North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

I'd suggest that the real risk of taxation coming will depend on whether it comes to be seen as a potential alternative to diesel (or diesel-like mixes) for road or domestic heating use. I don't think use as fuel just for steam locomotives is likely to provoke a response!

 

As I expect you'd worked out, unless a government is particularly clueless, they will realise that it takes work to set up a new taxing regime - work which unlikely to be paid back, if there's very little of the thing being taxed. Of course, there are a lot of clueless governments.

Noel

 

Never mind that, HMRC will need to identify the usage, then work on "closing the loophole" and get government to legislate (or pass a Statutory Instrument) to make the change.

 

The standard rebated fuel duty would add £ 2,945 cost to the full fuel tank, a relatively low addition to the cost of the fuel.

 

Is it that a reasonable increase? Assuming the tender holds 5 tons of coal at £400/ton that would be £2000 in coal - and what you are suggesting is a 150% more. If my car's fuel bill rose by 150% I'd be a bit unhappy!

 

Tender contains rather more than the equivalent 5 tons of coal !

 

Which tender are you talking about, and what is the fuel capacity?

In any case, all such discussion is a bit moot unless you know the respective fuel consumptions. For example, if a steam loco manages 70lb coal / mile (a reasonable total figure I think) and coal is £400 per ton, then the cost is £12.50 / mile. What are the equivalent figures for oil?

Tom

 

No idea on what 2253 burns.
But an article in one of the mags about the VOR said it cost twice as much for a return trip with the one converted to oil, as a coal powered trip. The cost being "offset" by the reduced fire risk.

 

It might be able to take more than 5 tons of coal an equally an equivalent amount of oil - but does it always carry the full amount? Realistic specific examples are hard to come by - and the quoted increase of £2495 in duty doesn't seem to be based on a quoted number. That's why I used the word "assuming"!

 

What other infrastructure is required for the oil fuel?
Tank, Pumping and pipework would be part of it, any more?
How much storage capacity is envisaged?

 

Coal from one supplier is currently around £330/t delivered with slight variations due to where it has to be delivered to. However, that’s for an artic load and the NYMR can’t accept artics and it has to be delivered in 8 wheelers at a higher cost. I don’t know what that is but I would suggest it is a bit less than £400/t.

 

Presumably getting a cheaper artic delivery to New Bridge (?) and tripping it to Grosmont by the handily adjacent railway isn't cost effective, even if it saves 15% per delivery?

 

Whilst possible, it would be a nightmare job . It would have to be tpped on a concrete apron, loaded into a suitable wagon and tripped to Grosmont where it would have to be unloaded. How, would be an interesting converation. I've unloaded 16 tonners by hand in my time and, I'd suggest that those days have gone for what would be a routine job. Ideally it would require a couple of operational coal hoppers and some coal drops in the North Eastern style but that's a lot of capital expenditure.

And we haven't discussed the matter of degradation of the coal from all this loading and offloading.

I think it will remain a pipe dream. On the other hand, moving the coaling tower to New Bridge at an enhanced MPD has a lot going for it.

 

Presume there's a seperate smaller delivery to New Bridge at present?
As you say the mechanical handling is not straightforward and too costly to set up even if it yields long term savings.

 

Coaling tower! How the other half live ...

(FWIW, we coal using a fork lift truck with a bucket, direct off a concrete apron. It works, subject to needing someone with the relevant fork lift qualification available during the morning. But fairly low tech relative to a coaling tower

Tom

 

The Grosmont tower also requires a JCB with bucket to load it up, but the hopper can be loaded and refilled at any time and isn't as time critical as loading up a loco directly.

 

Locos are not normally coaled at Pickering. If a loco overnights there it is coaled back at Grosmont during a layover next day.

Peter

 

For normal operations, there is no coal at the Pickering end and all locos are coated at Grosmont during the day. For special events where locos are stabled at New Bridge and don’t go to Grosmont, a supply of coal is provided at Pickering and the loco is coated with a machine.
When everything is normal and there are sufficient steam locos available, there are two locos off New Bridge and one off Grosmont, Until recently, in peak season the Railway ran an 8 train service requiring three locos to start the day at Pickering. Hence the suggestion that New Bridge should be upgraded to the main depot with Grosmont being the outlier. Whilst on paper it might sound good, there are problems with that suggestion in that New Bridge is a mile from Pickering so tank locos needing a top up during the day would require a time consuming 2 mile round trip to do so. Nothing is as simple as it might seem.

 

At present 2253 is burning diesel fuel at some considerable expense. Word on the railway is that it uses four times more diesel for a run to Pickering and back than a Class 37 on the same job. But that may be just mess room gossip.

Peter

 

Back in the day, the Grosmont coaling tower was essentially built by a member of the shed staff , mostly from scrap items. The main part was a hopper from a disused household coal yard. If the NYMR were to want to replicate it at Pickering, it wouldn't be a difficult piece of engineering to build the whole thing from scratch, possibly even as a volunteer project. It is possibly an idea that would anathema nowadays, but the NYMR really really needs to engage with its volunteers, and throw them some worthwhile challenges.