NORTH WALES COAST EXPRESS 2012

Sad to hear about the unfortunate problems with this train.

I was browsing Youtube before looking on the forum and watched this video of 60009 departing Preston yesterday and thought she sounded a bit off-beat 60009 Union of South Africa Departs Preston 4/8/2012 - YouTube

 

Network Rail have definitely scored a classic own goal here but it's a good illustration of their utter contempt for the industry and those that support it that they have acted this way and put forward such a lame excuse which is clearly complete drivel to even the most untrained eye !

When are the TOCs going to hold NR to account for this sort of behaviour ? It's their call !

 

Back to the question - since WHEN has the Acton Grange to Mickle Trafford been out of bounds to a Duchess? When was it deemed out of gauge by Network Rail? Is there much difference between an A4 and the Duchess - I think they are same height from the rails.

As the RTC North Wales Coast Trains start from Liverpool or Manchester and the Duchess is / was in the pool, one would assume the Duchess is cleared for the line otherwise I'm sure RTC would of not included it UNLESS RTC knew from the outset that the Duchess was NEVER going to appear on NWC trains as steam is advertised as start and finish from / to Liverpool and Manchester.

 

Utterly unbelievable. NR seriously need to explain themselves here. Incidently 45305 is also in the pool, but is covering out of Carnforth due to other shortages. 6233 clearly was considered in gauge until ver recently, as she has been that route several times before. Perhaps some people would like to suggest how RTC are able to produce in gauge locos out of thin air? There is a shortage of locos everywhere at the moment, a best case viable alternative was put forward; NR being obstructive prevented the situation being rescued and serious questions need asking.

 

This is not a black and white situation, but one of various shades of grey.

NR come out of today as the worst player - but what's new there? They do have utter contempt for the market - but until the market reacts with a single voice this will continue to happen.

Yet again - We need that industry forum but it needs people of greater vision than we currently have at the minute to grasp the nettle.

Promoters do have a duty of care in their planning of operations, and publicising a pool comprising locos that have been known to be banned on the route all summer is NOT good practice. I'm not at all bothered where RTC procure their motive power from. I am concerned that they make robust and justifiable provision - which they have actually failed to do with the current composition of this pool. If you choose to sell a product to the public you have a legal obligation to make it resilient.

If their pool had been resilient and capable of substitution the Friday loco could have been flashed up and done the job - if NR had been up to the call.

Failure all round.

 

Can only presume the difference is width or length, I don't know the where and why it's out of gauge, just quoting what I've seen elsewhere quoting as much.

 

The Crewe pool originally comprised 46233, 45305, 60009 and 70013. All these locos were presumed fine for the routes RTC wanted them to be used on and would ahave provided adequate provision for the booked trains. 46233 has since been discovered out of gauge but is still ok for the CME's, the route which it is out of gauge on has seen 6233 run over it several times before so one must presume this must be a new occurence. 45305 firstly had longer than expected repairs and has now, for some unknown reason (anyone know why?) been sent to Carnforth - this would have been a logical replacement for number 9 and could have adequately covered the season of NWCE with her. 60009 is fresh from overhaul and has run successfully up until now, but snagging issues must still be expected. 70013 is now down south covering for Braunton which in turn has been held up by Flying Scotsman, otherwise 70000 would be left holding the fort. So with number 9 failing, normally the original plan would have seen either 45305 or 70013 covering the turn, fine, but neither are here. 6233 did step into the breach with a reasonable plan, but this was stopped by NR. RTC started by advertising a pool that should have covered all eventualities, but as far as I can see other than the (in my view sensible) decision to provide cover for 70000 with 70013 on the Royal Duchy, all other decisions have been out of RTC's hands. We are afterall still waiting to hear when 6233 became out of gauge between Warrington and Chester, despite the (seemingly unfounded) suggestions RTC have known for months. Also 6233 is NOT out of gauge for Scarborough or Carlisle which the Crewe pool is also advertised for. Perhaps those with daggers out for RTC would like to specify which locos they would now have in Crewe to provide adequate cover for number 9, as i'm sure RTC would love to hear where they are going to come from. Otherwise should they now cancel all tours for which there is no standby loco? No one is denying this is a tough year for steam, the butter is being spread thin, but 'I told you so' comments will not help. If these commentators are so good at predicting the future perhaps they could predict the lotto numbers and restore a few more steam locos!!

 

A suggestion - is swapping over 70013 and 46233 for the rest of the season feasible ?, 70013 can do any run asked of the Crewe pool and since Weymouth is off the menu for the season now, 46233 has been to Plymouth before.

Plenty of potential reasons it might not be possible (support crew, Is 46233 gauged into Cornwall, can it fit St Blazey turntable ? etc etc), but no harm in suggesting/asking.

 

46233 has certainly been to Plymouth, but has it been to Cornwall? I have travelled to Par behind Bittern, but we now know A4's can go where Duchesses can't. Support crews maybe an issue with the Duchess being a 'midland' loco in every sense, but definitely one of the more sensible suggestions we have had.

 

Other than 19 and 26 August

70013 is also booked for the Faversham trip on 1 September

 

My mistake :doh:

 

ACORB

You totally miss the point - RTC is the promoter for and contracts in all the resources necessary for their tours; that is their business and their responsibility. This is not RTC bashing - its contract law and consumer rights and expectations, uncomfortable though that is.

They publish Flyers, NWCEs and CMEs as a season, and plan them as a season, resourcing, stock, motive power and staffing. Other than last night's failing of the A4, all these restrictions on motive power have been in play for months - yes months - so playing the "my friend is trying his hardest" card won't wash.

If their pool has been known to be insufficient for months then no matter how difficult it may be for them, RTC should have pulled out all the stops to protect their business obligations. If they haven't - then I'll say it again - They will fail the duty of having applied a satisfactory level of skill and care in their planning of their business over the summer.

That's it - no excuses - no exemptions. The law applies to all businesses and services without discrimination and if a business chooses to sail close to the wind as to the resources necessary to satisfy its customers, and fails, all the exclusion clauses in the world will be of no effect. That resources are scarce may be a fact, No-one is forcing RTC to overstretch them.

 

I saw the train leave Crewe diesel hauled and wondered what was up. I later saw the Duchess having some attention and wondered if it might be running to Chester to take over there but no such luck.

Having said that, I think it run diesel hauled is better than to cancel - I just hope The RTC compensate to a degree to ensure goodwill and to limit damage to the mainline steam tourist industry which these trains serve.

 

Frank, i'm afraid it you who is missing the point here. Can you please tell me how RTC could have known for months that the pool was insufficent? The four locos advertised are all in ticket and should have been in place were it not for outside circumstances due to a UK wide shortage of mainline locos. RTC have tried to pull out all the stops to ensure steam on today's train, but were prevented from doing so by NR. Please can you explain how RTC could have done more in this case? There just aren't the locos available at the moment, how can RTC influence that? This series was planned nearly 10 months ago, when 5029, Braunton and perhaps even 6023 or even Galatea were expected to be available. 30777 was also anticipated to be able to do more (but also seems to be under extended maintenance). Are you suggesting that RTC should trim it's programme at the last minute when locos are declared unavailable (losing deposits), or should they introduce golden handcuff contracts to loco providers whereby they only work RTC trains at the expense of other work (as 45305 seems to be working Compass Tours trains rather than RTC's)?
You appear to be very good at posting how you believe RTC are getting it wrong, but do not appear to be suggesting how they could do it differently..

 

There's a huge practicle difference between "anticipated", "planned", "perhaps" and actually being available, proved and reliable. Doesn't matter what type of business you're in and what you're selling. Time and reality prove out.

 

70013, 45305, 30777 & 5029 were all in ticket at time of planning. 6233 and 60009 had tickets in time for the season and are historically reliable performers with proven track records. Braunton has been promised for 2 years and was in Bury at the turn of last year with a current boiler ticket, several seasons of WSR running and with just (we were told) electronics to fit.
If people were RTC could they please state how they would have approached the 2012 differently? Would they not have promoted so many tours? Would they have added more tours as the season progressed and the season became clearer? Is it unreasonable to expect one or two locos to work a season of trains, The Jacobite and Cambrian would suggest otherwise? There is obviously a tide of opinion here, but there is little clarity apart from a lot of accusations of wrong doing. The facts stateat the moment that all trains have been met with the exception of today, where a substitute was steamed and was technically available, but was prevented from meeting the train.

 

On a PMR tour I was on last year( behind 6201) the sales staff and passengers( who were friends of the trust) were talking about routes they would like to do and the Devon Banks was the one they would like to do. When Bittern was turned on the turnable at St Blazey some fencing had to be taken down to enable it to be turned.

 

6201 is one of the longest locos out there, I suspect the turntable would prove to be an issue. The network is shrinking for a lot of locos, certainly 30777 seems to be a victim of this. Routes which were once no issue, are now out of bounds. A fleet of light pacifics (Standard and Southern) and Black 5's would be very useful, Mr Riley?!!

 

If you haven't bought it, or contracted for it you can't sell it - but that is what the railtour industry is doing. It is wrong. End of. There seems to absolutely no acceptance or understanding of that basic fact. Just because some people think that being promised more is good, when it is either undeliverable, or doesn't exist, is a ridiculous start point, but that is how many on here seem to want it.

How many examples do you want :- 6100 being promised for years on end? two steam excursions from Inverness to Wick and back in a day, which was never possible? Scheduling an out of gauge loco for a route with no capacity (the Sherwood Forester last year) - I could go and on, but you would all get bored.

Why do posters seem to be incapable of understanding the legal responsibility a vendor has to comply with before he brings a prospect to market in any business? I'm sorry, but if understanding the basics is difficult, then trying to move forward into specifics is probably nigh on impossible.

Just because a promoter has chosen a product that is difficult to resource does not relieve him of the responsibility to do it competently and professionally. That this pool has been effectively two engines that aren't interchangeable has been widely known for months. I'm sorry that is a fact. Read the forum and you will see when a Duchess was barred through Frodsham and an A4 over the Ouse Bridge. Support crews are volunteers and they don't grow on trees. There is a finite limit on the number of days they can turn out, or the amount of maintenance they can undertake, and they do perform miracles week in and week out. They don't make a penny. The locos usually rely on fund raising when overhauls come round. The tour promoter is however a profit making businessman. Not a preservationist and most definitely not a charity case.

That promoters - nonetheless, carry on selling trains that rely on more than the real on site pool can support is not the pool, or the motive power supplier's problem. It is the promoter's, and if the net result is that cancellations or non delivery occur, the responsibility lies with the promoter who made promises that post event due diligence would show to have been very conceivably beyond his capacity to supply whilst still in the planning and selling process, and exclusion clauses would thus fail fail to apply. The "Due care and skill" test!

I am not recommending last minute fixes, I am recommending planning that doesn't need fixing, the only commercially sensible, legally sound, and deliverable option at the end of the day. If that means less workings then so be it. If you want to gamble - Go to a Casino!

The choice is clear - sell what you know you can resource, or face the music! Judging by the load factors I have seen these last few days the fat lady is warming up right now

 

Well anyone know the answer to my first question? I am curious what has actually changed?

In relation to my second comment and if the Duchess is out of gauge for the line in question, then the reality RTC are out of order for advertising the fact that the Duchess is initial pool of 4 loco's to operate to Holyhead from both Liverpool & Manchester, regardless what happened today! Personally, I always thought it would appear on one of them from either destination just like the average punter would do but sadly it is never going to happen. The "promoter" HAS got to take some responsiblity for mis -information in the first instance as in the advertising literture it should state that the Duchess would never operate on the NWC trains from either Manchester & Liverpool.

I think "TBirdFrank" has already made valid point is some of his previous comments and I do accept some things do change leading upto the series of tours which can be out of control for the promoter, that is fair enough but I don't accept about the point of the Duchess, unless the out of gauge issue was only introduced in the last few weeks?