A4 event

Quite agree, I'm really not sure what people were expecting beyond what they got - and if they wanted something in particular I'm sure the NRM phone number is in the book.

Oh and BTW, I thought you had said you weren't going TBF? because it was too much (or maybe I just imagined that).

 

If you read his comment, I don't think he paid to go in the enclosure.

Oh, by the way:

http://www.therailwaycentre.com/

Regards,

Dan

 

So complain about something he never went to or paid for .....interesting.

 

Thanks for the link to the picture of the event Dan. First one I've seen.

 

I would hazard a guess that there will be more photographs available once the tour passengers get home :smt002

Regards,

Dan

 

Simon - I do realise that when you are a good little boy, that you do everything according to the book, and do not think outside the box.

Unfortunately I do not come from that background - hence why I can, and do, draw distinctions that infuriate those who want to impose their blind unimaginative way on the Great British Public.

It is obvious that you didn't take the trouble to go to York, or you too would have found that you could see exactly how the display was laid out both from the Great Hall, or from the droplight of any passing HST set

It didn't take the expenditure of £34+ to prove that once again the NRM had got it hopelessly wrong.

 

There's me thinking that you were after a refund!

 

No.7 was not behind fencing!! (See attached pic.)

You could not get a full picture of the event from the windows of the Great Hall.

 

You could only pick up Mallard and Bittern from inside!

 

I didn't go because I wasn't interested in going.

If I had been interested, £34 would not have stood in my way.

But what I can't understand is if you didn't go then why are you complaining?

A fair number of those who went seem to rate it.

 

The NRM couldn't do anything about the weather. A few pros, in their high vis vests, did get a look in on Saturday, when the rain stopped at around 1 pm, bearing in mind that the 4 locos were only together for 1 1/2 hours, how would a charter set up have benefited everyone else?. Don't forget that the cost of three of the A4's on display, was borne by those of us who travelled on the train.

A couple of photos between the showers on Saturday.

From the slightly elevated grandstand



From ground level

 

/\/\ Ahh! that's what it was supposed to look like! As I left I saw a NRM worker giving someone £10 - I went and stood in line thinking we were getting a part refund - no such luck, it was change from a souveneir programme..

Well, I could have gone either day, but sod's law kicked in.

Orange jacket man expecting us to appreciate his parking skill, you can just see the carefully measured and placed cone behind SNG's front bogie wheel.



If you have to cut a tree down, can you not do it properly?

 

Bit of a cheap shot at Ray Towell who couldn't see the cone from where he was directing the driver and was trying to get the best line-up for the photographers present.

For those of us who went on Sunday the lack of 60009 was regrettable, and whilst organisers on the day did their best to satisfy tour participants by providing 60007 for the main line run, it did leave photographers with only 2 locos ( instead of the expected 3 ) and a line-up of only 3 instead of the advertised and expected 4.

Whilst not quibbling about the efforts on the day I feel that we participants who paid out for something we didn't get should be receiving either some compensation or - more hopefully - another bite at this or some other "special" cherry such as a complementary ticket for the SSE.

This, however, is something to be taken up with the NRM and not discussed / disected in public where the NRM may be constrained from a proper response to those affected.

 

See the small print Fred - legally you aren't entitled to a bean!

The T & Cs were obviously written by a Dick Turpin accolyte too

As for not making a public announcement - why not?

The NRM organised this farce - let them justify it or apologise for it in public

 

I'm more concerned about the moral rather than the legal aspects here. Whilst accepting that legally there was little that could be done in the situation which developed over Saturday night, there is a moral duty to honour the expectations of those who did not receive that which was expected.

It is a sign of good marketing that you acknowledge the moral obligations rather than rely on legal obligations to defend lack of action on the basis of legally defined disclaimers and I - as will many others - am looking to see what moral value the NRM places in its duty to customers - especially those for whom the entry fee of £32:50 was only the start point of the weekend / Sunday expense and who were denied their expectations which had been raised after seeing the 4 locomotive line-up on both the various websites and national papers ( Sunday Express had as good a shot as any I have seen ).

But as noted earlier this is a point to be raised directly with the NRM with whom the contract was entered into rather than be discussed on a public forum in which confidentiality is simply a difficult word to spell.

 

Is there any support to suggesting to the NRM that they make a donation towards the repairs to No9 from the proceeds of the event? Of course, given the financial commitments and resources of all parties this may be a totally inappropriate suggestion. Its just an idea.

 

The NRM gave it's resources to no.9 last time, with it's wheel drop. and it's workshop space for a couple of weeks while the offending wheel set went to the Severn valley!

It's not the NRM's fault it broke, they were just the hosts of the mid way point, it's the tour operators problem really, but then again it lost the offending part, so it's the owner's problem!

When's no.9's last day on it's ticket?

 

I doubt the NRM got any money back from the non-attendance so they are hardly going to be in a position to pass any back to the punters.

"FM" springs to mind.