swanage is 10K with I believe a far higher retired percentage than somewhere like Corby.

 

The statement that the fundamental aim of the SRT and its predecessors has been to restore the link between Swanage and the national network at Wareham comes I believe from the SRT itself. It is of course debatable whether this actually means operating services or just providing the physical link ie the track, signalling equipment etc though that argument is probably somewhat disingenuous.

I do not disagree that the value of a regular service between a preserved railway and an interchange station on the main line is generally over-estimated.

The challenge that all parties face but particularly SRT SRC is ensuring that whatever happens the very hard earned achievements of 50 years are not lost.

 

Is not the general objective of a railway to connect? In this case two relatively small centres of population but one with a Steam Railway Attraction and the other with a main line connection It would seem that some are resigned to the inevitability of the continuing reign of the ICE in the form of buses and private cars,both of which IMHO are going to become much more expensive to operate
Is this marriage of a railway conserved in aspic(and btw nothing like the Swanage Branch that i remember from my youth) and an effort to present a reasonable alternative and convenience to the travelling public
going to succeed? We will not know until we try, we at least owe that to the pioneers. I write as a very early PLM

 

The railway exists and, if circumstances for road use change, it would be possible to respond and adapt.

As for the reign of the ICE, I struggle to shed too many tears when we’re talking about 60 year old DMUs running any connecting service, with steam the higher profile alternative. The green argument feels a dangerous one to deploy in this situation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I don't think it is a question of how vehicles will be powered. For green energy, electric vehicles powered by wind farms will be hard to beat. What will require far more of a sea change will be persuading people to forego their personal vehicle cocoon in favour of communal accommodation with a bunch of strangers. As far the SR, we (should) know that it cannot be "preserved in aspic" if it is to succeed and be viable - success, as measured in visitor numbers, means greater provision of up to date sanitary and other amenities, for example. Passenger numbers far higher than those when the line was a "proper" railway will demand longer trains and more powerful engines to pull them - but most of the locos based on the line are types that did run over it in earlier days and are still working there nearly 60 years after they were thought to have gone forever; in terms of staying true to its past the SR is doing better than most.

 

It's not much point in speculating what might or might not occur, Until such times as the Swanage railway obtains it's operating licence and we are talking about running over a mere Mile and a half of track between the boundary and London end of Wareham Platforms.
I am sure that suitable press statements will be made when this occurs.

 

"And why would Swanage want to be in a position of being treated as though part of the national network, subject to the obligations imposed by national regulators and ministers for GBR, rather than able to manage their own assets?"

Presumably as a useful additional service for the line and to the town and help secure the line's future.[/QUOTE]

 

Protect, or threaten?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I thought the purpose of a heritage railway was to preserve, educate and demonstrate? Many preserved lines do very well for themselves running from outside somewhere, to pretty much nowhere. Additionally I can't think of any others that have existing mainline connections (either with track or a junction station) that are desperate to take on the responsibility of a daily commuter service or hand their line over to someone else to enable that to happen. As you said, the population centers involved are relatively small, are the locals really that keen to give up the regular bus that stops at the end of the road, walk all the way to the railway station and then jump in a 60 year old DMU to have to change again to go anywhere?

 

Could have done all that then without involving Local Authorities,Appeals etc. and without building back to Worgret. So WHY did they do that??

 

It was not too many years ago that SRT appealed to its supporters through "Project Wareham" for the monies to enable SR to buy into the NR resignalling through Wareham and Worgret. Surely to goodness all that time,effort and cash was not for the rare Charters and rarer movements of Locos and rolling stock onto the Branch.Did DCC see it that way when they funded the purchase and rehab of Class 117 DMU? IMHO it speaks to credibility that commitments are fulfilled. On To Wareham!

 

Why on earth is everyone still banging on and on and on about a daily commuter service? Pure Fantasy!
The visitor to the Swanage Railway comes by SWR train to Wareham, alights from the train catches the DMMU to either Norden or Corfe and then changes into a steam hauled service to Swanage. Simples .

3A Bescot wrote "And why would Swanage want to be in a position of being treated as though part of the national network, subject to the obligations imposed by national regulators and ministers for GBR, rather than able to manage their own assets?"

Because that's the way it is and that's the way it has to be. The OR&R are in effect Her Majesties Railway inspectorate and ALL Train and Freight operating companies come under their jurisdiction, as of course does ALL heritage Railways.