North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

I think D821 and D7029 (and D8568) moving further south was more to do with the location of the DTG people who maintained them - mostly based south of Birmingham - rather than a souring of the relationship. When they were first preserved around 1981 the NYMR was one of the only preserved railways who would entertain main line sized diesels.

 

I don't know about bizzare but very sad. We know that 2253 only goes out when qualified crew (loco inspectors) are available. 926 is the only other currently serviceable steam loco in traffic and as usual its availability is somewhat erratic. Everything else is in bits and looks like staying that way for the immediate future.

Peter

 

Not fitted at the moment.

 

I can remember a conversation about air receivers on the Hymek not being certified and the loco needing to be lifted to gain access to them. Also as the 80s progressed the steam fleet improved with the completion of 45428, 6619 and 80135 getting sorted out. Passenger numbers soared and the mileage available to diesel groups plummeted, suddenly the peak summer school holiday season became all steam to balance out the passenger numbers between trains. Cliff Brown brought DVL to the railway, swiftly followed by Repton. At the start of the decade there were only enough serviceable carriages to form two trains, the four DMU vehicles and two spare mark 1s made up the third set at galas. By the end of the decade there were three sets of service carriages plus the dining train, which only operated evening services, because demand for normal passenger services didn't allow any paths in daytime for it. Eventually even this last bastion of diesel haulage fell to the mantra of an all steam timetable. Diesel gala passenger numbers fell because they ceased offering anything new or different and the railway could make more operating as a normal weekend so they got axed, after that the DPS went too.

Sawdust.

 

The NYMR has had substantial yearly losses for several years running; this is not conspiracy theory, but the NYMR's own accounting. The NYMR needs substantial contributions from supporters to make up for those operating losses; this also is not conspiracy theory, but a written recognition from the NYMR Trust. I could go on in that vein.

What you don't seem to be able to take on board is that people who are unhappy with the current board are fundamentally motivated by their concern for the ongoing viability of the NYMR. That concern is in large part driven by the foregoing - and the ongoing viability is in the hands of the current board.

Noel

 

For clarity I assume that your references to the board are to the elected Trust Board that is accountable for the strategic direction of the charity and its long term financial viability (as distinct from the PLC board which for over 30 years has had delegated responsibility for the operation of the railway).

 

For clarity, to whom are you responding?

Sawdust.

 

Looks like post #11825 to me.

 

I actually wasn't distinguishing; my "current board" was just quoting the instance thereof in @Bikermike's post.

Noel

 

Jnc’s post about “the current board” That raises the legitimate question about which one?

 

In turn, the quibbling over "which board" seems meaningless. The main function of the Trust Board now seems to be to subsidise the actions of the PLC board by handing over its reserves to subsidise the effects of the "professional" management's lack of ability to run the railway's operations at anywhere approaching a break-even level. that lack of ability, to my mind at least, rather hamstrings any thought of providing strategic direction.

 

D7029 estimated to be 5 years away from running .

 

Both have spect periods at OOC pre closure ,especially 7029