'Weymouth Seaside Express', 2014

And some fell on stony ground!

You did try though.

 

Could anyone please remind me why, with two other locos already at Bristol, it was necessary for 34067 to be sent specially all the way from Southall (and swiftly returned) in order to work this particular service?

 

The same person with a new identity?
That's the one good thing when the forum is off line, we don't have to read their insipid rubbish.

 

OK then!
Just seen this in our local paper.
http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/broken-down-freight-train-causes-7641344

Will this get as much bad mouthing off as steam does when something goes wrong?
Will there be calls to ban freight trains or class 70's, understand it was 70001.
Will there be calls to ban the TOC involved?
I think not somehow.
Steam issues is an easy scapegoat for those who dislike them & want it banned (this seemingly includes some members of this forum).

 

I'd support that. Ugly things.

 

Mainline steam is hugely important to me personally but it's worth remembering that it's a very small part of NR's revenue stream (the TDA cap on charters probably doesn't help) and it's not essential to the economy of this country whereas railborne freight probably is. That's a big difference and perhaps those of us involved in mainline steam should be on our best behaviour when we're out and about on the mainline.

 

Because one of them was hauling the Torbay Express ( 34046) and the other ( 5029)would have had maintenance being carried out.

 

Quite uncanny that this incident happened not far from the location at which "The Dorset Belle" came to grief in a similar fashion in January 1967 (the now-closed Maiden Newton - Bridport/West Bay branch). IIRC the train made it from Westbury to Maiden Newton, over Evershot, behind "Okehampton" (rebuilt), having had "Biggin Hill" & "Lapford" from Waterloo to Salisbury, where 34102 was detached.

 

I was told that this was because The 5029/34046 people were only able to provide one support crew.

 

Of course not. That's just being foolish, might as well ban every type of traction as nothing is failure proof.
And once again for the hard of understanding I don't want steam banned, I just want it to operate in a reliable an efficient manner, so it doesn't attract unwanted attention to itself and the punters can have some degree of confidence of getting there and back on time.
If that means bolting a diesel to the rear of every train then that's what needs doing, even if it enrages the non traveller.

 

Thing is explaining to the average punter that this trip is going to cost more due to the fact the operator wants to leave a few coaches off so the loco ain't going to be pushed to the limit and the alternative is a nasty smelly box on the back. To the average punter who just fancies a day out with a steam loco they probably wouldn't care or notice either way, of course the desperado steam crank would understand and probably pay up.

At least with a diesel bolted on the back you also have a rescue loco to hand, that's where it always seems to unravel these days, not much comfort for the punter when they get told the nearest rescue loco is at Carnforth and will take 3 hours to get to the train....
Tell you what, I wouldn't fancy trying to make a living from running steam tours, would have tipped me over the edge years ago!!

 

I think the use of the term "desperado steam crank" is out of order and insulting to those of us whose interest is pure steam. That is steam as we enjoyed it in the past and as we still enjoy it from time to time in the 21st Century right up to 2014.

We all have our preferences in life and should not be put in the position of wanting to pay good money for something we don't want. And being insulted for having that preference as well.

If the market for pure steam enthusiasts was too small to be economic then such as Vintage Trains would not be running the superb steam only trips they have been running of late.

I accept our contribution to the market is not enormous and that restricts choice. Fine. But let those involved in promoting the trains make open and honest declarations of what the motive power is likely to be. Reducing the risk to us pure steam enthusiasts to such as fire risk and bad weather, (Autumn leaves on hilly routes etc), when we have to accept last minute changes will occur.

 

I'm going to quibble with 2 points:
1) The promoter and operator need to get the load/route/loco combination right well in advance. It shouldn't be a matter of removing a carriage or changing the price a week or so before the train runs, especially with these repeat itinerary trips.
2) The "average punters" for steam tours, though not "desperado steam cranks", as you put it, are nevertheless fond of steam locos and usually know a thing or two about them. In any party of 4, chances are one of them used to be a spotter in their youth, or something of the sort. Tour operators can't just fob them off with a steam figurehead and expect them to come back time and again. Having said that, they will mostly be understanding and forgiving if, in exceptional circumstances, a DL has to be used, provided the situation is explained properly. But you can only try their patience and understanding so many times. The problem is that diesel assistance is being used routinely.

Absolutely! We all have reason to be very grateful to the folks who put so much time and effort into running these trains. And we should celebrate the fact that so many run successfully every year. We criticise the failures because we care and want them all to succeed.

 

Exactly.

Seems to me there are two fundamentals, and, with honourable exceptions, I'm not sure either is very certain at the moment - at least to my external observer's eye:

1) Honesty: the Tour companies need to be realistic about what they are delivering, far enough in advance that people can make informed buying decisions on it. If you need a diesel on the back, then fine, but admit it up front.

2) Price: The quid pro quo from enthusiasts is that if the price of reliability is shorter trains and higher ticket prices, then pay up - you can't have both.

Planning a tour itinery should be based on a worst case scenario. What load can loco X haul along that route in good conditions? Now knock a bit off for wet rail, a bit more for poor coal, a bit more to give some in hand for recovery time etc. Now what is the realistic load? If that load isn't cost effective, then don't advertise the tour, or else admit up front you will need diesel assistance: it seems dishonest to promise a particular combination of loco and route if you know all along that such a combination won't possibly run without either a diesel or an unacceptably big risk of stalling somewhere.

Tom

 

I agree with everything you say, one has to ask the question why Vintage Trains (foe example) consistently provide what is advertised, yet other operators seem less than able to match advertising with what is delivered on the day.
I certainly know the direction my money would be heading if I felt the need to travel on steam railtours.
Certainly the upcoming Atlantic Coast Express is a prime example of the customer being mugged off to some massive degree, and I feel sorry for anyone taken in by the glossy brochure and wonderful promise of a steam filled weekend in the South West.
As for the desperado steam crank remark it was tongue in cheek, feel free to feel to feel 'insulted' or 'offended', that's your choice, same as it's my choice not to apologise for people being over sensitive.

 

Returning the subject of this thread, The Weymouth Seaside Express... What's happening this coming weekend? I understand Braunton is the rostered loco. I've heard rumours that she might have diesel assistance and even that she might come off the train at Yeovil, to turn and service then run light to Weymouth for the return, much like the trip a couple of weekends ago during the FBU strike. I have to say, I don't know the source of those rumours, and it might just be pessimists thinking aloud (the way we do...)

 

So will Braunton have the diesel on the back this Sunday??

Edit; Sorry didnt see above post..

 

Totally agree Yeti. I hesitate to join this debate, especially as it has been a long day and I might get abusive about somebody who is being insulting to the hobby which has been a major part of my life for nearly 60 years. My interest on steam trips is loco performance and to get that I need pure steam. Anything else, whilst it may produce a nice day out, is not for me, so I choose my trips very carefully based on the track record (excuse the pun) of the tour promoter and of the regular trips operated. In normal circumstances, as has been said elsewhere Vintage Trains are without doubt top in this respect and also seem to manage to run trains restricted to the capability of the engine chosen but still at attractive prices. Repeat programmes like the Torbex and Royal Duchy also generally work well though on this last occasion the Weymouth Seaside Xpress did not. My view on this is that it was a combination of things, including probably; one coach too many, the wet weather and an engine which not only has a known habit of not keeping its feet but also a generally poor reliability record climbing hills particularly in adverse conditions. Maybe it needs attention to balancing, but maybe its just that particular engine and the way it is handled. It's notable that it holds the record for the westbound climb of Dainton with a single engine plus it climbed Bincombe unaided with 11 on. So perhaps its mainly about the driver and how Tangmere is handled.

Don

 

Ray Churchill was the driver the day of the record on Dainton, and it was damp and drizzle as I was on the train, Tangmere has never had any trouble on the Devon banks, Ray Churchill has always driven her when she's been down in Devon and Cornwall , he does seem to be able to get the best out of her, he also told me that Tangmere can be a difficult engine to drive and he seems to know the engine and all the little quirks she has, she is also the only engine on the mainline with a steam reverser.