Weymouth Seaside Express 2013

Just arrived Yeovil Pen Mill.

 

You'll need a good umbrella and wellington boots for when you arrive at Bristol. <BJ>

 

Not a peep from 5029 on the climb from Castle Cary and it's still wet.

 

Water stop at Frome cancelled, still it rains and still the 33 continues to shove.

 

SNG thoroughly soaked at Sparkford - it was persisting it down!

​

 

A rather nice photo with the loco in the right place for lineside photography and at least doing some work.

As I stated on the Scarborough Spa Express thread, I do find those mixed traction shots with the steam leading rather nice. Not so good for those on the train of course with the diesel noise no doubt drowning out whatever effort 5029 is making.

 

For what its worth it is now raining here yet again in Yetminster. Nice steady stuff which I hope will continue throughout the SW and enable The Torbay and Weymouth to be totally steam hauled once again.

 

33 was on the rear but NR insisted it had to be behind the steamer but was going to take to long to remove the kettle so had to go on front.

 

Isn't the issue that as has been said before the rules don't allow a loco on the back to shove and for once some one at Network Rail insisted on that rule being followed?

The need for a diesel seems to be NR's call but the incorrect formation and need for a correct one seems to be an operational one and therefore not NR's fault. If the train had been double headed with the diesel inside there would have been no delay.

Lets hope the rain means no more diesels anywhere in the train and normal operations can return.

SG

 

Not too much off topic as a question was asked about the SE run today,but the Midlands had steady rain for a good number of hours on Saturday afternoon and evening.

 

This is a pretty good summary of what appears to have happened, but please don't let it get in the way of the posturing and insults.

My understanding is that a diesel on the rear is OK for insurance and localised assistance if required, but as the prime motive power for a train it is not acceptable. Theref0re in the case of a train such as this where the diesel os to provide power throughout it cannot be on the rear. It arrived this way at Bristol and a controller took the decision to implement the rules as it would have been on their head if they hadnt.

Bear in mind if the majority of the power is coming from the rear who is controlling the train and what can they actually see, the Castle crew notice something and apply brakes, how long till the 33 does?

On the return I can understand the frustration of the passengers but at what stage do we make a decisioon for the steam to work, the crew cannot take a sample of the grass every 100 metres till its deemed wet enough?

This thread has made depressing reading not only for the passengers on the train, but also some of the total rubbish being spouted by certain posters.

 

You make some valid points but as to the "rubbish" being posted, I presume you refer to the adverse comments aimed towards NR and local control who seemed to have overruled Wessex Control who were, we are told, happy for the diesel there for insurance purposes only because of the heavy rain the previous day? The overwhelming view, I would suggest to you, is a major condemnation of decisions made locally by NR. If it were they deciding on steam hauled tours in the weeks ahead, there would be absolutely NO CHANCE of any of them running without a diesel pilot. Today for example, showers are forecast but is this going to be enough for NR down South to allow steam to return unaided? Or are we faced with weeks and months of this crazy situation continuing. And as for the notion that someone's job at NR is on the line because they allow a tour to run causing a lineside fire, is a complete myth. There is always risk and the worse that could happy is a sharp word in the controllers.

Someone in NR control in the Midlands took that risk yesterday with the Shakespeare Express. It has been just as dry up there and they will have had similar rainfall on Saturday as down South and yet, someone was courageous enough to run the trips without a diesel in sight and apparently it proved a great success with no incidents and the loco was being working very hard, we are told.

And talk about rubbing salt into the wound. The diesel on the Weymouth trip continued to work hard on its way back to Bristol despite more rain falling.

So please, no more defending the actions of NR responsible for the Weymouth tour. Many professional railwaymen, ex-railwaymen, enthusiasts and the travelling public on that train will not accept any defence of NR for decisions made regarding this tour, and rightly so.

 

The thing is apparently Wessex control agreed for the Diesel to be on the back, so that's how WCRC presented the train in good faith, not their fault if NR went back on their word at the last minute, that is where most of us are taking issue with what went on, why was it ok the night before but not on the actual morning when getting it sorted made a major delay ?.

Also, why would it matter when the 33 put the brakes in, woulden't the Castle at the front (with the front view) be controlling the brakes of the entire formation ?.

 

Its a summary of what happened, yes. The question is why? You have to accept that an an experienced TOC and crew are aware of the rule book with respect to positioning of motive power, has run tours immediately preceding this under those rules because of the steam ban, and would not turn up with a consist that they knew would be prevented from departing. So the real question remains ignored and unanswered, who or what led the TOC to believe the fire risk rules for steam working had been relaxed or lifted.

As indeed they were in the Midlands for the SE.

 

So how did the SE run then? And why did the TOC think that might have happened?

Edit. Its pretty clear that VT were aware on Saturday night that the diesel was not required. Who told them the steam ban had been lifted? Is it not possible that WCR were told the same thing at the same time? Is there not a safe assumption to assume that someone locally decided different, late in the day, for what ever reason?