North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

It had refreshed - but my disappointment (which I think was inherent in how Jorvik was designed) was that it was pastiche overlain on good archaeology

 

I think the refresh was forced upon it by flooding some years ago -IIRC it was closed for around a year or more. It serves to illustrate that refreshes can be good as well as bad, and obviously I want any refresh of the NYMR to be good for both volunteers and visitors - make it more of a heritage railway needs to be the aim, not just an alternative method of accessing Whitby a bit like Jorvik ought to be about finding and learning out about Viking York, without needing a patch of land and a trowel!

 

I think folks do notice vintage carriages, and that if marketed correctly they are an attraction in themselves. The Bluebell used to specifically note a 'vintage train' of non-corridor stock on the timetable. A lot of people forget that even Mk1's are seen as opulent and unusual to most of the travelling public who only have experience of RyanAir-style seating on the modern network. In the early 2000's I also noticed an increasing number of folks enjoying coaches with compartments because they were travelling like a certain teenage wizard who goes to school in a steam-hauled train of Mk1s..

 

Yesterday was the finale of the 2026 Diesel Gala. Not my cup of tea personally but even as a supporter of steam I can see the point of such events and from what diesel knowledge I do have there seemed to be a reasonable selection of traction. Friends who were in attendance all seem to have two opinions in common. They enjoyed themselves but also that it was very quiet with few passengers.

Organisation was said to be excellent, staff friendly and accomodating and very positive feedback but will it have made money? I'm not sure what the costs are of importing four visiting locos, two of which travelled down from Scotland but it must mean ticket sales rise sufficiently to cover that expense let alone make a profit.

On this matter I'm commenting from an armchair rather than my more usual platform view but what occurs to me straightaway are parallels with the recent Thomas event, that is to say well run but with poor patronage.

One skill which current senior management claim is in PR and such skills are especially needed to promote special events like galas and Thomas festivities. However once again there seems to have been a failure to promote these happenings effectively. In previous times such weekends were much better supported because of the excellent reputation the NYMR used to have. That goodwill seems to have been eroded,

One attendee expressed his opinion that confidence had been lost amongst the diesel fraternity and many stayed away as a result. This is of course sad, but it is a reflection of the loss of confidence that is now commonplace amongst volunteers and paid staff alike. Steve in his earlier post summed it up most eloquently and hopefully the next AGM will see long overdue changes. A vote of no confidence in the Senior Management needs to be the first item on the agenda.

 

I think the general point is probably fair, and the virtuous circle of being well regarded is no longer at work.

But for the diesel fraternity, I've picked up that there was a diary clash with another event (NNR), while the ever fickle diesel fans weren't energised by the traction on offer - a challenge that is far from unique to this event. In particular, the comment seems to be that the absence of large Type 5s, with corresponding requirement for air-braking, is a driver for custom - but that NYMR's vacuum brake only policy, with no brake translation permitted, inhibits this. The policy, as I understand it, is of very long standing while the fickleness of diesel fans is a challenge to event and tour organisers all around

 

I entirely agree with the description of many diesel fans as fickle and yes, this could be a reason for low attendance. Conversely I'm told that the two Scots locos present are not regulars on the gala circuit and being from north of the border were sought after by line-in-the- book fans. The no brake translation policy you mention I wasn't aware of and, if another diesel event is arranged for 2027, it could be wise to reconsider that ruling. As to bringing in more modern Type 5 diesel visitors I'm not sure that would be commercially viable unless it could be sponsored by the relevant TOC. The fickleness you refer to seems more governed by sticky vinyl digits than any meaningful interest and if those digits don't match what is deemed as "required" then the gamble might not pay off.

 

Just to note that I wouldn't assume a change of policy is necessarily a quick win, given either the policy implications or the sticky digit fickleness.

 

Is such a proposal actually possible? As I understand it, the management control who can join them and can also deny agenda items if they consider them to be vexatious. Even if it was allowed, could the management defeat such a motion by using proxies?
I fear we have been down this road before with the WSR and L&B

 

First visit of the year yesterday, arrived Grosmont late (0900) and was surprised to find ample parking available.

Travelled on various trains across the day from the first departure to the last arrival and it was good to catch up with some familiar faces again.

What was sad, as mentioned previously was the lack of passengers onboard all 3 sets across the day, I really hope it can return in 2027 and this year isn't an excuse to "rest" the event like what happened between 2017-2023.

Another big down point was a large increase (at least from my memory since my last visit in September), in speed restrictions, seems to one from Esk Valley Cottages towards Beck Hole (heard issues with bridges 37, 38 and 39 mentioned onboard) and from Newton Dale down to the Grange, plus long standing Goathland towards Abbots House and Fen Bog.

The only part with line speed seemed to be Pickering to Levisham.

Which means the vocal entertainment from the locos was minimal, which will also put off the diesel visitors.

I hate to think how difficult it must be to keep time with steam (29 is out today!!)

Another surprise was the bees and/or wasps are still in the blue coach in the beck siding from last year, signs on the fence, but surely these should have been removed from such a public area, incident waiting to happen.

In other news, it has been reported on the wnxx forum Caledonian Railway thread that locos "D9553 and 20166 won’t be returning to the railway", wonder where they are off to next - assuming they are not joining the NYMR fleet?

It was good to be back, trains ran mostly to time, refreshments available across the 3 sets and friendly staff as always.

Best regards

 

More to the point, there needs to be something positive offered. A vote of no confidence has very limited practical meaning, as the case studies you mention make clear.

 

I stand to be corrected, but some of the points in preceding posts need clarification:

@Lineisclear has suggested in earlier posts that a successful "no confidence" motion could cause panic with Santander if it resulted in the resignation of senior Plc Board Officials; I think that could be countered by having suitable candidates willing and able to take their positions, and I'm sure that suitable candidates have already been quietly spoken to. Proxies are a separate matter. Technically, they could be used to defeat a motion, but I think that would be widely seen as a pyrrhic victory if the strength of feeling at the actual meeting vis there. Even if not successful, the motion would surely send the message that the writing is there on the wall.

There is also the point that the Plc is actually controlled - and funded to the extent of the deficit - by the Trust, who appoint some of the Plc Directors; a change in those appointees could send a signal, as could withholding funds - for example to allocate them directly funding infrastructure works so the works get done and the railway is safeguarded, rather than meeting salary payments.

 

I suspect that approach could raise other questions, including whether in so doing the Trust as a body and/or Trustees were acting as shadow directors.

 

I went to the Yorvik exhibition just after it first opened. It was something a bit different at the time riding around in the ‘pods’ but, apart from that, nothing to excite me. I’ve never been back but it’s seemingly still popular, judging by the queues.

 

If that is so, and I accept that your knowledge of such matters will be much better than mine, then steps need to be taken where trustees need to become actual directors and not just shadows.

Apologies if I'm stating the obvious but control of the railway needs to be with the NYMR Historical Trust as conceived when the railway was re-opened in 1973. Professional staff are required to meet legal and regulatory requirements but the current position where highly salaried individuals have hijacked the organisation has been disastrous. What is worse there are no signs of recovery.The direction of the railway should be back in the hands of those who can be trusted and it is they who should decide on a framework in which paid staff are instructed to follow those policies.

I hope those more expert in how this can be constitutionally achieved at the AGM can formulate a method to dispose of those individuals who have shown themselves to be unfit, both financially and ethically, to run a heritage operation.

 

That is a structural question, and needs to be approached with care. The Trust owns the PLC, but the trustees and directors each have legal duties to the body that they are on. In the case of the Directors of the plc, that will include obligations under employment law. It is imagining the scenario you paint, where the Trust directs the PLC to operate in a way that undermines the ability to fund payroll, that has me deeply concerned.

That may or may not be compatible with the intent of the set-up in 1973 - and it is quite frankly irrelevant at this remove, given the changes in applicable law in my lifetime. But, if you wish to achieve a particular end, you need to be aware of the impact it may have - and the only thing more expensive than restructuring is a botched restructuring that goes to tribunal. Especially if people act beyond their authority, and make themselves personally liable for so doing.

I don't know the personalities at NYMR, and can't comment on who can or cannot be trusted. I think the rot runs significantly deeper than directors bad/trustees good, and I would be deeply concerned at a radical change that threw the baby out with the bathwater. However, misquoting Churchill, I do also share the view that "experts" are less "on tap" than "on top" today, and that this is a major weakness within the wider NYMR organisation.

Whatever's wrong will need time, effort and money to fix. That may be freed up by relatively few changes - I honestly don't know what's needed. But there won't be any panaceas, and it will be set back if people assume that there are.

Edit. @thb17 commented earlier on the need for paid staff. I disagree with the expression of that need, but agree with them that they are needed. If change is to happen, the goodwill of those staff is also required.

 

Typing this just with my anecdotal thoughts from attending plenty of diesel galas until 1995 and then since 2012, rather than the kind of firm tangible sales data that railways will be working from, but I think that fickle element might be slightly overstated.

What I definitely do see is a strong and very loyal contingent of 'red pen' people who just want 'new' locos and will turn out for fresh/rare main line freight engines and shunters, and will travel huge distances to do so, and who you can guarantee will turn out for the right engine. Then there are some class loyalists who will very reliably appear for their preferred loco class no matter how many thousands of miles they've had off that engine before, and some classes have bigger followings than others.

But I also see plenty of people swapping between classes at galas, and plenty of people in the same camp as me who just want thrash from classic locos and find the 'red pen' stuff gets right in the way of enjoying that... but also appreciate that it does guarantee a particular crowd will turn up so has a value. So there's a substantial 'non fickle' group for whom price, clashes, being able to plan ahead etc probably becomes the main theme.

Judging from WNXX - and again, no sales data involved here at all, just reading volume and tone of comments - you'd say at a glance that the North Norfolk looks like it was more popular than the NYMR last weekend. The NNR had zero main line Type 5s, and minimal shunter working with two 08s that I think have been out at plenty of NNR galas. Basically zero 'red pen' attraction, just a line-up of classic noisy diesels with steam and beers too. If the fickle point was the dominant factor, that gala would've been avoided in droves because it had no 'red pen' appeal and bar the Western was heavily EE-leaning in its engines (some would say steam being out too would've been offputting - again, my anecdotal evidence is the steam/diesel enthusiast crossover is bigger than hardliners on either side think. Some of us just like old trains!). But it sounds like a success.

My ideal plan for this weekend had been a big road trip of GWR steam/ales on Friday, NYMR on Saturday and NNR on Sunday. I held off committing to that because of the Grosmont bridge situation, as coverage on here in particular suggested that was running behind and there was a chance the gala wouldn't be full line. As the NYMR's 330 miles away, I wanted to make sure the trip was everything I wanted it to be, and by the time it was sure the full line would be open I was too late to arrange sufficient work cover to be sure I could still do it. Once it was clear by last Wednesday that I wouldn't be free all weekend, I decided to skip the road trip in its entirety and save money for other adventures.

I hope the diesel gala continues - for me the line-up looked fantastic, and I had Goathland bank on Railcam in the background during all my work shifts while the gala was on. But the NYMR's a line I'll get to again as soon as I can regardless because the steam entertainment there is great too and the scenery's wonderful, it's purely that I need a lot of logistics to be right around work and family priorities as it's a long diagonal line up the country away from me. And part of that is being confident far enough in advance that the line will be open in full.

 

Once again your knowledge of legal and technical requirements is welcome. Believe me I do appreciate the difficulties there would be to implement the changes I propose, but I did say that I hoped that those expert in the field of organisational restructuring would find a way to achieve this in a constitutional way.

You refer to people acting beyond their authority and again you clearly have technical knowledge in this respect but I simply don't believe that a way can't be found for the Trust to exert legitimate authority over those who are salaried employees. Some of them are clearly failing in what they are paid to do, ie successfully run the railway.

Unusually for one of your posts I really must take issue with you on a specific point in your first paragraph. where you refer to "that undermines the ability to fund payroll". What cannot be clearer from the current situation is the fact that the PLC is haemorrhaging money at an alarming and increasing rate. If anyone is undermining the future funding of payroll it is the actions of the current management.

 

I

Like most things in life, I feel that there are levels of action to be taken here but, like an increasing number of others that I have spoken to, I sense increasing concern that at the end of this year there will be insufficient funds to take the railway through to the start of the 2027 season. If that proves to be the case, the duty of the Trust Board (and I assume the Plc Board) will be to secure the survival and assets of the railway,, ahead of jobs. If jobs have to go then probably all the admin and operating staff, bar a very slimmed down residue, will have to bear the brunt, as engineering staff will still be needed to keep the show on the road. I'm not expressing bias, hatred of a particular group here, just what is, in my opinion, a realistic assessment. Unless someone rocks up with a very large cash donation, I can't see an alternative.

 

There are ways, but they will be less direct. I'm also well aware that continued large scale losses threaten payroll - but my point is that if grants are managed in a way that directs money away from payroll, that would make the whole mess more difficult, not less.

There is a difference between governance and day to day management, and my concern is that the Trust don't cross that boundary

 

I went over 30 years ago and seem to recall enjoying it, but haven't been back since. I'd take my son as I think he'd enjoy it, but like you I feel it's a "one visit" attraction as once you've been round, you've seen everything.

Talking of north east heritage tourist attractions, this popped up on Facebook the other day.

https://www.beamish.org.uk/news/rh/

The railway went down the annual pass route in an attempt to copy Beamish. Maybe promoting someone from within who knows how to manage the railway, paid staff and volunteers would be another thing to copy? Can't be any worse than hiring people with business degrees who appear to see the cost of everything and the value of nothing.