MHR Restorations and Overhauls

True but as 92212 is currently away and i assume Cheltenham still is aswell, there are only 4 standard use locomotives operational at the railway itself. No point listing 92212 as in the fleet when it's currently in Sussex! Same with Cheltenham at York/not in use.

 

I visited on Saturday but haven't had time to get the pictures off my camera yet. Sad to hear about the failure of 34007. She was moving about in Ropley yard on Saturday so I did wonder if she would be out on Sunday. Let's hope the problem isn't too serious.

 

Believe me, people don't respond well to such an enquiry! If a railway doesn't bother publishing their loco rosters, I take my average £40 - 50 spend off to a line that does. Hey ho.

 

Why? Until very recently no railway would publish rosters at all. with so many variables anyway it is not very easy to be accurate. What is the problem with turning up and enjoying what is being run, as we all did in the 70s, 80's 90s and 00's. Yes it can be disappointing to see the same engine running again, but why should the railway have somebody with the time to publicly list everything that is happening. Surly it is more important they actually deal with the process of running trains to meet the advertised service. "Oh, sorry Mr customer, I was too busy updating the website and talking enquiries line to change that spring (or light the fire or any other more pertinent task) so the train can't run today"

 

Conversely, I would argue that there no point in running a train service if nobody turns up to ride on it. Like any businesses, preserved railways have to look after their customers, and providing them with up-to-date information is an important task.
Websites can usually be kept updates outside operating hours, sometimes by people who wouldn't otherwise be able to take up an active volunteering role (say, because they live too far away from the railway). Of course, customers have to be prepared to take published rosters with a pinch of salt and accept that the advertised loco may not appear. Nevertheless, if, say, I was going to the MHR and was particularly keen to see 31806, it would be good to able to plan a trip for a day when she is running. The MHR will get the same amount of money out of me whenever I go, but if I can go and see the engine I really want to see then we all end up happier. Conversely, if I were travel to the railway from a considerable distance only to be told "sorry, she's not running today - but you would have seen her if you'd come yesterday", then surely you can understand why I would be a bit upset that they didn't publish a roster, so that I could have planned to come on the previous day?
Even if a railway doesn't publish an online roster, I would hope that at the very least a telephone inquiry to check the locos running that day would be answered. Railways have to answer telephone inquiries, which will often be "reassurance calls" from members of the public, wanting to make sure that there are no problems and the railway will be running as advertised. Failure to answer such calls risks losing potential customers, which is no good to anyone.
My point is, updating websites and answering telephone inquiries is every bit as important as changing springs and lighting fires, and these tasks will usually be handled by different volunteers in any case.

 

Well said Muz, I don,t your contribution here can be improved on. nice one.

Best regards
Chris:

 

Whilst a roster, for the effort required to keep one, isn't much to ask, it is worth noting that it will only be of interest to a minority of visitors outside of gala weekends - when such things tend to be excellently publicised.

 

Thanks, Muz for your exceptional post with which I am in full agreement.
I do accept guard_jamie's point that a roster will be used by a minority of visitors, but it really doesn't take long to update a list of locos. It does generate some income for railways. I go to Didcot & the Bluebell far more often than I visit Swanage or the Mid Hants simply because Didcot & Bluebell almost always have current rosters on their websites. I typically spend about £40 - £50 at any given railway per visit, which is a drop in the ocean, but rewards the efforts of whoever looks after the online roster. Last week I quite fancied going to the KESR and/or IoWSR, but neither gave any clues about what would be working so I headed to a couple of stately homes instead.

 

I response to the person who asked for photos of last weekend I started a thread in photography that has mine and another posters in at the moment...

http://railways.national-preservati...d-hants-railway-saturday-9th-june-2012-a.html

 

Well there is some point as it is coming back shortly, and 925 will also arrive soon.

 

Rather than continue a dialogue here, Ive asked the relevant people if they would update the loco roster - I'll "wait and see".

 

Great to think of 925 in action soon. There are still plenty of ex-Barry locos still to steam for the first time in preservation, including the Mid Hants' quartet of 75079, 80150, 34058 and (30)499, but it's pretty rare now for an engine which went straight into preservation to be steamng for the first time (well, if you discount its brief appearance at Rainhill). We've got 2500, the 3-sylinder Stanier 2-6-4T to look forward to if the press are to be believed, but the only other such engines I can think of are 41298 (again, discounting a possible brief steam-up at Longmoor) and 47445 - unless, that is, durng the recent Railfest the Mid Hants team have persuaded the NRM to outstation another engine at Ropley. T3 no 563 anybody?

 

2500 steamed at Bressingham in the 70's.

 

Fair point, but like 925 at Rainhill or (if it happened) 41298 at Longmoor, shuttling up and down the line at Bressingham isn't quite the same as hauling trains on a heritage railway or (in the case of 2500) the main line.

 

We can but dream...

Though my understanding is that, when the SR restored her for the Waterloo centenary, the boiler was run at about the lowest pressure possible while still allowing her to move under her own steam. Which rather suggests a new boiler (or substantial parts thereof) would be needed, were she ever to run again. So not impossible, but likely to be very expensive.

As C Hamilton Ellis wrote:

She's far and away the loco that is highest up my personal "fantasy NRM bring back to steam list", though.

Tom

 

Loco roster for rest of June now on the MHR web site.

 

Thank you, Colin. Good to see Wadebridge featuring in the forthcoming action again.

My comments about 563 were very much tongue-in-cheek, but I'm glad that they struck a chordwith someone else! I would put SECR 737 and "Gladstone" alongside 563 on my list. All fine engines, but all very unlikely ever to steam again.There's a marvellous account in one of my books of an X6 (Which to my untrained eye looks very like a T3 with larger wheels) taking over the Atlantic Coast express at Woking from a failed Lord Nelson and working a full 13-coach train all the way to Salisbury with a top speed on 74mph at Andover. The Adams 4-4-0s never seemed to be as popular with the enthusiast community as say, the Drummond T9s, but they put in 50 years of service and seem to have been pretty impressive engines.

 

Haha, Ah 563 comes up again! As i said on a previous thread I'd pay through the nose to see her working again!

 

The T3 would be the perfect NRM loco for the MHR to take on...just keep on asking!

 

The other half saw class 50 Lion arriving at Alresford early this afternoon, bit of a tricky time getting past the scaffolding on the Swan Hotel in Station Road though!