re-nationalisation.

This forum is for the discussion of all railway subjects that do not include the LNER, and its constituent companies.

Moderators: 52D, Rlangham, Atlantic 3279, Blink Bonny, Saint Johnstoun, richard, Tom F

burnie
NBR J36 0-6-0
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:47 pm

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by burnie » Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:00 pm

We could start building more steam engines and digging for coal, that would both create jobs and entice folk back onto the trains...……………………... :wink:

Seagull
GNSR D40 4-4-0
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: Between a cheap railway station and a ploughed field

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by Seagull » Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:02 am

Mickey wrote:
Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:08 am
I presume the current use of the LNER letters on the ECML are just a marketing ploy.
Much as in 1922.... :)

At least the LMS managed to get Scotland into their name.

Alan
Playing trains, but trying to get serious

Mickey
LNER N2 0-6-2T
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:27 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by Mickey » Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:52 am

Seagull wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:02 am
Mickey wrote:
Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:08 am
I presume the current use of the LNER letters on the ECML are just a marketing ploy.
Much as in 1922.... :)

At least the LMS managed to get Scotland into their name.
I have a liking for the old LNWR/LMS/B.R.(MR).

Re-nationalisation?. British Railways was good during the 1950s-1970s with the regional set up with the LMR ER WR SR & Scottish Region

'Mickey 4500 previous posts'

Mickey
LNER N2 0-6-2T
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:27 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by Mickey » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:27 am

burnie wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:00 pm
We could start building more steam engines and digging for coal, that would both create jobs and entice folk back onto the trains...……………………... :wink:
An excellent idea burnie so if it's a return to this- https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotive ... y-1967.jpg lets re-nationalise ASAP.

A grimy 9F no.92250 moves off the Carlisle Kingmoor turntable in February 1967 during the last full year of steam at Kingmoor.

User avatar
brsince78
GNSR D40 4-4-0
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 11:27 pm

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by brsince78 » Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:03 pm

I think what is needed is a change in structure not ownership. Vertical integration or why not even BR PLC...… The obvious argument against this I that it would create a monopoly. But a monopoly of what? Rail travel is one of many modes of travel.

Mickey
LNER N2 0-6-2T
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:27 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by Mickey » Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:46 am

From memory the first two or three years in the aftermath of privatisation was a funny time being on the job as the old established ways and practices of working the job were by and large swept away by an influx of new non-railway minded management and staff recruited 'off the street' after many staff who had come on the railways during the 1950s & 1960s finished up and left. Out on the track it all became a bit like the 'wild west' out there where once B.R. p.way men would attend to track maintenance overnight the same men worked for contractors who also subcontracted work out to non-railway people. The railway it's self that had once been separated by the old regional boundaries such as the WR, LMR, ER, or SR were either joined up or abolished and just became Railtrack country wide along with the introduction of the TOCs when B.R. had run the trains. Thinking about it now 25 years on it was all a bit of a culture shock to be honest for some of us guys who had come on the railways during the 1960s & 1970s that nobody gave any consideration to.

Mickey 48 years service on the railways...

kudu
GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 3:34 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by kudu » Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:24 pm

brsince78 wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:03 pm
I think what is needed is a change in structure not ownership.
I used to say there is good news and bad news about rail privatisation. The good news is that IF you want to privatise then the way the railway has been organised is probably right. The bad news is that I'm talking about the Isle of Wight.

Kudu

kudu
GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 3:34 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by kudu » Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:40 pm

drmditch wrote:
Sat Apr 13, 2019 8:52 am
Hmm. Bring back the LNER? But hang on, hasn't someone started using those letters recently?

I think there is scope for a thesis on 'Railways, Politicians and the Press'. Perhaps I should start developing one, but there is so much (model) railway building to do first.


There is a recent book by A.J.Mullay 'Grouping Britain's Railways'. I need to re-read it thoroughly, but on first reading it challenges quite a lot of what I thought I understood about Geddes and post WW1 conditions.
I found the Mullay book disappointing on the whole. Not well written, with a rather incoherent structure. (Endless "we'll return to this later".) I would strongly recommend Michael Bonavia's "The Four Great Railways", which covers the same territory in one chapter, though much more succinctly and without Mullay's detail, as part of his wider remit. Well organised, well written.

I did write on the Grouping myself, drawing on both books, for my local rail society's periodical, focusing on the various schemes considered. It doesn't fit under this thread, but maybe I should post it? (2,500 words.) I don't want to claim too much for it, but it is probably the only piece on the subject that includes the Monopoly board.

Kudu

drmditch
NER C7 4-4-2
Posts: 821
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:55 pm
Location: Durham

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by drmditch » Wed May 01, 2019 9:06 am

I do agree that Mr Mullay's book is not terribly well written, so is not easy to read. The information it presents however is certainly interesting, if it is accurate. I am in the middle of re-reading it.

It always worries me when authors make an error concerning a subject I do know about, because then I worry about what other errors they may have made in areas that I don't know about. On page 10 there is a statement that the seaplane carrier Engadine was 'the only non-armoured ship' to serve at Jutland. I haven't checked detail sources yet, but I am fairly sure that the hundreds of destroyers on both sides didn't carry heavy stuff like armour.

(Please note that I'm not intending to re-ignite a Jutland debate on this thread or this forum!)
Last edited by drmditch on Wed May 01, 2019 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

kudu
GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 3:34 am

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by kudu » Fri May 03, 2019 10:19 am

drmditch wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 9:06 am
I do agree that Mr Mullay's book is not terribly well written, so is not easy to read. The information it presents however is certainly interesting, if it is accurate. I am in the middle of re-reading it.

It always worries me when authors make an error concerning a subject I do know about, because then I worry about what other errors they may have made in areas that I don't know about.
I know the feeling. Random House published a massive history of London suburbs a few years back. The railway part is full of major errors on a spectacular scale. Can't understand how it could have happened unless the writer, with no initial knowledge of the subject, crammed the night before and tried to write from memory.

On the Grouping, I still recommend Bonavia's book over Mullay's, though better still would be to read both.

Kudu

sandwhich
NBR D34 4-4-0 'Glen'
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:05 pm

Re: re-nationalisation.

Post by sandwhich » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:57 am

Its not getting any better is it, I have picked up that First Group are in internal trouble with one part saying that they want to see First out of what they called the "destructive" rail industry. The "bus bandits" as they were once called are dropping out one by one first National Express whose present Md said that they would be mad to go back into the rail industry, then Stagecoach told to go away, Arriva not knowing where they will end up, and Abbellio rumoured to have been told by the Dutch government they should now not bid for anymore franchises. Now it seems that Trentalia who have c2c seem to have little interest in bidding for anymore franchises. The DfT adrift because not only of their incompetence but the political situation could well mean a new Transport Secretary in a matter of weeks, you really could not make it up. Someone somewhere had better take control of the situation or one day a Railtrack to Network Rail situation could come about.

Post Reply