Wensleydale Railway ‘clear out’

[47434]

Taking more than one pacer strikes me as great thinking by WR - for both spares but also having at least one spare unit as a rescue train which is the safest way should one fail.

 

[Nym]

Im pretty sure they'd have invested in a BSI Coupler Adaptor.

 

[47434]

Im pretty sure they'd have invested in a BSI Coupler Adaptor.

They may well have done - except you have to then de-train the passengers so rescue with another unit is far better all round

 

[43096]

I have known of issues with "private owner" locos being at sites and then due to corrosion exposing asbestos which then became an issue for the site owners, and required some cajoling to get this removed with the threat that the loco would have to leave if this wasn't done. I don't know how easy that is to do if say work has commenced and means a loco must be moved by crane rather than shunted.

Personally, if I ran/owned my own site I would be very careful with any private owner locos/stock, unless there was evidence of funding available for the work, or the owners had a good track record of restoration, maintenance and site etiquette. Just having conditions for working on site including basic HSE compliance may put some people off working there, and they forget that although it's their engine, legallly the railway that are working at has liability for their safety.

But if items are to be stored awaiting restoration with active fund raising ongoing, then a tin of paint every so often does go a long way to stopping the rot on open wagons, and a tarpaulin (or two) can prevent further ingress of water to carriages or engines. I admit, this does all involve some money, but wire brushing and generally cleaning up is free, so as long as there isn't access to do it, then there is no excuse for not doing it.

My personal bug bear is storing rust hulks on the second line which means that a) the public are exposed to it every trip and b) it prevents work as you are now on the running line, which causes a clash at say weekends when the owner says may have time to get out, but can't get access. That does just exacerbate the issue, and eventually these items will be beyond saving.

Of course if money was no object I'd build a new site with either a US style round house with individual sheds for overhauls, or a Crewe style system with a traverser, with each side of the traverser leading to an open area and then a shed, which would be secure and lockable with metered supplies. Locos etc. could be overhauled, brought out for startup/steaming etc. and rents payable along with services used.

I feel however it may need a big site, and somewhere to store items that the owner's default payments on... but it would clear up a lot of the heritage sites, which in turn may increase demand for engines, which may mean some of these projects do actually get completed.

Or of course my fantasy site just gets filled up with rusty hulks that the owners walk away from and I need to work out how to get a 9F (other engines are sadly available all too readily) with no wheels
out of a shed.....

The railways need to be far more commercially astute, with tighter agreements in place with loco and stock owners. These need to cover things such as restoration plans, funding, availability of people (volunteers) to do the work and timescales. Ultimately, they should be prepared to evict owners who aren't doing what's in their contracts. There is far too much junk around at almost every preserved railway - hopefully more will follow the Wensleydale Railway's lead.

 

[Cowley]

Re the asbestos issue - Isn’t that one of the problems preventing anything being done with our old friend 45015?
I seem to remember that there’s asbestos in certain areas (the boiler room possibly?) and that the cost of removal comes to more than the scrap value of the locomotive.
In many ways that loco is the archetypal case study in all of this.

 

[CarltonA]

Re the asbestos issue - Isn’t that one of the problems preventing anything being done with our old friend 45015?
I seem to remember that there’s asbestos in certain areas (the boiler room possibly?) and that the cost of removal comes to more than the scrap value of the locomotive.
In many ways that loco is the archetypal case study in all of this.

A Chernobyl style cocoon may be the answer there.

 

[paul1609]

Yes the relentless obsession of buying these for preservation....More will end up preserved than scrapped at this rate. I think some railways have more unrestored wagons and coaches than locomotives many of which won't run again and are unsightly.

Theres a relatively recent precedent with this in the form of Thumpers. At the K & ESR we were inundated with enquiries from people who wanted to bring a DEMU to our line. Just over 15 years later I wonder how many of them are still serviceable.

 

[Titfield]

The railways need to be far more commercially astute, with tighter agreements in place with loco and stock owners. These need to cover things such as restoration plans, funding, availability of people (volunteers) to do the work and timescales. Ultimately, they should be prepared to evict owners who aren't doing what's in their contracts. There is far too much junk around at almost every preserved railway - hopefully more will follow the Wensleydale Railway's lead.

One of the problems about being "commercially astute" (and thus enforcing contracts) is that it risks alienating "friends of the railway" and "volunteers" who often see heritage railways as not needing a commercial mindset indeed often believing that being commercial puts off volunteers.

As I have said previously the vast majority of visitors are not "enthusiasts" but simply see a visit to a heritage railway as a day out. HRs are competing with other attractions some obvious competitors some not so. If HRs do not deliver a "grand day out" then they risk seeing patronage decline. There are many ingredients to a grand day out but large amounts of derelict rolling stock do not add to the hr ambience that most if not all come to enjoy.

 

[alexl92]

Yes the relentless obsession of buying these for preservation....More will end up preserved than scrapped at this rate. I think some railways have more unrestored wagons and coaches than locomotives many of which won't run again and are unsightly.

I expect quite a few of them will be run on quieter services until they develop some major fault, sit in a siding for a few years then get sent to the scrapyard!

The supply of Pacers probably means that you could pick the best one or two and cannibalise the rest for spare parts.

I suspect this is it. The pacers are arriving largely ready for service, they're cheap to operate, sinple enough to maintain. If they can be used on off-peak days to generate some cash at a greater profit margin than running a loco-hauled diesel service then great. However I do think we'll see a fair few end up as christmas trees or in the scrap heap.

 

[Flying Phil]

There are many good points being made and I suspect the question is really getting the right balance. If the HR is tidied up too much it can lose supporters who help keep the railway running. It is not just the enthusiasts who appreciate seeing the variety of rolling stock that may inhabit some of the sidings. I do totally agree that even non running stock should look cared for with a tin of paint or a cover. It must be remembered that an old wagon for spares is a lot cheaper than having to make or buy a significant new part. I speak as a Windcutter worker with grey paint on my overalls!

 

[Titfield]

There are many good points being made and I suspect the question is really getting the right balance. If the HR is tidied up too much it can lose supporters who help keep the railway running. It is not just the enthusiasts who appreciate seeing the variety of rolling stock that may inhabit some of the sidings. I do totally agree that even non running stock should look cared for with a tin of paint or a cover. It must be remembered that an old wagon for spares is a lot cheaper than having to make or buy a significant new part. I speak as a Windcutter worker with grey paint on my overalls!

There is a bit of irony in that covering a wagon or other piece of rolling stock may make it look cared for (and help protect it) but then of course no one can see what it is! Perhaps if HRs were better at communications they would explain to visitors what the rolling stock stored is and what the plans for it are.

 

[Flying Phil]

Good point Titfield!
I was pleased to see that the GCR had put a variety of wagons on show in Quorn yard with description display panels for visitors to socially distance and look around, whilst waiting to board the trains this year. They have also encased about 16 coaches with custom green covers.

 

[JKF]

It would be nice if some railways could have a small branch line or sidings beyond the passenger section of the line for their linear scrapyards. Somewhere out of sight but still available for restoration work to take place.

Bitton & MRC both seem quite bad for having a lot of dead stock hanging about, I’m quite happy to see it but don’t know what the paying public think.

 

[alexl92]

It would be nice if some railways could have a small branch line or sidings beyond the passenger section of the line for their linear scrapyards. Somewhere out of sight but still available for restoration work to take place.

Bitton & MRC both seem quite bad for having a lot of dead stock hanging about, I’m quite happy to see it but don’t know what the paying public think.

Not a bad shout really but I suppose space is the issue. The Middleton Railway have the Dartmouth branch which used to lead to a yard, half way along their line and way out of public sight but I can't imagine there are many others that have a branch available like that.

Like you, I love to see it, but I can fully understand the position of those who don't!

 

[Titfield]

Swanage has the sidings of the line north of Norden (towards Wareham): Cripple Creek is one where stock awaiting restoration is stored. The challenge is that it is in the open with no easy access or utilities.

 

[JKF]

Not a bad shout really but I suppose space is the issue. The Middleton Railway have the Dartmouth branch which used to lead to a yard, half way along their line and way out of public sight but I can't imagine there are many others that have a branch available like that.

Like you, I love to see it, but I can fully understand the position of those who don't!

Yes, it’s a bit of a luxury if you can! The ELR has a set-up a bit like this, where a lot of their stock lives south of the station in Bury, so not visible when travelling north from Bolton St. Also maybe the Bluebell, with redundant stock stored along the stub of the Ardingley Branch, although I think they have some more stored elsewhere.

 

[bramling]

Theres a relatively recent precedent with this in the form of Thumpers. At the K & ESR we were inundated with enquiries from people who wanted to bring a DEMU to our line. Just over 15 years later I wonder how many of them are still serviceable.

To be fair, I think it’s only the East Lancs 207 and two out of three Dartmoor 205s which have fallen by the wayside.

Unless I’m out of date everything else is a runner to at least some extent.

The Thumpers did well, but it’s a shame they’re not that well represented on some of the “premier” lines.

 

[A0wen]

To be fair, I think it’s only the East Lancs 207 and two out of three Dartmoor 205s which have fallen by the wayside.

Unless I’m out of date everything else is a runner to at least some extent.

The Thumpers did well, but it’s a shame they’re not that well represented on some of the “premier” lines.

TBF to the ELR, the problem is they started work on the 207 and then found the dreaded asbestos, hence work stopped.

The ELR has a pretty good track record of getting things restored and into service. Asbestos does seem to be the thing which kills various restoration / preservation schemes.

The problem with them not being represented on the "Premier Lines" by which I guess you mean the likes of the Great Central, West Somerset, North Yorks Moors or Great Central, is they really are of limited interest. They weren't seen or used outside the Southern area and by the time they were being retired those lines had obtained first gen DMUs which met the demand for an 'off peak' unit and, by and large, was appropriate to their area - given most of the main DMU classes worked across large areas of the UK.

 

[tbtc]

I hope that this thread gets read by the kind of people who suggest that we preserve several of every type of stock (there was one thread - I think on here - where someone wanted about a dozen different 91s preserved because they all had some mild claim to fame!)

It's relatively cheap to buy an old locomotive (or bus etc - this isn't just a railway problem) but the costs of maintaining it slowly rise as the enthusiasm slowly drops off (and after a few years, replacement parts require non-standard/ obsolete items, rather than something still in plentiful supply as sister vehicles are taken out of service)

So, yay, things get preserved rather than scrapped, but end up just sitting, slowly rusting. It's bad enough with buses sat in the corner of a yard but when it happened to an unloved locomotive it means that it can be sitting on a section of track in the way of other trains (that are now unable to get out)

 

[DarloRich]

The Thumpers did well, but it’s a shame they’re not that well represented on some of the “premier” lines.

The problem with them not being represented on the "Premier Lines" by which I guess you mean the likes of the Great Central, West Somerset, North Yorks Moors or Great Central, is they really are of limited interest.

IRC - there was a Thumper at the NYMR for a bit. I don't think it really fit in! They do ( or did ) like their 101 unit mind.

It would be nice if some railways could have a small branch line or sidings beyond the passenger section of the line for their linear scrapyards.

Nicer if they had covered accommodation and active owning groups!

 

[Titfield]

I hope that this thread gets read by the kind of people who suggest that we preserve several of every type of stock (there was one thread - I think on here - where someone wanted about a dozen different 91s preserved because they all had some mild claim to fame!)

It's relatively cheap to buy an old locomotive (or bus etc - this isn't just a railway problem) but the costs of maintaining it slowly rise as the enthusiasm slowly drops off (and after a few years, replacement parts require non-standard/ obsolete items, rather than something still in plentiful supply as sister vehicles are taken out of service)

So, yay, things get preserved rather than scrapped, but end up just sitting, slowly rusting. It's bad enough with buses sat in the corner of a yard but when it happened to an unloved locomotive it means that it can be sitting on a section of track in the way of other trains (that are now unable to get out)

Excellent points. Sadly all that is often achieved is delaying the visit to the breakers yard. Not withstanding individuals personal wishes, the same combined effort spread over a smaller number of preserved rolling stock would have a better outcome.

 

[A0wen]

IRC - there was a Thumper at the NYMR for a bit. I don't think it really fit in! They do ( or did ) like their 101 unit mind.

Yes, looks like 205205 was based there, now on the Epping & Ongar railway, which seems more appropriate given it operated into London for many years to end up on the only standard gauge heritage railway in the London area.

 

[DustyBin]

Yes, looks like 205205 was based there, now on the Epping & Ongar railway, which seems more appropriate given it operated into London for many years to end up on the only standard gauge heritage railway in the London area.

It was indeed 205205, it’s the heavily refurbished one with the gangway connections etc. As you say it now lives on the Epping Ongar railway and looks to be well cared for. Having said that does anybody know if it’s operational? It was undergoing heavy engine repairs a couple of years ago but I’ve never actually seen it in service.

 

[EbbwJunction1]

It was indeed 205205, it’s the heavily refurbished one with the gangway connections etc. As you say it now lives on the Epping Ongar railway and looks to be well cared for. Having said that does anybody know if it’s operational? It was undergoing heavy engine repairs a couple of years ago but I’ve never actually seen it in service.

According to their web site, it's not operational at the moment: "At the end of 2016 the unit was sidelined following discovery of an issue with the camshaft. Subsequent repairs saw the unit move under its own power again in late 2019. However, it is currently awaiting bodywork repairs."

 

[DustyBin]

According to their web site, it's not operational at the moment: "At the end of 2016 the unit was sidelined following discovery of an issue with the camshaft. Subsequent repairs saw the unit move under its own power again in late 2019. However, it is currently awaiting bodywork repairs."

Thanks, I hadn’t checked the website for ages, nice to see they’ve updated it and hopefully the bodywork repairs go ahead!

 

[Nym]

According to their web site, it's not operational at the moment: "At the end of 2016 the unit was sidelined following discovery of an issue with the camshaft. Subsequent repairs saw the unit move under its own power again in late 2019. However, it is currently awaiting bodywork repairs."

A DMU camshaft put something out of service for 3 years?????

Perhaps an approach is needed as to what degree of preservation is wanted.
If it just needs to look the same, fit a modern generator?

 

[EbbwJunction1]

A DMU camshaft put something out of service for 3 years?????

Perhaps an approach is needed as to what degree of preservation is wanted.
If it just needs to look the same, fit a modern generator?

On the basis that I don't know what a camshaft is, never mind what it does, I can't offer any opinion on this!

 

[Cowley]

On the basis that I don't know what a camshaft is, never mind what it does, I can't offer any opinion on this!

The camshaft has lobes on it and as a general rule is driven off a chain from the main crank shaft in the engine. Those lobes are connected via cam followers (and possibly pushrods) to the valves in the engine heads. A faulty cam shaft is a reasonably big job to do as it involves stripping down the top of the engine and obviously acquiring the parts to repair it.
If a cam shaft goes out of phase it can cause damage to the tops of the pistons as the valves start hitting them. That’s why when a timing belt snaps on a car it usually wrecks the engine in a very noisy and expensive way.

 

[DustyBin]

A DMU camshaft put something out of service for 3 years?????

Perhaps an approach is needed as to what degree of preservation is wanted.
If it just needs to look the same, fit a modern generator?

Don't forget it's not a common Leyland or AEC engine, I don't know how readily available parts are for the EE 4SRKT? I suspect it was a case of waiting it's turn as much as anything.

If you fitted a modern generator you'd lose the disctinctive sound that these units are known for, plus I can't imagine it being a cheap solution!

The camshaft has lobes on it and as a general rule is driven off a chain from the main crank shaft in the engine. Those lobes are connected via cam followers (and possibly pushrods) to the valves in the engine heads. A faulty cam shaft is a reasonably big job to do as it involves stripping down the top of the engine and obviously acquiring the parts to repair it.
If a cam shaft goes out of phase it can cause damage to the tops of the pistons as the valves start hitting them. That’s why when a timing belt snaps on a car it usually wrecks the engine in a very noisy and expensive way.

Correct, although the valves generally come off worse.

 

[EbbwJunction1]

Thank you for the education; I'll know what to say when someone asks me next time!