North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

If you think of a whole-railway cost and imagine running, say, a six coach train with either a steam loco or diesel hauling it, almost all the costs are identical. P/way, C&W, signalling, the basic business costs - everything is the same. Only the traction costs vary, and by definition they are only a small part of the total operating cost.

The evangelists for "diesel is cheaper" tend to focus on the traction costs and ignore the fact that it is the whole railway cost that matters, not just the traction. (Just as in arguments about the rise in coal prices, coal is only a par of the cost of running a steam loco). My hunch is that diesel is cheaper, but it is not as much cheaper as its advocates suggest. There is also a big unknown in that whereas with steam, pretty much any replacement part - even new boilers and cylinders - has been done and can be factored into cost models, I have a suspicion that there are some major tasks in diesel traction that have never been attempted in preservation and it is unknown whether they are even feasible, or if they are, how expensive they will be.

Tom

 

It's a poor comparison. The really big issue with steam is that it is very labour intensive in day-to-day operation (all that shifting ash around ...) That's a big problem if you are paying for your labour, as British Railways was; less of an issue if you aren't.

Tom

 

A diesel loco is definitely cheaper to run whilst it runs. However, when it comes to a major overhaul, that is when the problems will start to arise. Steam loco engineering is basically simple engineering and, as has been shown, nothing that is required is in the 'too hard' category. Diesel locos, though, are living on borrowed time. They are generally kept going because people were wise enough to build up a good stock of spares and, once those spares are used up, that may well be the end. The 04 shunter on the NYMR was sidelined a good while ago with a bent crankshaft. A replacement was unobtainable until a replacement Gardner 8LW was eventually sourced in (I think) Ireland. There are so many parts on a diesel that can't be replicated with basic engineering skills, unlike the steam loco.

 

If you travel to the North York Moors by road from various directions you will see the brown tourist attraction signs. They don’t point the direction to the NYMR, they simply say ‘Steam Railway’. The NYMR must have agreed that wording when they weee put up and I’m fairly certain those in Park Street know what Joe Public is generally looking for. High fire risk may be a hot topic but they can’t tun Tornado and play the fire risk card. Thee are currently any number of locos with no work to do. The Railway needs to give Joe Public what it wants or be truthful in why they can’t do so.

 

I reckon it has lost its way in general, not just in the commercial subset.

Noel

 

Yes.
It's why we need transparency from the NYMR.
There has been so much obfuscation. What are they hiding?
Why did they use columns in Moorsline justifying the appointment of the CEO?
Why don't they publish passenger data? They've never had so much real time data.

After the appalling first AGM of the CEO, it was apparent that a stooge had been put in place.

Last year's AGM simply glossed over the problems.

Until competent people are in charge the railway will suffer.

 

You don't pay for all the drivers, firemen and cleaners and some workshop staff on an HR.

 

In Kent at least if a brown sign says steam railway it has been paid for by the road authority. If it says eg Romney Hythe & Dymchurch Railway it has been sponsored by that organisation who have paid a not inconsiderable fee especially on motorway or trunk roads. Sometimes they've been able to get the funding for these fees from tourist or regional organisations.

 

Good point. I know, though, that the NYMR has more paid staff than most heritage lines; I don't know in exactly which roles, though (other than marketing ;-). Are many of them in steam-specific slots, ones which wouldn't exist under diesel?

Sure they can; the vast majority of politicians do something like that, and seem to get away with it.

Noel

 

It would be nice, given the lack of steam on service trains (through either firecon or lack of operable engine) to have Lucie or 29 on Brake Van rides at one of the stations. Especially at somewhere like Levisham or Goathland to boost patronage on internal services.

 

Signs are not supposed to convey too much detail. Would you have a different sign for a diesel railway? The French "Chemin de fer touristique" avoids this issue.

See also the noise generated by one of the age charities that the old people sign gives a false impression of old people. It's not meant to give a detailed demographic portrayal, it's a quick visual cue to indicate there may be slow-moving, senses-impaired people about.
And when was the last time you saw a car or a motorbike that looked like the ones on the signs.

I think the fact that the nation generally expects steam is a point worth making, but the continual blaming everything and anything on the NYMR management somewhat blunts the force of your observations.

To show what I think should be done (If you can wade through it), go back through the LBR thread and read Tobbes' posts. Clear, patient, fact-based questioning.

 

The fundamental economic shift for diesel, at the time of their introduction, was productivity. Even without timetable enhancements, the same number of duties could be served by fewer locomotives because they didn't need to go to the shed between turns.

They then enabled faster trains, more frequent services, and (eventually) reductions in headcounts.

None of these are especially relevant to heritage railways. The duties aren't onerous enough to need time on shed between turns, while short journeys and volunteer workforces mean that the productivity gains don't offer much. That leaves the direct operational costs (diesel vs coal), and then the treatment of capital costs.

 

Given the scale of work, for example on D9015 Tulyar (ran for the first time since the mid 1990s this year), I think that understanding does exist. What may be less established is the understanding of what that means for the whole lifecycle.

 

One of the biggest problems is that hire fees for diesels aren't anywhere near that of steam either, due to the perceived cheaper running costs. I've heard of some diesel locos being paid £100 a day. You could barely even get a steam loco warm for that! A month of daily running would barely pay for a set of replacement brake blocks at that rate. Whether it's owners not charging enough or railways not willing to pay enough, I don't know, but it won't help diesel preservation long term.

With steam locos you know there's going to be an overhaul every 10 years and can budget and fundraise accordingly (though many locos still need extra funds due to unforeseen work arising). With diesels, if you have enough spares, you can change some components out and not have the loco out of traffic for any significant period of time. Even something like a traction motor change can be done over a weekend with careful planning. But how many owners (groups and individuals) were able to afford sufficient spares in the first place? And how many have enough money saved up from hire fees for such eventualities? Not easy when you're being paid a fraction of what a steam loco earns.

There's also the question of volunteers willing to help out. The Class 56 Group have made no secret that their loco (56006) hasn't done much running in recent years due to the amount of work required and insufficient people available to carry it out. There's also the length of time jobs take. D9015 Tulyar's overhaul has only cost £100,000 - cheap by steam standards - but has taken 29 years.

Getting back to the NYMR, D7628 has been out of traffic for well over a year. 50027's main generator required repairs at a cost of around £15,000, so I would imagine the 25's will be similar, if not less. The Q6's replacement cylinder cost NELPG £70,000. How many thousands have the railway spent hiring in 37688, 31128, 47077 and the autocar while their own loco sits there out of traffic? Even now the generator has only been taken out of the loco for assessment, not for it to sent away for repairs.

 

As one of the most highly critical posters about NYMR management, I take your point, and actually I think that most of the management are doing their very best under difficult circumstances, with minimal resources, but I remain firmly of the opinion that is the commercial side of the management who have, and continue to, let the business as a whole down - and it has left the entire business in an ever worsening death spiral as a result. That position is the responsibility of the CEO and senior colleagues in that department, which is why I try to aim my comments there. I don't think I have been critical of the engineering side, and from that flows sympathy towards the operating department, BUT they can only work with whatever resources are made available to them. Matters have been made worse, imho, by the attitude developed over the last 10 years or so that the NYMR is a "big" business" and one of the "larger" charities when I don't really think it is either. So much needs to change, but accepting reality, and the need to cut the coat according to the cloth available has to be the first, and having nearly 20% of the paid staff working in sales and marketing is not realistic - in my view, at least.

 

If the genuine take of people (some with considerable experience on successful heritage lines, to inform their thinking) is that the NYMR has management issues, what are they supposed to do, say nothing?

This thread actually has recently had longish runs without explicit bashing of the NYMR management (albeit often focusing on things that are inherently criticisms of them - e.g. the recent discussion of schedules, and steam/diesel - but any criticism of a line is almost inherently criticism of that line's management - are we all supposed to refrain from any criticism of all lines?) However, I reckon any lack of direct criticism of the NYMR management is actually a bad sign, not a good one, if they genuinely think it is failing: it effectively means that a lot of people have given up, and are mostly just waiting for the melt-down, having decided that there's nothing they can do to help avoid that happening.

Noel

 

Just looking back at the Tornado loadings during this visit I'm wondering whether there was opportunity to try something different. Apologies if this has been mentioned already but I haven't waded through every post I've missed over the last few days.

For the Pendennis or Gresley visits you have a more limited amount of runs and therefore a better chance at selling more seats per run. SNG has 14 runs spread over two periods but with a big gap in the middle. Pendennis only has 8 runs over two weekends. Tornado itself has a couple of things going against it. The sheer amount of runs is one (24 daytime runs and 1 evening), but its also been there relatively recently so with the other two options coming up there's a potential people are picking one or two of the three. I wonder if there was a chance to just add an optional supplement on to the rover to open those workings up to anyone on the railway that day rather than doing seat reservations. With a price difference between offerings you might have even been able to run both deals side by side.

The extra services being run make the internal railway a much better offer than normal, but if you can't use some of the services that benefit is lost. But also you've got the Whitby customers disappointed not to have steam you can at least give the option of using if they spend more time on the railway and less in town.

Obviously too late for this visit, but maybe an idea for next time.

 

The danger with that is the negative on line feedback you get if people are unable to get a seat on a train with your "Star Loco" having coming especially, if it is full with those just on a normal visit.
It might be manageable and the current event may provide some feedback on numbers, but this is peak holiday time, so how much would read across to a shoulder season is arguable I suspect.

 

It is a consideration but they already blank out carriages from online booking, I assume expecting walk ups on the day. You could still have the book seats deal with particular carriages saved for the 'rover' option. You could also stick a limit on how many of the optional supplement you can sell each day. Even if it was only half a carriage worth its all extra on top of the current takings.

With the current set up you have a half empty five coach set literally passing the heaving two coach autocar.

 

This is in the current strategic plan. I can't think how long the bay platform is at Pickering but wondered if this is a long term thought for the diner...