NYMR Spring 2010 Steam Gala - Giant Gala of Giants

added a few more photo's from saturday.


more @ http://kenneth-f-baker.fotopic.net/c1848825.html

 

Well done all for putting a great show despite all the problems over these past 3 weekends.

I have thoroughly enjoyed all of my 5 visits.

Better luck for Autumn.

Best Regards

 

Sorry Steven,it was an observation,not a cheap shot.
As for managing business as a partner of a multi office firm of Chartered Accountants I have been known to try it occasionally.Similarly at a charity level being daft enough to be a District Explorer Scout Commissioner.In either role,facing problems similar to yesterday,I would have atleast adjourned the meeting until the immediate problem of what to do with a train load of passengers who had paid for a trip to Goathland/Grosmont/Whitby but got no further than Levisham had been dealt with.
On a personal level,many thanks for your informative postings over the last three weekends,without which hich many enthusiasts would have had little idea what was/wasn't running.

 

Apologies back, D7076 - touched what can be a nerve on the NYMR!

In terms of moral support, you are probably spot on but in terms of practical support, the Board is a mixture of the members of the Parent Company board (i.e. effectively working members from many departments, not necessarily "customer facing" ones) and "external" members, largely if not totally drawn from the wider membership or shareholders because of particular experitise, e.g personnel, legal, ex-HMRI and BR Goods train operating. Just how useful any opf us would actually have been, or how much we might have made "too many cooks", is very questionable, quite apart from the fact that we were all in "civies" and hence could have added to the confusion.

The point is, however, taken that perhaps we should have considered whether the Board might be best advised to show its face. In fact, I have seen elsewhere compliments as to how the staff handled a situation made all the more difficult by being dynamic and having no firm outcome predicable in terms of when the trains would be allowed through. Passengers seemed to be generally understanding and accept the situation as being beyond our immediate control.

This is underlined by my own mis-understanding as I left - the line was made available about 19:30 but by this point the New Bridge signalman had been released and the train staff for the centre section was at the wrong end, so the diner did a number of trips up and down Grosmont bank rather than the through journey.

Today has been generally rather better, although a train each was lost this morning due to congestion on Grosmont MPD meaning the first loco was late off shed. Ironically, one of the debates yesterday which was somewhat cut short by the GM needing to deal with the fire situation was on the need to provide additional facilities at the MPD to handle the current and impending traffic demands - which, it was decided, will progress.

Steven

 

My collection of pics from the 3 weekends can be found here: http://yorkylad.fotopic.net/c1844654_1.html

 

My best pics from today and yesterday (just a few as the sun was in and out) can be found here.

Despite the on-going loco woes I really enjoyed the event. I was very pleased to hear today that they'd put a diesel on the Whitby runs so that every Grosmont departure could be steam. We'd been told to expect the 11.30 to be diesel-hauled, so that 44871 could be held back for the diner, but thankfully when it pulled into (a bustling) Goathland station it was an all-steam scene. Good example of some clever last-minute planning there.

 

As in workshop space (and manpower) Steven?

 

Finally got around to sorting out the photos I took over the first 2 weekends of the gala, now online at: http://www.nymrphotos.fotopic.net/c1849955.html

 

I attended the middle weekend of this gala and, in truth, I have mixed feelings about it. The visit was only the second time I have been to the railway, I wasn't too impressed by the customer care aspects of the railway on either occasion. On the visit to the gala I walked from Goathland to Grosmont on the Friday taking video en-route and got the last train back. The train was the Gresley set and there were problems. Someone had overfilled the loo reservoir and the carriage was awash with water. Nobody had made the slightest attempt to mop up the water or to lock the doors to take the carriage out of service. In addition, the carriage smelt of dust. When I sat down a significant cloud of dust came up from the seat. It is clear that cleaning this carriage is not something that is done well if at all - a great shame considering the quality of the original restoration.

On the Saturday the timetable went awry. I was on the footpath above Bridge 30 when it became clear that something had gone seriously wrong. I motored to Pickering to try and get some info. I spoke to a TTI who replied as though the situation was amusing. He spoke of an 'amended timetable' when there were no trains running at all. When I asked if the timetable would be restored that day he said abruptly that I could make a written complaint or a could take a decision not to go to the railway again - a response that was not justified by the situation. I don't want to do either of those things nor did I on the day; I just wanted to know, basically, whether to continue hanging about or just to call it a day and go back to the B&B. I went back to the B&B.

I think I’m obliged to challenge the assertion that visitors were or have been kept informed. There hasn’t, to the best of my knowledge, been the slightest expression of regret from the railway for the situation that it got into that weekend, nor has there been an explanation. It is clear that something went seriously wrong within the loco dept that weekend and it is clear to me, after a working life spent in the engineering industry, that this was sometime in the making. The steam locomotive is not a machine that is inherently unreliable, but neither is it a machine that will tolerate the putting off of maintenance. To have one loco go down is unfortunate, but can be tolerated. To have as many go down as the NYMR had that weekend cannot be explained in any other terms that loco maintenance has been deferred for too long. It was not the result of bad luck, it must be a result of withdrawing resources from the department probably because of the over-riding need to get Bridge 30 in service.

It would have been much more sensible in the circumstances of the Bridge 30 issue to have had a much reduced gala that required far fewer locomotives and it is a matter of regret to me that the NYMR didn’t do just that.

Regards

 

Whilst I would probably agree with that, I would take issue with some of your other accusations.

Bean Counter goes to great lengths to keep people informed about developments on the NYMR, and this has included the loco situation in the run up to the gala. The failures have not been down to a lack of maintenance, so can you please reconsider that statement.

Whether Grosmont loco has the facilities, resources and management support to keep up with the ever increasing demands on it is another issue. Not one to discuss on here, but if you do have a lifetime of engineering experience, and feel you could help improve the situation, I am sure that they would be delighted to hear from you.

I'm sure Steven will pick up on your comments about the provision of information.

 

I suggest that you should have gained the full facts about the repair and maintenance of the NYMR locomotive fleet before you started your post nothing has been scimped over the winter as you suggest.

Bridge 30 was funded seperatley from loco maintenance this has been written about on this site and others in great depth.

I again suggest you try doing some home work before bad mouthing a railway.

 

Your post seems quite uninformed in part, Orion. As loco cleaner says you clearly didn't know anything about the situation with the locomotives and the efforts made to salvage them for use. I think the loco team should be congratulated for salvaging 60007 (only for lightning to strike twice!) and 53809 prior to the third weekend, and for getting 45428 into use too (before its paint job was even complete!).

As for customer care I'm sure you're not lying but that doesn't represent the railway as a whole. I found the staff at Grosmont and Goathland to be very helpful indeed! The lady in the shop at Grosmont could be overheard answering peoples' queries about the timetable, locomotives, stock formations, things many volunteer shop workers at steam railways probably wouldn't have a clue about. The staff in the cafe at Grosmont were serving well past 4.30 on the final Saturday which is when the sign outside indicated it would close. One of Repton's crew on Sunday (silver hair, tanned, I believe he was on the Whitby trains on Saturday?) was being very helpful indeed with the passengers on the station. The man on the stall just outside the gate to the platform at Goathland was happily giving enthusiasts the latest updates on which locos were doing what. I could go on...

 

Let's get a few things straight here, because, reading what you have put, your knowledge of steam locomotives is pretty near useless, whether you have spent a working life in the engineering industry, or not. But first, let me put your equally ill-informed comment about Bridge 30 into place. It has had virtually nothing to do with the circumstances surrounding the locomotive situation at the gala and cannot, in any way be linked to it I say,'virtually' because one locomotive (45212) was affected by it but it is unlikely to have made any difference in reality.

There is nothing 'seriously wrong with the Loco Department that weekend' as you said. In fact there is nothing seriously wrong with the Loco Department, full stop. The staff tried to move heaven and earth to provide locomotives. When the gala was first planned, there were expected to be some fifteen locos available; Let's look at what happened.
825 - In service until just before the gala. Failed with a steam leak in the outer firebox hidden behind the frames. Now the boiler has been lifted, a crack has been found between two stays. Would you have allowed the loco to remain in traffic with such a defect?
6619 - Suffered from a loose crank axle. Presently awaiting the fitting of a new axle. It doesn't work very well without one.
30926 - had to be taken out of service on the day with a loose piston rod cotter. These things happen. Refitting isn't simply a case of hammering it back in. but it was done as quickly as possible and it's back in service
45212 - Taken out of service with loose tyres. New ones in stock at Ian Riley's as the owners (it's on hire) knew the tyres were on their last legs but the loco was trapped on the wrong side of Bridge 30 so the wheels couldn't be removed. Even if the bridge wasn't in the way, it is unlikely that it would have been re-tyred in time.
45428 - Well, I guess that you can argue that this loco should have been ready after its long and very extensive overhaul but, it wasn't. The shed staff tried, and didn't quite make it. Blame them if you wish.
49395 - failed with leaking tubes. Again, the loco is on hire and not NYMR responsibility.
53809 - Broken tender spring. The owners (again, it is on hire) didn't have a spare and one sourced from elsewhere was found to be unsuitable. Would you, with your vast engineering experience, have put it into service with the knowledge that the RAIB had just published a very critical report on the derailment of a similar tender with unmatched springs?
60007 - Another hire loco not maintained by the NYMR. The winter repairs were protracted due to additional unplanned work being found during examinations.
63395 - Yet another hire loco. Winter repairs ongoing largely due to delays due to bad weather and the owning groups priority to finish work on 62005.
75029 - This is an NYMR loco and full responsibility must be accepted for the NYMR turning what was a simple boiler job of a retube and foundation ring rivets into the addition of a new tubeplate, front barrel strake and half of the second strake, along with a new throatplate and lower firebox sides. Sorry that we didn't stick to the first plan when all these problems were found so that it could be available.
So, that leaves us with 44871, 45407, 76079, 60019 and 1744 but all these, too, had minor problems that needed rectifying. I've lost track of what and when these were but there have been loose cotters, air brake system faults, priming and a host of other problems to be sorted out, all of which caused them to have to be substituted at times.
I don't know about 6024. You'll have to ask others why it didn't come.
Now, armed with the above knowledge, and using your lifetimes engineering experience, will you please explain how you would have managed the situation better?
I did note, by the way, that you were at Bridge 30 then motored to Pickering to find out what was happening. My conclusion is that you weren't contributing to the day and freeloading but, like you, I'm good at jumping to conclusions.

I can't comment about the lack of information or the other points made by you with regard to coach condition or customer relations. However, having regard to your other comments, I do wonder what the reality was.

 

Added a few photo's to this gallery that show the extent of the fires in Newtondale - http://markt79.fotopic.net/c1843639.html

 

Firstly, apologies that I haven't answered until now - bit busy ahead of going to Germany tomorrow.

I should also start by saying I am sorry that Orion has issues with his visit to the NYMR and to thank those who have already jumped to the Moors defence.

The toilets on the teaks have been a problem throughout and the owners of the coaches, the LNER Coach Association, have been working on them this winter with new toilet cisterns being fitted. It was this work that probably meant the coaches didn't have the same deep clean as the Mark 1 fleet and obviously for this we must apologise, as we must on the fact that one of 4 coaches with 64 out of 184 seats on the set wasn't locked out of use. One of the principle aims of the timetable was to match 1744 with the teaks as much as possible, hence the use of the set in this formation.

I am somewhat confused by the problems on the Saturday that Orion experienced. Having checked the Control sheet for the day (as well as having been on duty at Grosmont), there was a delay of 25 to 35 minutes on almost all departures all day - which would mean the first train up the bank was late but after that the trains ran at exactly the timetabled interval. Due to the initial delay and then the steam-pipe leak on 45428, the goods train was cancelled but all other services ran and, as I say, at the gaps scheduled. It sounds as though Orion may have missed the trains by leaving Bridge 30 just before a train and then missing one at Pickering.

I can only apologise if Orion felt the TTI's response was inappropriate - judging tone when dealing with passenger queries can be a skill we all get wrong from time to time and the NYMR is well aware that we do need to constantly work on communication and customer service, but I would defend the level of customer care, especially at this last weekend. It is also work remembering that, when things do go wrong, over an 18/24 mile railway on which mobiles generally don't work, instant information is not necessarily available but as noted earlier on this thread (I think!), we do need to check and improve how information is communicated to front line staff and the GM is aware of this.

As a non-engineer myself, I hesitate to comment too much on the loco position, but Steve has detailed this very well. The last people who should be blamed for the problems with loco availability at the Gala are Grosmont MPD staff – they have worked tirelessly (and probably it seems to them near endlessly) to keep the steam fleet going and just as one loco becomes available, something seems to have gone wrong with another one! This is not a problem unique to the NYMR – I am aware of at least two heritage lines which have had similar problems this year and the same could be said of the mainline scene – perhaps Orion would be less inclined to suggest this is due to “poor maintenance”. This is certainly NOT the case at Grosmont. The standards are the very highest.

You will also note from Steve’s detailed response that there are many people involved in keeping a loco running – owners, suppliers, contractors, at least some of which will be working on more than one loco and balancing trying to meet various deadlines and demands at the same time.

Finally, as the NYMR Finance Director, I can confirm that the loco department was not starved of money to fund Bridge 30 – thanks to the marvellous achievement of the Bridges and Wheels Appeal and the generous support of North Yorkshire County Council and the North York Moors National Park LEADER fund, much of the cost of the Bridge has been covered from funds raised for the purpose. Obviously, the MPD have been involved with servicing the work on Bridge and some extra work due to the division of the Railway for the Bridge works.

I would also add that the 2010 Budget is the first in which I have introduced a “cross-check” that the expenditure on locomotive overhauls and major repairs is equal to the value (at hire rates) of the mileage run by the NYMR maintained fleet – I am not saying its hasn’t been previously, but this is the first time we had made the formal cheque. There has been an under-investment in loco overhauls in the past but we are now addressing this as best we can within the Railway’s overall finances.

Managing to achieve the Gala at all has been a miracle given the circumstances we found ourselves in with loco availability ahead of the Gala and clearly, it has taken a toll ion all concerned. I was particularly proud with the excellent way front line staff reacted last Saturday to the different problems caused by lineside fires after such a trying period over the previous few weeks. I am sorry if there have been instances where things fell short of what could be expected, but overall I believe the NYMR can be proud of how we have tackled this whole event (and I think it is safe to say we will need it to be something very special to try a 3 weekend event again!)

Steven

 

I suspect the reality lies somewhere between this post and that by Orion.

Yes, the NYMR were desperately unlucky with events over the Gala weekend, however loco shed projects do seem to have been delayed by the essential bridge 30 works and the severe weather over the winter period.

With this in mind and without blaming the locomotive department one must wonder if the management were wise in planning such a major gala over such an extended period.

Communication seems to be be a constant issue on the NYMR (and indeed many other preserved lines), both between internal departments and also with the public, who it must be remembered are paying to see the show.

I would hope that the NYMR are now asking themselves could a Gala of this size and time-scale be properly resourced, could the staff cope with the potential demands placed upon them, were the owing groups of the hire locos (where Steve seems, by implication, to be placing some blame) consulted and asked if these plans were viable for them and was there a plan B if things started to go wrong?

I must say that I have concerns about publicising an event committing locos. that are still awaiting completion of overhauls or planned maintenance after a previous busy season and/or main line works. We all know that planned maintenance frequently throws up other problems that require further attention.

There are lessons here, I believe, for the whole movement. I have for some time been concerned by preserved lines advertising 'bigger and better galas', many of which have run into just these sort of problems albeit on a slightly smaller scale.

To summarise, I would suggest that Railway managements must ensure that , when planning events, they can be properly resourced, that all departments are 'on-board' and not likely to be stretched beyond what is possible and that this does not impinge upon the railways ordinary services. ( No point in having a successful gala, financially then loosing revenue in the following weeks because services have to be Diesel hauled, while the loco dept. catch up on the backlog, which usually causes loss of revenue when non enthusiast passengers decline to travel on a non steam hauled train.

I also feel that it is unwise to commit the total running fleet to the gala thus leaving no reserves in the event of failures.

I hope that this post is taken, as intended, as a constructive review of what has happened and is meant to protect the interests both of the passengers and the staff of our preserved lines from disappointments and distress caused by what I am sure are well intentioned plans which then turn out to have been somewhat over optimistic.

 

Briefly (well, by my standards) replying to Oakfield, I would repeat that I am not aware of Bridge 30 limiting MPD activities - indeed, the availability of the Kirow crane meant that it was used for 45428's boiler lift instead of ahving to steam up the 45T steam crane! The bad weather is probably more of an issue - said boiler lift was delayed due to poor weather being forecast, only to take place with a good 6" snow on the ground!

It should be said that it was never the plan to run every loco every day - there just isn't enough work to make that worthwhile. I know this draws some critiscism but the planned locos for each day were made known (and hopefully we will keep that up!). Spring Galas would be impossible to plan if every loco had to have finsihed its winter maintenance befiore being advertised, and the only loco involved in an overhaul - 45428 - did play some part in the event. Actually, that is not the only loco involved which was fresh from overhaul - so was 45407, which didn't even have its boiler on back on Maunday Thursday but ran two weekends and was away on the mainline the third. It is also worth remembering that some non-appearances were due to issues arising after planned maintenance had been completed and the locos had run in traffic. The NYMR is one of a comparatively small number of railways that runs daily for at least 7 months of the year and this always makes knowing what will make it for any Gala difficult. Look at the similar problems with 825 on the NYMR and 70013 elsewhere to see that a loco that is going great guns one day can be laid low for a while the next.

All that said, I do fundementally agree with Oakfield about the ever bigger gala syndrome, especially as a financial man, I appreciate the risks taken in terms of costs. Despite, indeed at times partly because of locos not appearing and costs thus being reduced, all the problems, I don't think the bottom line on this event is going to be too far adrift from what was budgetted but I would agree that preservation generally needs to look at the massive galas and the costs involved. Actually, however we tried to sell it, only 2 guests came in specifically for the event with two more for a longer period. That actuially means costs were much less than for some other events, both on the Moors (2008 LNER Festival) and elsewhere. The problem is that as long as one line does it, others feel the need to do it to get their event noticed and attended.

Steven

 

Steven,

Thank you for providing this information. This sounds like a very sensible course of action. Could you also tell me (pm if you wish) if as well as checking the finance spent on hire v maintenance/overhauls, if results will also be tracked. Obviously this is affected by some loco groups owning more than one loco. However, will there be a check to see if (for example) £100k spent on a loco at Grosmont sheds results in a loco fit for traffic within 6months versus if £100k spend on loco hire generates the same result (i.e. a loco fit for traffic within 6months).
I'm not sure I'm making myself clear.....the policy of matching inputs (expenditure) is a great idea, but IMHO outputs (locomotive overhaul time and total cost per overhaul) need to also be checked to ensure that the hire fees are fair (to both parties) and to identify potential efficiencies/improvement.

As a slight aside a letter published not too long ago in Moorsline did seem to make a lot of sense regarding the hire-purchase of 76079 when (I think) it pointed out that although the NYMR would have an asset on its books after the hire-purchase it would be another out of ticket loco requiring an overhaul (and overhaul costs), whereas the same expenditure in loco-hire fees would mean no additional costs to the NYMR in an overhaul and may result in a locomotive being available for traffic sooner (but this latter point on availability is conjecture).

I hope this is taken in the spirit it is meant (i.e. advice) and if people feel I am being critical I will try and explain/re-phrase.
Personally I hope the HP of 76079 is filling a gap in the locomotive availability and is the start of a plan for rolling overhauls - i.e. as 76079 goes out of traffic a replacement comes in.

Although I am finding this discussion interesting I do not wish to comment on the gala as I did not attend for any significant period as a passenger, nor do I work in the locomotive department.

 

ciuaRe: NYMR Spring 2010 Steam Gala - Giant Gala of Giants

The gent that wrote into Moorsline has his own adgenda, when it comes to favouring hire locos.

The truth is that we need a mixture of hire & railway maintained locos. There also seems to be a trend towards the line owning more of them directly, especially as benefactors pass away. 80135, 45428 & D7628 have been purchased by the line. 30926 & Vera are in trust for use on it. 76079 & 2253 are also railway owned of course.