North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

According to the LNERCA Facebook page it is the first of an eight carriage reshuffle.

Sent from my SM-A166B using Tapatalk

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/1F3ArC5u1D/

The Great Northern Saloon Heads to Its New Home

The Great Northern Railway Observation Saloon No. 3087, owned by the LNER Coach Association, has now left our Kirby Misperton shed and arrived safely at the Embsay & Bolton Abbey Steam Railway on long-term loan.

Built in 1909 and beautifully restored by our volunteers, this elegant carriage will soon be taking passengers once again for weddings, cream teas, and special events.

No. 3087’s move marks the first stage of an eight-carriage reshuffle taking place over the coming weeks — part of our ongoing work to ensure each vehicle in the collection is in the right place to be cared for and enjoyed.

A huge thank-you to everyone involved — both our volunteers and our friends at Embsay — for helping this remarkable carriage roll again!

 

"part of our ongoing work to ensure each vehicle in the collection is in the right place to be cared for and enjoyed."

That particular line of the statement feels somewhat pointed given the handling of the NYMR based teaks by the railway. It will be interesting to observe where everything ends up following the reshuffle.

 

I do pay a monthly fee to avoid ads on YouTube. What puzzles me is who actually buys anything in response to the ads if we all hate them so much.

 

For a moment I "liked" this, but then deleted it. In reality its a pitifully sad reflection on the status of the NYMR a a heritage railway, and the sorry excuse for a management that now runs it. I don't think they'll be satisfied till all the teak coaches are gone, and after that it will presumably the "non-standard" steam locos like those of NELPG that will be under pressure to be moved away elsewhere. Has too much damage now been done to be reversed? I fear it may have been.

 

Unfortunately, I fear that you are right. For the Trust chairman to stand up at the agm and say that”we don’t need the teak coaches” was a disgrace and he should resign. He may be technically correct in the use of the word ‘need’ but I do think he should have added “ but we really do want them. ” to his sentence.

 

I suppose this is the rub. As a hard nose business its all about costs and returns, as an educational charity, without the teak set you only have half a story. It's finding the balance

 

You are right, but if he doesn't resign (which he will not, of course!) under another of the genius changes brought about by an ex-chairman, there's nothing the members can do about it - as I understand it, the chairman is no no longer elected by the membership, but by his fellow board members - and he's probably not due for re-election to the board for at least a couple more years.

It's a bit too late in the day to be deciding that the NYMR is a hard-nosed business. It is an educational charity, and has appealed for, and been given, large sums of money by grant-awarding bodies and its membership to perpetuate that end, and is still looking for them to do so to keep it afloat. It should really be thinking more in terms of honouring that long-standing premise.

 

I think this is unfortunately the result of so much focus being put on short term financial pressure and not enough on the longer term. Whilst I'm not saying the short term didn't need action, I think the balance moved far too much. What's the point of saving today only to sacrifice tomorrow?

In reality the railway and the various owning groups need to work together for the long term viability of both. For the owning groups, if they can't get what they need from the NYMR I'm sure they can find a home somewhere else. There will be no lack of potential homes for those carriages though it will likely mean them being more spread out among more railways. For the NYMR, if they struggle to attract owning groups they will have to find a way to be a lot more self sufficient, which I struggle with seeing. Other owning groups will be watching what goes on here and adding it into the risks section of any potential relationship with the NYMR. Speaking from the outside it looks very much like the LNERCA have put up various options to help over quite a bit of time now but none of those options have been taken up. @Lineisclear mentioned an agreement with the previous owning group of 80136 and the J94 to overhaul the latter. But they have a contract with the LNERCA to lease, maintain below the drawbar and presumably run the teaks that isn't being actioned. So on one hand they commit to funding an overhaul on an engine that likely won't see lots of use on the NYMR, but on the other not fund the general maintenance of carriages that could be used. But that is just one example.

All of these agreements between owning groups and railways rely on relationships, trust and a certain amount of good faith. How much of that has been sacrificed here? Not just with the LNERCA, but other potential groups that may have been looking at the NYMR but perhaps might not now.

 

I have a big problem with the Austerity being restored for hiring out - there doesn't seem to me to be much evidence that any loco owners earn much more than what it costs to keep the loco running (if anything!), and it's largely extra work for someone else's benefit! Add on to that the question of time taken to maintain support for the engine and then look at loco availability on the NYMR, and ask whether the money it brings in will be worth it (clue: see what the position is each year as the winter maintenance programme ends and the new season starts). It would be far better to include the loco in in a sensible fleet plan, where it could be used sensibly, as per @Steve's suggestion.

 

I think the going rate for hire of an Austerity is north of £500. Ten years of 100 steamings/year would bring in £500k which should be enough to pay for the next overhaul. The question is, can you get a hundred steamings? Most railways wanting an Austerity (but not all) are likely to be weekend only so, even though the demand to hire might be there, the usage may not be.

 

The SVR’s Great Western set is a wonderful example of what can be done if you choose to do it properly, the recently completed disabled buffet (can’t think of its number) is an absolute work of art.

 

The SVR is still a heritage railway, the NYMR is no longer in that category. The work of the LNERCA is up there with the best of any carriage restoration group, and it is thus a great shame that is isn't either appreciated or valued by the numpties who run the NYMR now. They should have opprobrium heaped upon them!

 

But would that income cover the cost of the (probably paid) staff time spent on maintaining the loco over that time as well? The NYMR is making enough of a loss atm as it is - would it really be a good business move to increase that by effectively subsidising another railway? I'd love to see the detailed financial justification for this plan - something more than "that's a brilliant idea!"

 

I see a lot of similarities with the SVR in the recent past and what’s going in North Yorkshire at the moment, is there someone like Gus up there atm?

 

I thought it was said up thread it was part of "a package" with a loco the NYMR does want.
I took that to mean the other one and this would go elsewhere if the Austerity was not overhauled.

 

Correct! The gift was of an indivisible package.

 

Apparently it was the "strings attached" to 80136,but actually I don't think it is relevant. If something had to be done with it, which do you think would be the better option - overhaul it for use on the NYMR, or overhaul it to hire out for another railway's benefit, but at a questionable rate of return?? Hopefully there's still time for common sense (normally a much evident Yorkshire trait, but sadly now extinct in a certain area of Pickering!) to prevail.

 

6 people paying £300 each for a driving experience to New Bridge and back, £1800 a day. Can that be done between services with the current timetable frequency, or would it need to be on non-operating days? Yes, basing it at the Pickering end will mean it'll need to go back to Grosmont periodically for maintenance - charge the one way move accordingly, maybe on a Sunday when the service is quieter, then run it Monday to Friday on alternate weeks.

It would be crazy to overhaul the loco and send it out on loan when it could bring in significantly more money based on the line. £1800 a day, 5 days a week, 10 weeks a year, 10 years = £900,000.

 

Good idea! How about putting your name forward for the GM's post - even if it's only one good and sensible idea, it's probably an improvement on the present incumbent.