The Waverley

My video from Ais Gill last Sunday. No outward video due it being very(!!) wet at Blea Moor.

 

Typical S&C weather last weekend, heavy rain climbing up to Ribblehead and Blea Moor, yet the sun appeared just as we entered Blea Moor tunnel!

 

48151 through bingley at 10.20. tootling along nicely at the max permitted speed.... No box behind the Loco, didn't catch if there was one on the back...

 

Footage of 8f 48151 on the S&C at Gargrave and Selside Shaw.

 

Usual high quality vid there. You weren't joking either that is the most minimal contribution from a steam loco yet this summer I'd say. Why possible justification other than an unfit loco could there be? Doesn't qualify as steam hauled in my book.

 

Footage of 48151 making a bit more noise at a wind swept Blea Moor 18/8/13



Hope you enjoy.

 

Just passed Armathwaite on the southbound. Diesel now tucked in behind 48151.

 

Diesel is 37706, if anyone's interested....

 

Nice footage, shame about the help the tour was receiving.

Makes you wonder why they don't go to Universal Studios in Florida, and get Hogwarts Castle, and put that on the front.

I am sure the passengers would be none the wiser, and would save prepping a loco.....

 

So Nat Pres judge and jury are working overtime again, and having a field day to boot ,from reading the garbage posted by guycar and co.

Network Rail LNE zone are absolutely adament that steam should not be powering trains in their area and that the required diesel should power the train. Keeping the loco in light steam is no easy task with little or no draft on the fire. It is therefore hardly surprising that the fire on leaving Hellifield was in a far from ideal state. This resulted in the loco struggling for steam beyond Helwith Bridge, hence the request for diesel assistance from there to Ribblehead.

On the return, with the advantage of a cleaned fire, the loco worked the 500 ton load largely unassisted to Ais Gill with no problems at all. As fireman I can assure you that it was absolutely on top of the job on the return and could not have steamed better

What is really worrying is that Network Rail are openly reading these forums in search of evidence the we are not complying with their edicts and seem happy to believe the speculative rubbish that gets posted here. With friends like those on Nat Pres who needs enemies?

Peter James

 

Well then Peter, answer these questions.

1. Why did it run at all with steam northbound, was it easier just to run to Carlisle l/e and then attach for the southbound run????

2. Why run a half hearted excursion at all, why not repay the punters.

3. Do you think punters got value for money, do you think they will come back.

 

Peter, your clear explanation of what really happened is very welcome. Thanks.

Peter is right that people on here (and elsewhere) speculate about the possible reasons behind what they have seen and heard whilst filming steam trains, or when viewing the results. In the absence of hard information, that speculation is often wide of the mark, especially since the people most likely to post are the ones who feel upset for some reason. However, that speculation usually stops as soon as there is authoritative information available. We've seen many times that when someone with first-hand experience explains why something happened the way it did, the hot air stops (mostly) and a more sensible discussion follows.

If tour operators and TOCs are seriously concerned about uninformed comment on this forum and others, then the solution is to get the real information into the public domain before the empty tin cans can rattle for too long. Timing is everything. It's obviously ridiculously unfair and impractical to expect footplate crew to give a running commentary. However, I'm sure there are ways that some kind of blog or Twitter-feed could be updated from the support coach from time to time. (Steam Dreams and MNLPS already tweet progress reports on some of their trips.) The tweets or blog could be linked from a thread like this, or perhaps echoed in the thread itself. There are people in the Admin team who I expect could think of several ways to do it. If that seems too hasty, then at least if moderators knew that an inside report would appear the next morning, they could damp down the wilder speculation by saying "wait for tomorrow's report from on board".

No one on here wants mainline steam to stop. We all want to ride behind steam, to photograph it, to enjoy it. We want to get what was promised as often as possible, and when it's not possible, to understand why things changed.

(Mods - I think this probably needs a thread of its own somewhere, rather than hi-jacking the Waverley thread...)

 

Hmm, not sure that particular option is sensible. Since the problem is DL assistance in York Control's area, i.e. to Skipton, a workable alternative might have been to change locos at Skipton or Hellifield. The question for the tour promoter and TOC is whether it is "better" to provide steam haulage for the whole of the advertised route or just the sections where the steam loco can do most/all of the work. There isn't a right answer. It has to be a value-judgement based on the operators' knowledge of their passengers' expectations and the cost/hassle of changing all the planned arrangements. We may disagree with their decisions, but carping on an internet forum doesn't really help. In fact, as Torgormaig explained, it may occassionally make matters worse.

 

The fireman, Peter James, has stated that it is very difficult to maintain a good fire, or should that be grate, when running in light steam from York to Skipton, out of necessity. Surely, the train operators etc would be aware of this too. Common-sense tells me that 48151 should have done Hellifield- Carlisle- Hellifield only.

 

Words like adamant do not bode well for this, the SSE or the Bittern trip.If the ban stays on for the next couple of weeks I wonder if the last Waverley run of the season on 1 September could be steam Hellifield-Carlisle and return and announced in advance as such.

 

Would that not have required a an additional LE path from York to Hellifield, was one available and if so would it have needed pathing at short notice etc.

Equally you would no doubt have had those complaining that the steam should have gone on at Skipton instead of Hellifield? There is no easy answer in this, I would suspect that a certain proportion of the passengers would not care that there was steam and diesel and just enjoyed the day out with a steam locomotive on the front and would have been more upset if it had not run at all.

 

couldn't agree more with the fireman,at least he knows what he is talking about unlike a lot of the posters on here,perhaps they just like seeing their name in print.

 

I'd like to thank Peter James for coming on & telling it 'as it was' - that also explains why there was a lot of "EE thrash" from 37706 on departure from Skipton & the other stations en route to York. Also thanks to him & his driver for what seemed to be a very vocal and competent climb to Ais Gill on the return run.

Thanks too to all involved in the organization & operation of yesterday's train. It was my in-laws' first experience of a steam run on the 'big railway', and they want to do it again. Hopefully next time we'll be diesel-free

The comments about the LNE area's attitude towards steam are worrying, it has to be said. Here's hoping it can be resolved sensibly.

Mark

 

48151 did an L.E. movement from Carnforth to York on the 15th. Management was fully aware of the steam ban then. As I have said previously, common-sense was not used and management need to look at themselves and ask a few questions of themselves.