North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Wasn't the "purchase" for only a nominal amount and an obligation to sell it back for the same amount when it finishes in traffic, with the overhaul costs being repaid through hire fees in the meantime?

 

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R53351/2026-07-17/detailed

31128 arriving Friday night/Saturday morning.

 

You are better informed than me if that is the case.

 

Not "informed", just the grapevine.

 

Effectively, that's the same sort of deal Peter Best did with the KWVR for 45212 so it is a plausible possibility.

 

‘I do it to make a profit.’

‘But how can you make a profit? You lose two cents an egg.’

‘But I make a profit of three and a quarter cents an egg by selling them for four and a quarter cents an egg to the people in Malta I buy them from for seven cents an egg. Of course, I don’t make the profit. The syndicate makes the profit. And everybody has a share.’

Yossarian felt he was beginning to understand. ‘And the people you sell the eggs to at four and a quarter cents apiece make a profit of two and three quarter cents apiece when they sell them back to you at seven cents apiece. Is that right? Why don’t you sell the eggs directly to you and eliminate the people you buy them from?’

‘Because I’m the people I buy them from,’ Milo explained. ‘I make a profit of three and a quarter cents apiece when I sell them to me and a profit of two and three quarter cents apiece when I buy them back from me. That’s a total profit of six cents an egg. I lose only two cents an egg when I sell them to the mess halls at five cents apiece, and that’s how I can make a profit buying eggs for seven cents apiece and selling them for five cents apiece. I pay only one cent apiece at the hen when I buy them in Sicily.’

‘In Malta,’ Yossarian corrected. ‘You buy your eggs in Malta, not Sicily.’

Milo chortled proudly. ‘I don’t buy eggs in Malta,’ he confessed… ‘I buy them in Sicily for one cent apiece and transfer them to Malta secretly at four and a half cents apiece in order to get the price of eggs up to seven cents apiece when people come to Malta looking for them.’
​

Tom

 

Maybe in the case of 44806 there was an accounting need for the legal ownership to change in order for the Railway to be able to hire it?
As well as to protect the considerable expenditure of Mr Best.

 

Not really, it is a matter for the infrastructure manager of the railway in question.

The NYMR is independent of Network Rail. It is up to them to have their own risk based decision, based on whatever mitigations they have in place. I can't speak to what those are, but my point is that the separate legal entities may make different decisions for very legitimate reasons.

Sent from my CPH2621 using Tapatalk

 

Because they are independent entities, so it is not a national 'rule'.

Look at it this way, if the NYMR invested in fire pumps, marshalls, bowsers, whatever they think to control the risk, why should they be forced by an external party?

Sent from my CPH2621 using Tapatalk

 

And the question asked was about the NR owned section on which NYMR run. It's IMHO a reasonable question, but one that cuts to the heart of risk analysis.

 

Thanks for clarifying

Sent from my CPH2621 using Tapatalk

 

And if everywhere in England is Black as is reported in RH, why would Grosmont to Whitby be excluded from that?

 

I don’t know what the situation is with the NYMR and the Line between Grosmont and Whitby. However, as it is a Network Rail requirement they have the power to exempt if they consider there is good reason. It is the same with OTMR which is a Network requirement but there is an exemption for the NYMR. And why not?

 

Certainly NR could impose a steam ban everywhere else but with an exception between Grosmont and Whitby if they saw fit to do so, but is there any suggestion why they might do so, or any reason to suppose that they have done so?

 

Because there are specific local circumstances that lend themselves to local risk assessment differing from the national position.

 

The slower speed perhaps, or the weight of the trains? The criticality of the line in the event of an issue (it's not the WCML...)

Pure speculation, but it's good that a more nuanced decision has been made not a national blanket

Sent from my CPH2621 using Tapatalk

 

Presumably each NR route director makes a decision based on local risk determined by area engineers.
I can see a ban in the future if the dry conditions persist but, fingers crossed, Whitby may escape it.

Last Sunday, I saw the last train pull into Pickering with less than 10 passengers.

Next week, the seven day timetable begins, including the expanded Whitby timetable. It offers the possibility of a full day out in Whitby. I was surprised this wasn't offered on Sundays from June 7th onwards.

 

Normally I'd be pretty happy about the 7-day working getting going but lately they've only just been scraping through the 5-day timetables motive power wise with Wednesday seeing a Whitby run cancelled. I'm not feeling particularly positive about whats coming. Unless things have moved on dramatically in the last couple of days there still isn't a lot of motive power available. Repton still looks like its not complete, 9F the same. I believe Eric is still waiting for parts etc. And there doesn't seem to be a lot of diesels about either.

 

Good to see the 31 & 47 are back from tyre turning .

Jon

 

31466 and 47077 should be back by now, and 31128 arrives later tonight.