Mainline Steam

[TDK]

But a Class 66 or 67 without contingency which can (and has in the past) caused considerable delay would be fine then?

Steam vs Diesel sorry fella - I should rewrite it to "any railtours without a contingency plan" Sorry to up set you steam fanatics but to me a train is a train
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even older diesels normally have two locomotives at the head (or top & tail) nowadays for backup, never mind steam. Rare to see class 31s, 37s, 47s or 56s to go out on their own nowadays. Even 56s, which are "relatively" recent compared to most other traction, had to have two locomotives on the DCR scrap trains from Peak Forest, to cover the chance of a failure. Christ knows why they let much, much older kettles run without any backup locomotive.

Because the organisers are incompetent at their jobs obviously or they are looking at profit over minimising risk/cost! Who knows Bev but if someone somewhere doesn't address it the railtour business will be defunct in a few years.

 

[Dave1987]

Ive read recently that the delay minutes caused by a railtour failure won't be capped in future so the railtour company will be liable for the full cost of the delay minutes. So could make all railtours prohibitively expensive to run in future.

 

[Tomnick]

Steam vs Diesel sorry fella - I should rewrite it to "any railtours without a contingency plan" Sorry to up set you steam fanatics but to me a train is a train

I'd go further and consider "any train without a contingency plan". I don't know how a railtour with a pair of 37s at the front is considered more likely to expire than a track recording train with a single 37, for example, for starters. Either way, all sorts of trains fail in all sorts of places, and this was just another one - the problem here seems to have been the slow response in arranging assistance, which would have affected a 66-hauled freight as much as it affected the kettle on the charter.

Because the organisers are incompetent at their jobs obviously or they are looking at profit over minimising risk/cost!

Two things - 'organiser' isn't necessarily the same as 'operator', and surely minimising cost and maximising profit go hand in hand rather than being conflicting aims?!

 

[theblackwatch]

I'd go further and consider "any train without a contingency plan". I don't know how a railtour with a pair of 37s at the front is considered more likely to expire than a track recording train with a single 37, for example, for starters. Either way, all sorts of trains fail in all sorts of places, and this was just another one - the problem here seems to have been the slow response in arranging assistance, which would have affected a 66-hauled freight as much as it affected the kettle on the charter.

Two things - 'organiser' isn't necessarily the same as 'operator', and surely minimising cost and maximising profit go hand in hand rather than being conflicting aims?!

A lot of people seem to be unable to differentiate or get confused between an organiser/promoter (ie Steam Dreams in the case of this tour) and an operator (DB Schenker in this instance) and seem to want to blame the first of these for what is the responsibility of the second.

You are quite right in your example of the Class 37, but there is one difference - if it were a track recording train, it would probably only get a small mention in passing on here, if at all. A charter train however, will generate a lot more interest among railway enthusiasts. Even service train failures won't generate such debate as to whether that type of traction should be banned - nobody suggested it when a Class 150 suffered at locked axle at Horsforth last year (see http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=64515 ), stopping trains running from Harrogate to Leeds for several hours.

 

[Beveridges]

Ive read recently that the delay minutes caused by a railtour failure won't be capped in future so the railtour company will be liable for the full cost of the delay minutes

Uncapped fines? I bet that will make them horrendous!
With railtours it seems they don't go wrong often, but the problem is, when they do go wrong, the disruption they cause is normally very extreme!

If a 150 fails its normally a lot easier to get it out of the way than a kettle or 37 with a load of mk1's!

 

[Dave1987]

Uncapped fines? I bet that will make them horrendous!
With railtours it seems they don't go wrong often, but the problem is, when they do go wrong, the disruption they cause is normally very extreme!

If a 150 fails its normally a lot easier to get it out of the way than a kettle or 37 with a load of mk1's!

From what I read it would effectively mean the end of charters as the risk of failure would make the operating costs prohibitively expensive. Sorry to the enthusiasts but its seems mainline charters days may be numbered.

 

[Beveridges]

It wont just be the end of excursions for rail enthusiasts. Many charters are ran for "granny days out" plus there is also other excursions such as Northern Belle, Boat trains and many others. I am not an expert on such things, but I know that rail enthusiasts only make up a small percentage of the charter market.
It will be disapointing for a lot of people.
Personally I don't do tours myself (no need to) but I do like to observe them passing my depot whenever one is due. I think its just another step towards making the modern railway a more boring and routine monotous place.
Ever since the 1980's the railway has slowly been going this way, from the huge variety that there used to be, to the mundane scene today.




EDIT: 1000th Post! Now an "Established Member"

 

[Dave1987]

It wont just be the end of excursions for rail enthusiasts. Many charters are ran for "granny days out" plus there is also other excursions such as Northern Belle and many others. I am not an expert on such things, but I know that rail enthusiasts only make up a small percentage of the charter market.
It will be disapointing for a lot of people.
Personally I don't do tours myself (no need to) but I do like to observe them passing my depot whenever one is due. I think its just another step towards making the modern railway a more boring and routine monotous place.
Ever since the 1980's the railway has slowly been going this way, from the huge variety that there used to be, to the mundane scene today.

Indeed I agree, without wishing to drag the thread off topic I feel all the modern passenger cares about are luxuries like air con, wifi, power sockets etc and really don't care what the train looks like. Infact I'm sure before long there will be trains that have no windows at all!

But returning to the subject of this thread, with uncapped fines I don't think steam trains would be on the mainline so there would be no mainline steam drivers.

 

[455driver]

Ive read recently that the delay minutes caused by a railtour failure won't be capped in future so the railtour company will be liable for the full cost of the delay minutes. So could make all railtours prohibitively expensive to run in future.

Or more likely to have a diseasel follow the tour "just in case" its needed to assist or even stick the diseasel on the back (preferably painted in some shockingly bright colour scheme for full effect*)!

Thats not a bad idea really.


* only joking about the colour scheme.

 

[Beveridges]

Or more likely to have a diseasel follow the tour "just in case"

Theres more to the word diseasel than you may think. Quite a few have caught diseases from working with diesel units and not using the correct PPE on Maintenance Depot.


But back to the point of your post, yes, they certainly won't be letting Kettles out on their own anymore when uncapped fines come in, thats for sure. That is even if charters survive altogether. There is so much potential for them to cause disruption, even if the locomotive failing is not the cause of it.

 

[TDK]

Theres more to the word diseasel than you may think. Quite a few have caught diseases from working with diesel units and not using the correct PPE on Maintenance Depot.


But back to the point of your post, yes, they certainly won't be letting Kettles out on their own anymore when uncapped fines come in, thats for sure. That is even if charters survive altogether. There is so much potential for them to cause disruption, even if the locomotive failing is not the cause of it.

If that is the case Bev my original post of "the operator is neglegent for not having a contingency plan for failure" is correct. If they have to make their possibility of a failue more robust because it will cost them a lot of money and they carry out such measures then the incident with the train at Rhyl seems that they didn't add a loco to the rear as it would on cost them £5k if it failed vice £105k. I don't have anything against heratage on mainline as long as they play the "minimise risk" game instead of hoping for the best as it will only cost them £5k. So it was us the tax payers who had to foot the bill for the NR fines from the TOC's then?