West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I had that in mind, and have heard him speak on the subject. The problem is that the CC's publicly stated position is that they don't get into disputes between trustees over how a charity works.

That leaves a wide spectrum unclear, between that trustee's view (that the CC ought to come in robustly) and that of others (it's an internal disagreement and nothing to do with the CC).

I draw a number of conclusions from the (non-)outcome of that particular escalation to the CC, and also what happened in that charity. In particular, I conclude that the CC cannot be relied upon to intervene on anything more than the most egregious breaches. If they do (see the Actors Benevolent Fund for a case study), the outcome of that intervention is far from certain, and may be adverse. I therefore, finally, conclude that the key accountability is to the members, and that this must be in a form that does not allow the board to control governance.

 

I think it must be right to observe that modern charities effectively require some public benefit to be declared in writing - with difficulties if ideas of a public benefit change or original drafting that turns out not to be ideal.

Volunteers "playing trains" however enable the public the public benefits to happen. Unfortunately leading volunteers to what they can do is like herding cats - more or less an art form: the virtuoso head of a school not a top down director commanding.

Mercifully, the volunteers seem to just well up, but not at all necessarily where, when, how or to do exactly what anybody would have foreseen. And often despite major discouragement - the amount of good painting done in the open air with no protection from the weather!

 

I do hope that however mild the climate in Minehead is that, standing up beside the van in December, you did not get a chill in your stomach.
NB Click the little verticle arrow above, beside "Robin Moira White says"

Vigorous accounts elsewhere on this forum of the rigours of the weather elsewhere - up "The Alps" on the Hampshire Downs - restoring wagons.

 

Ah! In the context of the Heritage Railways section I assumed that "SR" meant the Swanage Railway -- though perhaps I should have realised that the quoted improvements were implausible for that line.

 

They put up with me, including my “Engineman S.R.” cap, and have done for many
years

The SR growth in traffic from 1923 to 1938 was almost entirely due to electrification.
Some of the numbers are staggering, doubling pax numbers within a matter of
months.

The ‘race’ to electrify led to a minimum spend on new steam locos; very much
a ‘make and mend’. In 1938 for instance two previously withdrawn B4 4-4-0s
were renewed as one loco.

The onset of WW11 found the SR with ( because of the 25% only freight, ). with a
shortage of freight locos and a surfeit of (many were old ) passenger locos for
the rapidly changing traffic requirements. Many of the King Arthur 4-6-0s
found employment on freight from Hither Green; ( despite 6’ 8” coupled wheels),
a few went to the North East working in the Gateshead area, some I3 4-4-2 tanks
spent time at Kidderminster, ( there were suggestions that the GWR crews liked
them ! ) some D1 0-4-2 tanks went to NE Scotland ( Dornoch if memory correct ) etc,

The SR pax numbers held up I think because of the need for people to work in
London but move out at night to avoid night time air attacks. Central Division
steam services were reduced considerably, eg (as with the Dover/Folkestone Boat trains)
services to Newhaven, The LB&SC Atlantics found use either on Waterloo Basingstoke
residential or Charing Cross to Folkestone and Dover. ( Ex LB&SC locos had to be
modified to be within the former SE&C loading gauge )

These are only a few of the changes the SR implemented. Additionally because of
it’s location, the SR had many more bomb hits in actual numbers and in terms of
bombs per square mile multiple times as many as the other ‘big four’ Railways.
And then there were the emergencies, children evacuated, post Dunkirk evacuations,
preparing for the Normandy landings etc.

The interesting thing perhaps, still debated by the erudite, is did the SR come through
this in reasonable shape because it had developed emergency plans from 1938 onwards,
or good senior management or simply committed traffic managers, shed masters, etc
getting on with it.

I suspect a combination of all three but the ‘let’s get on with it ‘ attitude at the stations
and depots was key. The details of train handling at Redhill after the Dunkirk evacuations
are all about team work, pragmatism and rising to the occasion. A lesson for the
Heritage Railway community in challenging times perhaps.

Bernard Darwin’s ; War on the Line The Southern Railway in Wartime.
( there is a reprint ) is worth a read.

Michael Rowe

 

If you are of a certain age, then the sight of "lines of rotting wagons" are part of your memories of the "Big Railway".

 

I have a number of memories of the "Big Railway" that I wish to avoid on heritage lines. They have a habit of being associated with decay.

 

Wagons have always been the poor relations on all railways. Most had loco sheds, many had carriage sheds but the only time the humble wagon was out of the weather was when being unloaded in a goods shed. Things haven’t changed much in the heritage world.

 

Agreed. That doesn’t alter my response to the vision of decay that I reacted to - something that railways should not be recreating.

 

Since this is on a thread concerned mainly with the West Somerset Railway, although I don't think 35B was necessarily implying this, it is important to record that the WSR has no intention to recreate "visions of decay". This is not what any of us want to see, and a main reason that on the WSR we are all very supportive of the work that Seb and his colleagues are doing to preserve the heritage of goods wagons on country railways: they have put in hours of unpaid work and the outcomes of this are plain to see.

We have also worked to ensure that as far as we possibly can we have worked to minimise wagons or coaches out of use on sidings. At the same time we have a dearth of covered accommodation (which we are working to rectify) and we have a range of rolling stock which we want to keep and use as soon as we can.

Frank

 

I am delighted to read that; my concern was that anyone might think recreating decay was a good thing.

 

Have just seen a picture of Norton Manor's tender on WSR.org. Has anyone any details of the "ovoid/eco coal" .

 

Well, that is good news. When might we expect to see a planning application lodged - the litmus test for a real project? And how is it to be financed?

Just a couple of links to present WSR projects:

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/ba-station?utm_id=2&utm_term=VXry9aqq

With only £9,970 left for phase 1, and

https://wsra.org.uk/dmu-appeal/

With (how much?) left to raise?

It will be appreciated that donors seeing their donated funds put to good use is the best way to encourage more funds, so perhaps we could have an update on the cast B&E station signs for Dunster and Watchet (3 for each) which have, I understand, been lurking in a wagon at Dunster for two years now awaiting putting up. An erection would be a very visible sign of progress. Where should I send the price of a packet of viagra?

(Photo courtesy of Mr Edge’s website)



Robin

 

An empty stock test run will be taking place tomorrow to assess if the Ovoids are suitable for our use. Some smaller Railways appear to have had some success but with our challenging line it will be interesting to see the results. There are a few different brands/products now, I can't remember exactly which one we have gone for.
For anyone interested - 1200 off MD and 1400 off BL. Obviously could run early/late/not at all.

 

As someone who contributed to the appeal for those signs, I am very dismayed to learn that they have yet to be erected. I must admit that I had not checked on them for some while now (too many other things on my mind!), but I had assumed that - once cast and delivered - they would have been painted and erected within a reasonably short timescale. An update would certainly be most welcome....

 

To be honest, it sounds like a project on our line. Started well, got the hard bit done, then seems to have fallen through the cracks. I think the main problem with these things is that, often, no one person really "owns" the project. There is no-one concentrating on delivering it, when there are so many other plates to keep spinning, too.

 

How did it go ? I use ovoids and notice that the fumes are particularly acrid. The ash is like concrete dust whereas the ash from coal is more like shingle, and is far easier to handle.

 

I read elsewhere this morning that Locomotive No. 9466 has beeen withdrawn with a cylinder problem. How will this affect motive power avalability for the Railway?

 

Rail Advent announced it yesterday. <BJ>

''Jonathan Jones-Pratt has announced that GWR Pannier No. 9466 has been withdrawn from service for the foreseeable future.

The withdrawal has come due to issues with the cylinder block.

After various repairs were completed to the locomotive, the decision to withdraw the locomotive from traffic early has been taken.


9466 was due to be withdrawn from overhaul in November 2025 and was due to appear on other railways over the winter period.

Focus now turns to complete 4936 Kinlet Hall, which will be returning to the WSR for completion, which will then allow 9466 to be dismantled and repaired as needed''.

 

Off the top of my head I think they're left with 7828 and 9351. And possibly 6695, depending on how long that loan agreement is due to last for