Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank to be based on the
Severn Valley Railway.We already have a number of components and a
useful library of engineering drawings, and if we can achieve the
necessary funding, 82045 could be running within a very few years'time.
It is our intention that this locomotive should break new ground by
being the precursor of small-scale series production of new steam
engines suitable for use on heritage lines in the UK.Existing locos
will not last for ever: we believe that this is the only way to assure
a future for working steam in this country. We also believe that the
Standard Class 3 tank is ideal for the purpose, as well as plugging a
gap in preservation

http://lms8f48773.tripod.com/the82045locomotivefund

"8f48773"  wrote


> Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank to be based on the
> Severn Valley Railway.We already have a number of components and a
> useful library of engineering drawings, and if we can achieve the
> necessary funding, 82045 could be running within a very few years'time.


I don't wish to be a killjoy, but the one new build project which has been 
undertaken is still some considerable distance from completion and in dire 
need of a substantial cash injection to allow a boiler to be commissioned.

Is another project not likely to hamper the A1's completion?

John.

"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ded908$r7i$1@newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net...

>
> "8f48773"  wrote
>
>> Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank to be based on the
>> Severn Valley Railway.We already have a number of components and a
>> useful library of engineering drawings, and if we can achieve the
>> necessary funding, 82045 could be running within a very few years'time.
>
> I don't wish to be a killjoy, but the one new build project which has been 
> undertaken is still some considerable distance from completion and in dire 
> need of a substantial cash injection to allow a boiler to be commissioned.
>
> Is another project not likely to hamper the A1's completion?


Not only this, but I recopgnise the OP's email address as someone who was in 
charge of the Class 47 Locomotive Group, who never gave me much confidence 
in their attempts to preserve 47087, 47306 or 47635, according to the spam I 
kept receiving in my inbox and on a strictly no-spam 47 gen list I used to 
run... :/

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

Rich Mackin wrote:


> Not only this, but I recopgnise the OP's email address as someone who was in
> charge of the Class 47 Locomotive Group, who never gave me much confidence
> in their attempts to preserve 47087, 47306 or 47635, according to the spam I
> kept receiving in my inbox and on a strictly no-spam 47 gen list I used to
> run... :/


The whole thing is an obvious non-starter, an impression that is
reinforced by a website so sub-literate as to give the impression that
it was typed by an infinite number of monkeys.

"Chippy"  wrote:

>
>The whole thing is an obvious non-starter, an impression that is
>reinforced by a website so sub-literate as to give the impression that
>it was typed by an infinite number of monkeys.


I think you meant a (very) finite number of monkeys, as an infinite
number would surely have achieved something that appeared at least
slightly intelligent at some point in the process. 

I suggest that the site is aimed at those lower down the scale of
intelligence, because you would need to be pretty daft to support such
an ill-conceived idea.

Sam Wilson wrote:

> In article <hlHOe.62$xm3.15@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Rich Mackin
>  wrote:
>
> > ...
> > the Class 47 Loco Group later became the 'Surzler[sic] Type 4 Group', ...
>
> "Duh yeoo ave a leesohnce for zis Surzler?"


Nah, that's "manky", rather than "minkey" <g>


-- 
Regards

Mike

In article , 1501 
 writes

>> But from what I understand,  the main market for heritage railways is
>> not enthusists but Mum, Dad and the kids looking for a entertaining day
>> out.
>
>Andy.
>
>Indeed, your understanding is absolutely correct. The occasional
>paraffin burner is OK but all the while would be a big turn off for the
>avaerage heritage line visitor.
>

On the 'quieter' days on MHR when we run one steam plus one DMU, I not 
infrequently find myself having to 'sell' the DMU to pax whose mouths 
are beginning to turn down at the corners.  Usually, telling them what a 
great view of the line they get if they sit just behind the driver works 
- in fact, if you encounter them later in the day they often enthuse 
about it!

On the other hand, don't have to 'sell' steam.  Not even to the very 
smalls, who can't possibly be accused of nostalgia.

(Occasionally have to console very smalls if large loco lets safety 
valves go two yards from them, but that's another matter.)
-- 
Sue
The Sir Nigel Gresley Locomotive Preservation Trust is now at
http://www.sirnigelgresley.co.uk
Including - 00 gauge Hornby and Bachmann models for sale.

The message <17JOe.135$Or3.17@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>
from Charlie Hulme  contains these words:


> the draught was disturbing the bloke's wife's hair!  The request
> > was politely refused.  
> > 

> John Prescott and hs wife travel on steam specials??


Dunno!  You were filming us leaving Chester - did you spot him joining
the First/Premier section of the train?  We were slumming it.  I know my
station in life.

And my reply wouldn't have been polite...

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

On 22 Aug 2005 13:20:16 -0700, "Chippy"  wrote:



>reinforced by a website so sub-literate as to give the impression that
>it was typed by an infinite number of monkeys.


with casino popups  >:o(

gwr4090  wrote:


>Setting aside your disdain for the website, I'm just wondering why you
>should think it an ill-conceived an idea, in view of the current shortage
>of suitable and economical Class 2/3 motive power for use on heritage
>lines ?   There are quite a few pople in the heritage railway business who
>think that a small batch production of the right prototype (ie smallish
>tank engine) could be an economic proposition. It would certainly be a lot
>more viable than yet another pacific which would see relatively little use
>and be very expensive to run.


No-one is seriously suggesting that another new Pacific should be
built.  The ongoing. slow moving farce that is "Tornado" should be
enough to warn anyone off doing that in the foreseeable future.

Personally, I believe that the preserved steam railway business is
already at, or even past its peak.  The proportion of railway
enthusiasts in each succeeding generation is sharply reducing, and the
numbers of those who can recall steam on BR is reducing even faster.  

I was one of the youngest passengers on the "Fifteen Guinea Special"
on the last day of BR steam in 1968, and I am 51 now.  I was a few
days short of my 14th birthday then.  Most of my fellow passengers
were much older, and the majority are long dead and buried.  

What the preserved railways need to do is acquire and restore some
dependable diesel locomotives start on the button rather than needing
to be fired up at some unearthly hour in the morning.  Those locos
would also be something that today's enthusiast would relate to, which
is surely better than trying to pander to a dwindling number of old
men by running 100% steam.

Of course railway preservation has always included daft projects put
forward by people of no substance, and this one is no exception.

Chris Tolley  wrote:


>8f48773 wrote:
>
>> Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank ... we believe that
>> this is the only way to assure a future for working steam in this
>> country.
>
>Are plans also in hand to build some new chimneys. on the basis that you
>can send children up them and so assure a future for former working
>practices?



Ouch!  So sharp that it hurts ...

;-)

"Tony Polson"  wrote in message
news:9j7ng1pdpkhau3ee7k324721u7jaivhfsh@4ax.com...

> What the preserved railways need to do is acquire and restore some
> dependable diesel locomotives start on the button rather than needing
> to be fired up at some unearthly hour in the morning.  Those locos
> would also be something that today's enthusiast would relate to, which
> is surely better than trying to pander to a dwindling number of old
> men by running 100% steam.


As a preserved railway diesel (not steam) driver I wish I thought that would
work.  IMX the number of diesel enthusiasts is growing and the antipathy of
non-enthusiasts to diesels is reducing, but it is still steam which attracts
the majority of ordinary customers - not just old men but also young mothers
with their kids.  In other words, they are less likely than 10 years ago to
walk away if a diesel stands in for a failed steam loco, but when given a
choice in the timetable the majority will come on the steam days.

Maybe  that will eventually change, but for the foreseeable future we will
have to offer mainly steam trains with a smaller proportion of diesel-hauled
or DMU workings.

Roger

"Rich Mackin"  wrote:


>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious 
>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...



I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
>
>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...
>
>
>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
>
>

I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by. 
Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has 
just started.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

"1501"  wrote


> I don't recall any group trying to receate a lost diesel class.


DP2 was muted as I believe was a 'Baby Deltic' and I think there have been 
other suggestions.

John.

"Roger H. Bennett"  wrote


> As a preserved railway diesel (not steam) driver I wish I thought that 
> would
> work.  IMX the number of diesel enthusiasts is growing and the antipathy 
> of
> non-enthusiasts to diesels is reducing, but it is still steam which 
> attracts
> the majority of ordinary customers - not just old men but also young 
> mothers
> with their kids.  In other words, they are less likely than 10 years ago 
> to
> walk away if a diesel stands in for a failed steam loco, but when given a
> choice in the timetable the majority will come on the steam days.


Could this be because diesels are scheduled to run at off-peak times and 
weekends, whereas steam locos run when the highest number of passengers are 
expected, this perpetuating the situation?

I stopped visiting preserved railway some years ago because I felt they 
totally failed to capture the atmosphere of the BR steam era which I loved 
and remember so well.

John.

John Turner wrote:

> I stopped visiting preserved railway some years ago because I felt they
> totally failed to capture the atmosphere of the BR steam era which I loved
> and remember so well.




An interesting statement indeed. Is this because locomotives at
preserved railways are too clean, hence not giving the later British
Railways steam days ethos, or is the livery and engine type variation
too great? A classic scene such as a steam-hauled express line-up at
large stations such as Waterloo and Paddington can, sadly, not be
recreated authentically today on such a large scale!

John Turner wrote:


>
> I stopped visiting preserved railway some years ago because I felt they
> totally failed to capture the atmosphere of the BR steam era which I loved
> and remember so well.


In what particular ways do you think they fail, John? Is is something
the railways could do something about (e.g. by having different stock
or liveries, or perhaps even intentionally dirty locos), or is it to do
with the inevitable differences between a railway functioning as a
means of transport and one that is part of the entertainment industry?

For me the things which most impair the experience are (a) former goods
yards now crammed with dismantled locos and derelict rolling stock and
(b) hordes of tourists (of which I cannot deny that I am one myself)
photographing everything in sight . However the sights and sounds of
real steam locos continue to draw me back.

Andy Kirkham

> A classic scene such as a steam-hauled express line-up at
> large stations such as Waterloo and Paddington can, sadly, not be
> recreated authentically today on such a large scale!


However several heritage lines recreate the idilic scenes of a branch
line at their intermediate stations. Try sitting at Hampton Loade,
Glyndyfrdwy or Blue Anchor on a summer afternoon between train arrivals
and departures.

"The InterCity"  wrote


> An interesting statement indeed. Is this because locomotives at
> preserved railways are too clean, hence not giving the later British
> Railways steam days ethos, or is the livery and engine type variation
> too great? A classic scene such as a steam-hauled express line-up at
> large stations such as Waterloo and Paddington can, sadly, not be
> recreated authentically today on such a large scale!


It's a mixture of a whole plethora of things, the general cleanliness being 
one of them, but it goes much beyond that.  One of my main interests in the 
steam era was always freight traffic (something which has no financial 
interest to the preservation scene) and all of the parapernalia assocociated 
with it.

John.

"1501"  wrote


> However several heritage lines recreate the idilic scenes of a branch
> line at their intermediate stations. Try sitting at Hampton Loade,
> Glyndyfrdwy or Blue Anchor on a summer afternoon between train arrivals
> and departures.


Carrog at the end of the Llangollen Railway is another example of this, but 
when a train arrives the whole atmosphere is lost, mainly because the place 
is much too busy.

John.

"Andy Kirkham"  wrote


> In what particular ways do you think they fail, John? Is is something
> the railways could do something about (e.g. by having different stock
> or liveries, or perhaps even intentionally dirty locos), or is it to do
> with the inevitable differences between a railway functioning as a
> means of transport and one that is part of the entertainment industry?


I've answered this in my reply to a previous posting.


> For me the things which most impair the experience are (a) former goods
> yards now crammed with dismantled locos and derelict rolling stock and
> (b) hordes of tourists (of which I cannot deny that I am one myself)
> photographing everything in sight .


That is also part of it.  How nice it would be to see a goods shed being 
used for its original purpose, but I do understand why such would not be 
attractive to the preservation scene.

Even the old goods shed at the NRM in York is crammed with passenger 
coaches, rather than being used to illustrate it original purpose.

John.

John Turner wrote:

> "8f48773"  wrote
>
> > Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank to be based on the
> > Severn Valley Railway.We already have a number of components and a
> > useful library of engineering drawings, and if we can achieve the
> > necessary funding, 82045 could be running within a very few years'time.
>
> I don't wish to be a killjoy, but the one new build project which has been
> undertaken is still some considerable distance from completion and in dire
> need of a substantial cash injection to allow a boiler to be commissioned.


Only one new build project? So the three new Fairlie engines running
around on the Ffestiniog Railway don't count, nor do Northern Rock,
River Mite, Sian or Katie on the 15 inch?? Or the Trevithick and
Rainhill replicas? Or the Steam Elephant Alan Keef built?

Personally, I think building a 3MT 2-6-2 is a great idea - just the
right size for a preserved line. Given that it'd be a "traffic" engine,
it should pay for itself fairly quickly. The conventional boiler and
frames would make it easier to build than a Fairlie as well - it'll
certainly be easier than the hugeness of an A1.

Andy Elms

John Turner wrote:

> "8f48773"  wrote
>
> > Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank to be based on the
> > Severn Valley Railway.We already have a number of components and a
> > useful library of engineering drawings, and if we can achieve the
> > necessary funding, 82045 could be running within a very few years'time.
>
> I don't wish to be a killjoy, but the one new build project which has been
> undertaken is still some considerable distance from completion and in dire
> need of a substantial cash injection to allow a boiler to be commissioned.


Only one new build project? So the three new Fairlie engines running
around on the Ffestiniog Railway don't count, nor do Northern Rock,
River Mite, Sian or Katie on the 15 inch?? Or the Trevithick and
Rainhill replicas? Or the Steam Elephant Alan Keef built?

Personally, I think building a 3MT 2-6-2 is a great idea - just the
right size for a preserved line. Given that it'd be a "traffic" engine,
it should pay for itself fairly quickly. The conventional boiler and
frames would make it easier to build than a Fairlie as well - it'll
certainly be easier than the hugeness of an A1.

Andy Elms

"James Christie"  wrote in message 
news:gguW0jQdM8CDFwh4@christie.demon.co.uk...

> In message , Tony Polson 
>  writes
>>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
>>
>>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
>>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so 
>>>far...
>>
>>
>>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
>>
>>
> I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by. 
> Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has 
> just started.


I thought both the boiler and tender had been put out to... erm, tender? 
Haven't heard any more since.

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

James Christie wrote:

> In message , Tony Polson
>  writes
> >"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
> >
> >>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
> >>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...
> >
> >
> >I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
> >
> >
> I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by.
> Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has
> just started.
> --
> Regards,
>
> James Christie


I reckon they've done very well.  Although they've had their ups and
downs it now looks like they are in sight of finishing the job.  Some
major loco restorations have taken longer - you can only proceed at a
rate the available funding and labour will allow.

I don't think an appeal for another loco will dilute support for the A1
trust - some people who would never contribute to the A1 might well be
attracted to a different project and some wealthy people may be happy
to support both.

Smaller engines, such as this 2-6-2 tank, ought to be cheaper and
quicker to build as well as being better suited to the operatioal needs
of tourist/heritage lines.  The idea of building a batch of 0-6-0
pannier tanks has also been suggested by the owner of the Flour Mill
workshops - following their rebuild of one that had so few original
parts left it almost was a new-build anyway.

Narrow gauge is already showing the way - Festiniog have built a number
of new locos over the last 30 years and the present owner of the
Hunslet Engine Co. name has recently started work on a batch of
new-build 'Quarry' Hunslets for which I assume he must have customers.

In message <SN%Oe.1232$ER4.644@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, Rich Mackin 
 writes

>"James Christie"  wrote in message
>news:gguW0jQdM8CDFwh4@christie.demon.co.uk...
>> In message , Tony Polson
>>  writes
>>>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
>>>
>>>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
>>>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so
>>>>far...
>>>
>>>
>>>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
>>>
>>>
>> I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by.
>> Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has
>> just started.
>
>I thought both the boiler and tender had been put out to... erm, tender?
>Haven't heard any more since.
>

Construction has started on both. The boiler at Meiningen, indeed, the 
Front tubeplate should already be done.
The tender is also underway, at William Cook Cast Products (a long term 
supporter of the A1 Trust).
Some 385,000 is still required to complete the job, but it's still on 
course for assembly in 2007.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:


>I stopped visiting preserved railway some years ago because I felt they 
>totally failed to capture the atmosphere of the BR steam era which I loved 
>and remember so well.



Agree 100%.

Most preserved railways now present a sort of 1930s pastiche, but with
super clean locos and bright new paint everywhere.  

A sort of Technicolor version of a reality that never existed.

James Christie  wrote:


>In message , Tony Polson 
> writes
>>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
>>
>>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
>>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...
>>
>>
>>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
>>
>>
>I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by. 
>Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has 
>just started.



But the funds to complete them are nowhere near being in place.

The group behind "Tornado" are very adept at PR.  Publicity is always
positive, and no mention is ever made of the fact that the project is
running years behind schedule with contributions having slowed to a
trickle. 

I hope "Tornado" does get finished.  However, there must now be a
significant possibility that it will not, because of people's natural
reluctance to fund a project that is making such slow progress.

wrote


> Only one new build project? So the three new Fairlie engines running
> around on the Ffestiniog Railway don't count, nor do Northern Rock,
> River Mite, Sian or Katie on the 15 inch?? Or the Trevithick and
> Rainhill replicas? Or the Steam Elephant Alan Keef built?


I was talking about mainline locos, not miniature stuff, creditable that 
they all are.

John.

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>James Christie  wrote:
>
>>In message , Tony Polson
>> writes
>>>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
>>>
>>>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
>>>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...
>>>
>>>
>>>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
>>>
>>>
>>I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by.
>>Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has
>>just started.
>
>
>But the funds to complete them are nowhere near being in place.
>
>The group behind "Tornado" are very adept at PR.  Publicity is always
>positive, and no mention is ever made of the fact that the project is
>running years behind schedule with contributions having slowed to a
>trickle.
>
>I hope "Tornado" does get finished.  However, there must now be a
>significant possibility that it will not, because of people's natural
>reluctance to fund a project that is making such slow progress.
>
>


Well, like I elaborated on in a later post, the funds are almost there 
to finish the engine, as the Bond issue was a huge success.
They only need 385,000 to finish her off (not a huge sum in today's 
Preservation world).
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>I stopped visiting preserved railway some years ago because I felt they
>>totally failed to capture the atmosphere of the BR steam era which I loved
>>and remember so well.
>
>
>Agree 100%.
>
>Most preserved railways now present a sort of 1930s pastiche, but with
>super clean locos and bright new paint everywhere.
>
>A sort of Technicolor version of a reality that never existed.
>
>

So how would you rather have it? Filthy engines, a next to non existent 
service, station awnings with no glass, closure notices everywhere?
Not 'proper' trains running but replaced by a railbus?
Seeing as most of todays preserved lines (with some notable exceptions) 
are ex branch lines, for them to be in a truly authentic 50s/60s 
condition, they'd also only need to have the requisite dozen passengers 
a day.

(Cue pedants quoting all sorts of examples to the contrary)

Locos and Stock in deplorable mechanical condition, never mind the 
aesthetics.
I'm glad we can't look back to 60s steam on preserved lines. It may have 
been 'happy' days, but if Preserved railways tried to emulate the 
Modernisation Plan/Beeching Era railway in all of it's rundown 
authenticity, the vast majority of visitors (Tourists/Familys, who 
REALLY pay for these lines) would get straight back in the car again.
And who could honestly blame them?
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

James Christie  wrote:

>Tony Polson wrote:
>>But the funds to complete them are nowhere near being in place.
>>
>>The group behind "Tornado" are very adept at PR.  Publicity is always
>>positive, and no mention is ever made of the fact that the project is
>>running years behind schedule with contributions having slowed to a
>>trickle.
>>
>>I hope "Tornado" does get finished.  However, there must now be a
>>significant possibility that it will not, because of people's natural
>>reluctance to fund a project that is making such slow progress.
>
>Well, like I elaborated on in a later post, the funds are almost there 
>to finish the engine, as the Bond issue was a huge success.
>They only need 385,000 to finish her off (not a huge sum in today's 
>Preservation world).



"Almost there" doesn't exactly square with "385,000 to finish her
off", given the very slow rate at which funds have been raised so far.
By the time "Tornado" is finished, it will probably be very difficult
to fill main line steam specials with paying passengers.

But when it comes to spin, the "Tornado" people do take some beating.
You would almost think the project was on time rather than years late.

;-)

James Christie  wrote:


>So how would you rather have it?



I don't know.  But I strongly dislike the over-bright colours, the
unrealistic trains and the blatant attempts to screw every last penny
out of the great unwashed hordes and their badly behaved kids.

It's like a full scale version of the "Thomas the Tank Engine" videos,
vivid primary colours and all. 

If this is what is needed to keep "preserved railways" alive, I am not
sure I would be too sad if some of them died.  There are far too many
of them anyway.

Tony Polson wrote:

> James Christie  wrote:
>
> >So how would you rather have it?
>
>
> I don't know.  But I strongly dislike the over-bright colours, the
> unrealistic trains and the blatant attempts to screw every last penny
> out of the great unwashed hordes and their badly behaved kids.
>
> It's like a full scale version of the "Thomas the Tank Engine" videos,
> vivid primary colours and all.


I've often wondered if there wouldn't be some merit in asking people to
wear more muted colours when visiting preserved lines.  I certainly
wouldn't want people to put on period dress (the amatuer theatricals of
the 'Wartime Weekends' and the like are toe-curlingly embarassing
enough) but fewer glaringly bright jackets would improve many photos.
I'm a strong believer that photos should include people, but at present
it is difficult to do so.

However, given that many adults nowadays have taken to dressing in a
style previously associated with five-year olds, it might be a
non-starter.


>
> If this is what is needed to keep "preserved railways" alive, I am not
> sure I would be too sad if some of them died.  There are far too many
> of them anyway.


Quite so.  And they fall into two groups - the ones resembling a cross
between a scrapyard and a municipal rubbish tip, and those that you
have described, which give the impression of a low-budget film set.

"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:dehb02$mfq$1@newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net...

> Could this be because diesels are scheduled to run at off-peak times and
> weekends, whereas steam locos run when the highest number of passengers
are
> expected, this perpetuating the situation?


No, because what I am thinking of is the number of passengers on a diesel
Tuesday or Thursday compared to the steam-hauled Wednesday in the same week,
when presumably the passengers have a free choice of which day to visit.

I wish I could find any sound basis for saying anything different.

Roger

"Chippy"  wrote:


>Tony Polson wrote:
>> James Christie  wrote:
>>
>> >So how would you rather have it?
>>
>>
>> I don't know.  But I strongly dislike the over-bright colours, the
>> unrealistic trains and the blatant attempts to screw every last penny
>> out of the great unwashed hordes and their badly behaved kids.
>>
>> It's like a full scale version of the "Thomas the Tank Engine" videos,
>> vivid primary colours and all.
>
>I've often wondered if there wouldn't be some merit in asking people to
>wear more muted colours when visiting preserved lines.  I certainly
>wouldn't want people to put on period dress (the amatuer theatricals of
>the 'Wartime Weekends' and the like are toe-curlingly embarassing
>enough) but fewer glaringly bright jackets would improve many photos.
>I'm a strong believer that photos should include people, but at present
>it is difficult to do so.
>
>However, given that many adults nowadays have taken to dressing in a
>style previously associated with five-year olds, it might be a
>non-starter.
>
>>
>> If this is what is needed to keep "preserved railways" alive, I am not
>> sure I would be too sad if some of them died.  There are far too many
>> of them anyway.
>
>Quite so.  And they fall into two groups - the ones resembling a cross
>between a scrapyard and a municipal rubbish tip, and those that you
>have described, which give the impression of a low-budget film set.



Exactly.

"1501"  wrote in message 
news:1124799586.238518.296580@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>> Not only this, but I recopgnise the OP's email address as someone who was 
>> in
>> charge of the Class 47 Locomotive Group, who never gave me much 
>> confidence
>> in their attempts to preserve 47087, 47306 or 47635,
>
> Perhaps, but assuming the connection with 8f 48773 and the SVR is
> correct there is a lot more credibility than you suggest.


Given that the Class 47 Loco Group later became the 'Surzler[sic] Type 4 
Group', I doubt it.

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

A new build of a British Railways Standard Class which no longer exists
is certainly an interesting concept. I am curious as to why not one of
2-6-2 Class 3 tanks survived into preservation, but a number of its
counterparts did, particularly the popular 2-6-4 Standard Tank. Perhaps
the Class 3 locomotives never made it to Barry scrap yard, but instead
were dispatched to other scrapping merchants whom were not so engine
friendly!

If this project 'takes off', it will certainly complement the other
prototype BR Standard Class being built - No. 72010 'Hengist'. The
latter is, naturally, the size of Britannia!

Good luck with the tank engine - it would be great to see this
locomotive in action, and fill the gap in the standard class fleet
line-up.

> > Perhaps, but assuming the connection with 8f 48773 and the SVR is
> > correct there is a lot more credibility than you suggest.
>
> I doubt it.


I'm unsure of what you mean. Do you have reservations about the 48773
group and the SVR?

Or do you have doubts about the group of diesel preservationists?

"gwr4090"  wrote


> Setting aside your disdain for the website, I'm just wondering why you
> should think it an ill-conceived an idea, in view of the current shortage
> of suitable and economical Class 2/3 motive power for use on heritage
> lines ?


Eh?  I don't follow the logic here, there are numerous small diesel 
locomotives which have been withdrawn from the national network over the 
last twenty years or so which are sitting around idle for most of the time.

All of these have far more relevence to kids of today, and restoration of 
some of these would be much more viable than attempting to build some new 
steam locos to which most of the younger generation will not be able to 
relate and will not have the novelty of being historic artifacts for the 
older enthusiasts.

I don't know whether you've noticed that diesel days on many preserved 
railways attract enormous interest and numbers of enthusiasts, and that 
suggests heritage diesel traction is the way forward.  If you can't fill 
seats with steam haulage on the mainline, why should it be any different on 
the preserved railways?

John.

Chippy wrote:

> Tony Polson wrote:
>>
>> "Almost there" doesn't exactly square with "385,000 to finish her
>> off", given the very slow rate at which funds have been raised so
>> far. By the time "Tornado" is finished, it will probably be very
>> difficult to fill main line steam specials with paying passengers.
>>
>> But when it comes to spin, the "Tornado" people do take some beating.
>> You would almost think the project was on time rather than years
>> late.
>
> I read an online copy of their latest newsletter.  This includes
> information on the oil-firing/coal-firing alternatives:
>
> "The capital demands of oil firing combined with the
> likely demands of these financial institutions mean that Tornado will
> be initially
> coal fired but oil-ready; oil firing will be reconsidered at the first
> 10 year
> overhaul. Oil-firing equipment would increase build cost by over
> 400,000.
> Certification of a boiler designed for coal firing is straightforward
> with no
> research and development costs. On the other hand, though the
> oil-firing
> principle was accepted, it was not fully proven in the UK. The
> significant rise in
> oil prices now made it more expensive per mile than coal.


not if you use waste oil like some preserved locos in the US.

Al




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

> Are plans also in hand to build some new chimneys.


Copper capped ones?

James Christie wrote:


> So how would you rather have it?


I think I'd prefer it if preserved railways gave the impression that
they had been discriminating in their stock acquisitions. Several I
could (but decline to) name seem to have a real menagerie of coaches and
wagons filling every available inch of siding.

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633065.html
(50 014 at London Paddington, 1978)

"1501"  wrote in message 
news:1124811839.809929.323660@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>> You're quoting me out of context there.
>
> Rich
>
> I'm sorry, I'm still unclear about which group you have reservations
> about.
>
> I was seeking clarification but I believe both the 48773 group and the
> SVR are pretty dependable. But I also know some of those involved with
> the 82045 project are also involved with one or more of the other
> organisations mentioned. Hence my confusion.


No worries - just to clarify, the OP emailed me last week about the same 
project - in the past I've had numerous dealings with his CL47LG as I used 
to run a Class 47 gen list and he kept spamming it on a highly regular basis 
despite the group having a strict no-spamming policy. Once banned, another 
member of the group joined up and did the same, and when asked to cease sent 
me a pleasant, mature, "Neeerrrr, our Yahoo! Group's better than your group 
so there!"-style email. Subscription to said Yahoo! Group revealed they were 
dogged with constant in-fighting and some strange choices over which 47 to 
purchase (in particular, one that a group member had owned a model of back 
in the 1970s - even though the real 47 in question was long gone!).

None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious 
new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

"1501"  wrote in message
news:1124797700.993111.235060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...


> Indeed. There is growing evidence that mainline steam railtours are
> rapidly becoming a rich man's indulgence rather than a commercially
> viable proposition.
>
> Circa 15K to fit TPWS then the cost of servicing it along with the
> loco for how many trips per year.
>
> Hardly worth it.


Comments which apply equally to diesel railtours using heritage traction.
Companies like EWS can use creative accounting to hide the true costs of the
operation and can offer bog-standard traction at knock-down prices. The
private locomotive owner has no such luxury available. We've already seen
private operators go to the wall as a result of being unable to be
competitive and unable (not allowed?) to compete on a level playing field.

In article <hlHOe.62$xm3.15@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Rich Mackin
 wrote:


> ...
> the Class 47 Loco Group later became the 'Surzler[sic] Type 4 Group', ...


"Duh yeoo ave a leesohnce for zis Surzler?"

Sam

The only reason why heritage diesels have anywhere to have a decent
length run on a regular basis is because of the heritage lines
established by steam enthusiasts. I do not know of one successful
heritage line established by a purely diesel preservation group or a
collection of such groups.

Yes, there are many people who find the occasional diesel gala
interesting but the vast majority of heritage railway revenue is
generated by steam haulage.

Filling seats regularly behind steam haulage on heritage is far less
difficult than behind diesels.

> Not only this, but I recopgnise the OP's email address as someone who was in
> charge of the Class 47 Locomotive Group, who never gave me much confidence
> in their attempts to preserve 47087, 47306 or 47635,


Perhaps, but assuming the connection with 8f 48773 and the SVR is
correct there is a lot more credibility than you suggest.

"Tony Polson"  wrote


> I don't know.  But I strongly dislike the over-bright colours, the
> unrealistic trains and the blatant attempts to screw every last penny
> out of the great unwashed hordes and their badly behaved kids.


Even the NRM are at this now, attempting to sell Hornby train products at 
way about the recommended selling price!  OK, so one or two people may be 
willing to pay these exhorbitant prices, but others are coming away feeling 
there is a serious attempt to rip them off.

John.

Chris Tolley wrote:

> James Christie wrote:
>
> > So how would you rather have it?
>
> I think I'd prefer it if preserved railways gave the impression that
> they had been discriminating in their stock acquisitions. Several I
> could (but decline to) name seem to have a real menagerie of coaches and
> wagons filling every available inch of siding.
>


I can think of just one line that used to be like that: the
(Buckfastleigh) Dart Valley line started off trying to reproduce a
1930s GWR branch line as meticulously as possible. Their locos and
stock were exclusively of GW design (although some were built in BR
days) and all of them an appropriate size for a rural branch line. Most
of the services were operated push-pull in the authentic manner. It was
like a sort of full-size Pendon.

Of course they had the advantage that they started out long enough ago
to purchase their equipment directly out of BR service. It was also
unusual in that it was, I think, conceived as a commercial project
directed a by a few people with a strong consistent vision for the
project.

Unfortunately it didn't last: when I visited a few years ago my train
consisted of BR Mk 1's just like on almost every other preserved  line,
and the loco was an industrial tank in fake BR livery.

Andy Kirkham

Tony Polson wrote:

> James Christie  wrote:
>
> >In message , Tony Polson
> > writes
> >>"Rich Mackin"  wrote:
> >>
> >>>None of it filled me with confidence, and I'm uncertain of this ambitious
> >>>new venture. I wish them luck, but Tornado hasn't had an easy ride so far...
> >>
> >>
> >>I wonder if anyone will *ever* ride on or behind "Tornado".
> >>
> >>
> >I can't see why not. If last months Steam Railway was anything to go by.
> >Construction of the last two big components, the Boiler and Tender has
> >just started.
>
>
> But the funds to complete them are nowhere near being in place.
>
> The group behind "Tornado" are very adept at PR.  Publicity is always
> positive, and no mention is ever made of the fact that the project is
> running years behind schedule with contributions having slowed to a
> trickle.
>
> I hope "Tornado" does get finished.  However, there must now be a
> significant possibility that it will not, because of people's natural
> reluctance to fund a project that is making such slow progress.


The tender is sponsored by the firm building it; and I doubt the boiler
manufacturer would have started work if they did not have confidence
that the trust can come up with the money.  With these major contracts
in place the fundraising for the remaining 300k or so may well regain
momentum - they have previously raised well over a million.

Delays and slow progress have always been characteristics of the
railway preservation movement; not surprising when you rely mainly on
private subscriptions and volunteer commitment.  But so many 'long
delayed' projects have eventually reached completion so there is no
reason why this one shouldn't.

I have no connection with the A1 Trust and do not intend to contribute
- my interests lie elsewhere; but I think they have done well and will
succeed.

"Chippy"  wrote:


>Tony Polson wrote:
>>
>> "Almost there" doesn't exactly square with "385,000 to finish her
>> off", given the very slow rate at which funds have been raised so far.
>> By the time "Tornado" is finished, it will probably be very difficult
>> to fill main line steam specials with paying passengers.
>>
>> But when it comes to spin, the "Tornado" people do take some beating.
>> You would almost think the project was on time rather than years late.
>
>I read an online copy of their latest newsletter.  This includes
>information on the oil-firing/coal-firing alternatives:
>
>"The capital demands of oil firing combined with the
>likely demands of these financial institutions mean that Tornado will
>be initially
>coal fired but oil-ready; oil firing will be reconsidered at the first
>10 year
>overhaul. Oil-firing equipment would increase build cost by over
>400,000.
>Certification of a boiler designed for coal firing is straightforward
>with no
>research and development costs. On the other hand, though the
>oil-firing
>principle was accepted, it was not fully proven in the UK. The
>significant rise in
>oil prices now made it more expensive per mile than coal. Longer term
>savings
>using oil were lower than first thought due to the UK certification and
>insurance
>environment.
>Higher coal operating costs, on a locomotive so designed, could be
>limited.
>Coal meant a larger support crew - ideally 4 for longer jobs (2 if oil
>fired).
>Summertime coal-firing demanded spark arresters and a disciplined crew.
>A coal
>quality/handling issue was identification of a regular, reliable supply
>network, and
>an understanding that you get what you pay for! Potential annual use -
>subject to
>finding the jobs - was 35+ runs with coal (60+ with oil)."
>
>So, to fit oil-firing would more than double the amount of money
>needed, but not to do so reduces the theoretical number of trips per
>year from 60+ to 35+.
>
>I'd personally prefer to see a coal-fired loco, but it seems overly
>sanguine to blandly state that the potential usage can be almost
>halved.
>
>The report continues:
>
>"At higher oil prices, projected reserves and cashflow for oil firing
>showed
>losses in 6 of the first 10 years with minimal surpluses in other
>years. Thereafter,
>surpluses were expected to rise significantly. A coal projection showed
>a surplus
>every year - small in the first 4 years and lower in total over 15
>years.
>Commercial funding terms disallow the oil firing business case. Coal is
>now the
>only viable first option. Our strategy, therefore, was to achieve a
>fully subscribed
>Bond and a smaller loan with the prospect that, if the Bond was a
>successful,
>Tornado could be steamed in 2007 and on the main line in 2008!!"
>
>Is it just me, or does all this sound strangely barmy?  The 35 trips
>coal-fired, and 60 if oil-fired sound absolutely crackpot estimates,
>especially as these figures are supposed to be sustained over the first
>10 years.



Unfortunately, an awful lot of the publicity emanating from the
Tornado group is suspect, and this example is not out of kilter with
the rest.  

It sounds like bullshit, pure and simple.

"Andy Kirkham"  wrote:

>I can think of just one line that used to be like that: the
>(Buckfastleigh) Dart Valley line started off trying to reproduce a
>1930s GWR branch line as meticulously as possible. Their locos and
>stock were exclusively of GW design (although some were built in BR
>days) and all of them an appropriate size for a rural branch line. Most
>of the services were operated push-pull in the authentic manner. It was
>like a sort of full-size Pendon.
>
>Of course they had the advantage that they started out long enough ago
>to purchase their equipment directly out of BR service. It was also
>unusual in that it was, I think, conceived as a commercial project
>directed a by a few people with a strong consistent vision for the
>project.
>
>Unfortunately it didn't last: when I visited a few years ago my train
>consisted of BR Mk 1's just like on almost every other preserved  line,
>and the loco was an industrial tank in fake BR livery.



That was my favourite line.  I volunteered there in the 1970s and
invested in the share issue.

It was purchased as a recently-closed ex-GWR branch.  The share issue
ensured that plenty of ex-GWR locos and rolling stock could be
purchased, and most of them were in good working order.  The branch
included two extremely picturesque stations - Ashburton and Staverton
Bridge - and the priceless connection to BR at Totnes.

Unfortunately, even before the line re-opened, the building of the new
A38 trunk road cut the line short to Ashburton, leaving the dull and
unremarkable Buckfastleigh station as the terminus of a much shorter
line than had been hoped for.  

Later, the opportunity arose to lease the Paignton-Kingswear line and
it was grasped with enthusiasm, with the Dart Valley Railway Company
Limited taking the best of the locos and rolling stock, leaving the
original Dart Valley line in limbo and alienating many enthusiasts in
the process.  I rode on the Paignton-Kingswear line just last week,
and I was disappointed to see it had turned into the kind of
Technicolor pastiche that I wrote about earlier in the thread.  

The original Dart Valley line has become just another poor relation,
with a miscellany of locos and rolling stock that is only loosely
related to the Great Western Railway branch line that we all wanted to
see running.  There are already too many preserved lines like this.

I suspect this is partly because some volunteers find it difficult to
work with others, become disaffected and leave the more established
preserved railways to set up something that reflects their more
amateurish approach.  Examples I have visited include the Cholsey and
Wallingford, the Swindon and Cricklade and Embsay railways.  

I think they are all something of a waste of time because they serve
only to dilute the available volunteers (and customers) at the more
professionally run railways.  

It is sad that the Dart Valley has been allowed to slip into this
lower category as a result of the Paignton-Kingswear line becoming
available.  I don't blame the DVR company - if they hadn't taken on
the lease, another group would, and either way, the original Dart
Valley line would have suffered.

In case anyone thinks that I don't like *any* preserved railways,
because they all fall into either of the two camps I have criticised,
there is a third category, of preserved railways that are well run and
still evoke the atmosphere of BR steam to an extent.  They include the
Keighley and Worth Valley, North Yorkshire Moors, Severn Valley,
Llangollen and Bluebell railways, plus the truly wonderful Talyllyn,
which is my all-time favourite.  I also admire the Romney, Hythe and
Dymchurch, but hesitate to call it "preserved".

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 20:17:38 +0100, Tony   Polson 
wrote:


>which is my all-time favourite.  I also admire the Romney, Hythe and
>Dymchurch, but hesitate to call it "preserved".


Is the Paignton line "prerserved" as such? On my two or three visits I
got the impression it is a private railway which uses steam to bring
in customers, rather than any attempt at representing history. ISTR
getting the impresion there was a "we've got your money, there's the
loco going choo choo, now clear off out the way" atmosphere.

-- 
Arthur Figgis                Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote


> Is the Paignton line "prerserved" as such? On my two or three visits I
> got the impression it is a private railway which uses steam to bring
> in customers, rather than any attempt at representing history. ISTR
> getting the impresion there was a "we've got your money, there's the
> loco going choo choo, now clear off out the way" atmosphere.


I got the feeling that the Ffestiniog was much the same, run purely as a 
business and without much soul.  The Tal-y-llyn on the other hand is a much 
nicer, friendlier place and is much recommended.  Just a shame that it's so 
far from Hull where I live - it's the only railway where I'd consider 
working as a volunteer.

John.

Arthur Figgis  wrote:


>On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 20:17:38 +0100, Tony   Polson 
>wrote:
>
>>which is my all-time favourite.  I also admire the Romney, Hythe and
>>Dymchurch, but hesitate to call it "preserved".
>
>Is the Paignton line "prerserved" as such? On my two or three visits I
>got the impression it is a private railway which uses steam to bring
>in customers, rather than any attempt at representing history. ISTR
>getting the impresion there was a "we've got your money, there's the
>loco going choo choo, now clear off out the way" atmosphere.



I tend to agree.  However, I think the epithet "preserved" is probably
justified, because they use ex-GWR locos on an ex-GWR line, with
stations and rolling stock in GWR livery.

8f48773 wrote:


> Fund aims to build a Riddles Class 3 2-6-2 tank ... we believe that
> this is the only way to assure a future for working steam in this
> country.


Are plans also in hand to build some new chimneys. on the basis that you
can send children up them and so assure a future for former working
practices?

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p15036440.html
(43 023 at Reading, 6 Apr 1985)

In article ,
   Tony   Polson  wrote:

> "Chippy"  wrote:
> >
> >The whole thing is an obvious non-starter, an impression that is
> >reinforced by a website so sub-literate as to give the impression that
> >it was typed by an infinite number of monkeys.

> I think you meant a (very) finite number of monkeys, as an infinite
> number would surely have achieved something that appeared at least
> slightly intelligent at some point in the process. 

> I suggest that the site is aimed at those lower down the scale of
> intelligence, because you would need to be pretty daft to support such
> an ill-conceived idea.


Setting aside your disdain for the website, I'm just wondering why you
should think it an ill-conceived an idea, in view of the current shortage
of suitable and economical Class 2/3 motive power for use on heritage
lines ?   There are quite a few pople in the heritage railway business who
think that a small batch production of the right prototype (ie smallish
tank engine) could be an economic proposition. It would certainly be a lot
more viable than yet another pacific which would see relatively little use
and be very expensive to run. There is already evidence that the main line
steam market is close to saturation, and there is no real business case
for large engines on most preserved lines (occasional special events/galas
excepted), as they do not generally attract more paying customers to
compensate for the higher cost.

David

John Turner wrote:

> "gwr4090"  wrote
>
> > Setting aside your disdain for the website, I'm just wondering why you
> > should think it an ill-conceived an idea, in view of the current shortage
> > of suitable and economical Class 2/3 motive power for use on heritage
> > lines ?
>
> Eh?  I don't follow the logic here, there are numerous small diesel
> locomotives which have been withdrawn from the national network over the
> last twenty years or so which are sitting around idle for most of the time.
>
> All of these have far more relevence to kids of today, and restoration of
> some of these would be much more viable than attempting to build some new
> steam locos to which most of the younger generation will not be able to
> relate and will not have the novelty of being historic artifacts for the
> older enthusiasts.
>
> I don't know whether you've noticed that diesel days on many preserved
> railways attract enormous interest and numbers of enthusiasts, and that
> suggests heritage diesel traction is the way forward.


But from what I understand,  the main market for heritage railways is
not enthusists but Mum, Dad and the kids looking for a entertaining day
out. These people mostly can't tell the difference between a Class 46
and a Class 66, but they can tell the difference between a diesel and a
steam loco. Diesel means modern and mundane; steam, means "yesteryear"
and romance. Just because an era is beyond living memory doesn't mean
people lose interest in it; otherwise the National Trust would have
folded long ago.

Andy Kirkham

John Turner wrote:

"If you can't fill
 seats with steam haulage on the mainline, why should it be any
different on
 the preserved railways?"

I think it's very different. A mainline steam run is likely to be much
more expensive than a trip on a heritage line, and financially out of
the question for a family group. And unless you spend most of the time
with your head out of the window, the experience of a main-line steam
trip is not all that different to a common-or-garden train journey. On
the other hand, a preserved railway provides a "total heritage
experience" with picturesque stations, semaphore signalling and other
relics, tea shops and souvenirs.

Andy Kirkham

1501 wrote:


>> Are plans also in hand to build some new chimneys.
> 
> Copper capped ones?


You can put coppers on top if you like, but the classier chimneys always
got sovereigns... ;-)
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857147.html
(66 092 at Basford Hall, 11 Mar 2005)

> But from what I understand,  the main market for heritage railways is
> not enthusists but Mum, Dad and the kids looking for a entertaining day
> out.


Andy.

Indeed, your understanding is absolutely correct. The occasional
paraffin burner is OK but all the while would be a big turn off for the
avaerage heritage line visitor.

> It would certainly be a lot
> more viable than yet another pacific which would see relatively little use
> and be very expensive to run. There is already evidence that the main line
> steam market is close to saturation, and there is no real business case
> for large engines on most preserved lines (occasional special events/galas
> excepted), as they do not generally attract more paying customers to
> compensate for the higher cost.


Indeed. There is growing evidence that mainline steam railtours are
rapidly becoming a rich man's indulgence rather than a commercially
viable proposition.

Circa £15K to fit TPWS then the cost of servicing it along with the
loco for how many trips per year.

Hardly worth it.

> Comments which apply equally to diesel railtours using heritage traction.
> Companies like EWS can use creative accounting to hide the true costs of the
> operation and can offer bog-standard traction at knock-down prices. The
> private locomotive owner has no such luxury available. We've already seen
> private operators go to the wall as a result of being unable to be
> competitive and unable (not allowed?) to compete on a level playing field.


True.

But now to try to get back a little near to on topic.

I don't recall any group trying to receate a lost diesel class.

Anyone fancy a got at a Baby Deltic or some such? At least a BR Std
class 3 is achievable and there would be plenty of work for it.

Nah! IIRC the only BR Std with a fancy chimbley was 92220. The rest
were all iron including BR Std class 3.

Andy Kirkham wrote:


> But from what I understand,  the main market for heritage railways is
> not enthusists but Mum, Dad and the kids looking for a entertaining day
> out. These people mostly can't tell the difference between a Class 46
> and a Class 66, but they can tell the difference between a diesel and a
> steam loco.


The truth of this is borne out by the general failure of most heritage
diesel-hauled trains to find much support.  If you recall the fuss that
was made in the 1980s about how 'unfair' it was that steam was allowed
on the mainline but preserved diesels were not, and then consider how
many (or how few) diesel specials have run, the truth of the argument
becomes obvious.  Could anyone really see, for example, a 'Jacobite'
type operation with diesels succeeding?


>  Diesel means modern and mundane; steam, means "yesteryear"
> and romance. Just because an era is beyond living memory doesn't mean
> people lose interest in it; otherwise the National Trust would have
> folded long ago.

"Chippy"  wrote in message
news:1124805099.960247.13580@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
> The truth of this is borne out by the general failure of most heritage
> diesel-hauled trains to find much support.  If you recall the fuss that
> was made in the 1980s about how 'unfair' it was that steam was allowed
> on the mainline but preserved diesels were not, and then consider how
> many (or how few) diesel specials have run, the truth of the argument
> becomes obvious.  Could anyone really see, for example, a 'Jacobite'
> type operation with diesels succeeding?


Hertfordshire Rail Tours had the mix right several years ago. An interesting
destination with a decent layover, to attract the Mums and Dads and kids (or
the bucket-and-spade brigade) for a day out, a full-dining option for the
well-heeled and then put a heritage diesel on the front to top-up with
cranks. A guaranteed sell out. Pathfinder are doing a similar thing with
many of their tours now, e.g. The Eden Belle's utilising the Fifty Fund's
Class 50s.

The only diesel heritage operations that don't generally sell out are those
who pander solely to the crank market and forget the daytrippers. Many
enthusiasts now have families and want to take the wife and kids, who will
not be prepared to pay for a day out which involves an hour at the
destination watching the loco run round and the stock being watered!

Chippy wrote:


> The truth of this is borne out by the general failure of most heritage
> diesel-hauled trains to find much support.  If you recall the fuss that
> was made in the 1980s about how 'unfair' it was that steam was allowed
> on the mainline but preserved diesels were not, and then consider how
> many (or how few) diesel specials have run, the truth of the argument
> becomes obvious.  Could anyone really see, for example, a 'Jacobite'
> type operation with diesels succeeding?


No - and yet the odd thing is that the only real sight most passengers
get of the steam loco is when the train comes into the platform. They
could have as much fun with just a platform ticket.

Charlie

"1501"  wrote in message 
news:1124810735.033772.152780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

>> > Perhaps, but assuming the connection with 8f 48773 and the SVR is
>> > correct there is a lot more credibility than you suggest.
>>
>> I doubt it.
>
> I'm unsure of what you mean. Do you have reservations about the 48773
> group and the SVR?
>
> Or do you have doubts about the group of diesel preservationists?


You're quoting me out of context there. The full sentence being: "Given that 
the Class 47 Loco Group later became the 'Surzler[sic] Type 4 Group', I 
doubt it."

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

> You're quoting me out of context there.


Rich

I'm sorry, I'm still unclear about which group you have reservations
about.

I was seeking clarification but I believe both the 48773 group and the
SVR are pretty dependable. But I also know some of those involved with
the 82045 project are also involved with one or more of the other
organisations mentioned. Hence my confusion.

The InterCity wrote:

> A new build of a British Railways Standard Class which no longer exists
> is certainly an interesting concept. I am curious as to why not one of
> 2-6-2 Class 3 tanks survived into preservation, but a number of its
> counterparts did, particularly the popular 2-6-4 Standard Tank. Perhaps
> the Class 3 locomotives never made it to Barry scrap yard, but instead
> were dispatched to other scrapping merchants whom were not so engine
> friendly!
>


I think that's exactly it. I don't think any 82XXX's went to Barry.  I
would love to see a replica in service; as well as being very  handsome
engines in my opinion, they are also the only standard tanks that could
legitimately carry green livery. However I've heard they were not very
good performers; I wonder if a replica could be tweaked to improve on
the original.

Andy Kirkham

The message <defe00$1f4k$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>
from Charlie Hulme  contains these words:


> the odd thing is that the only real sight most passengers
> get of the steam loco is when the train comes into the platform. They
> could have as much fun with just a platform ticket.


The SLOA trips of the 80s with their photo run-pasts had the best of
both worlds: being on the train - windows wide open obviously - and
enjoying the sound of the loco working hard* (or not!), and being at the
lineside with camera gripped firmly in hand.  It wasn't essential to
leave the train at the run-pasts, and wives and children could remain on
board.  Lots of orange tape kept the photters from the running lines,
and the whole thing was well organised.  I suspect that today's HSE
would have a fit at the thought of a train-load of enthusiasts walking
across the running lines to take up their places at the lineside...

*On a Chester Chuffer a couple of years ago I was asked to close the
window just as Taw Valley attacked the first part of Gresford bank
because the draught was disturbing the bloke's wife's hair!  The request
was politely refused.  

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

David Jackson wrote:


> *On a Chester Chuffer a couple of years ago I was asked to close the
> window just as Taw Valley attacked the first part of Gresford bank
> because the draught was disturbing the bloke's wife's hair!  The request
> was politely refused.  
> 


John Prescott and hs wife travel on steam specials??

Charlie