DON’T NEGLECT YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE
OUR INDUSTRY INSIDER GIVES AN OPINION ON THE STATE OF PRESERVATION
SO, THE Department for Transport says disused heritage lines should not be put into the custody of heritage railways as they don’t have the resources to look after them. Is this an astute comment or an unfair slur on our character?
The reality probably exists somewhere in the middle. The heritage railway sector seems to be sending out a very mixed message. We have railways who seem to be sending out press release after press release informing us of their next bridge replacement and purchase of rail, while others are unable to open because of the state of bridges, track, and embankments, and some even seem to be starting appeals to buy rail just to keep running.
Many railways have spent money to keep pace with the deterioration, while others have maintained existing track they have inherited from BR to the point they have been beautifully maintaining many miles of scrap and worn-out railway.
Like many things in the preservation sector, it’s been down to personality and leadership. Those who shout loudest get the money, and very often it’s the shiny things that run on the railway that get priority and money while the railway itself plays second fiddle. I’ve heard a prominent heritage railway manager use the phrase “they don’t call them railways for nothing”. Is it time we started to realise that all these locomotives, carriages and wagons will look a little silly if there is no infrastructure to run them on?
I’ve read article after article telling me that the locomotives and carriages are getting older, more expensive, and harder to look after. However, how many of us have stopped to consider how old the bridges are that carry the shiny, heavy, and moving lumps of metal over them are? Most heritage railways are plying their trade over infrastructure built on the cheap during the frenzy of the mid-Victorian era of expansion. While this infrastructure was maintained by the ‘Big Four’, followed by British Railways, its deterioration was relatively managed. The moment the heritage railway movement took over the mantle, one could argue, the rot started. Not just because we didn’t have the money, but also because we concentrated too much on the nice things while the boring stuff trotted along behind.
I know this is a wild generalisation and there are loads of good examples of best practice, however it is not exclusively the case, and there is no doubting the Office of Rail and Road has seen enough to have concerns, which should prompt ours, and motivate us to action. This, of course, is easy to say but not easy to do, and the unknowns that face us post-Covid are still very frightening. The temptation to sweat the assets even further becomes greater as money gets tighter. However, to do so is simply kicking the can down the road and should be avoided at all cost. The sad fact is that railways managed as railways will fare better than those who concentrate purely on the nice-to-haves for the exclusive benefit of the enthusiast.
THE OFFICE OF RAIL AND ROAD HAS SEEN ENOUGH TO HAVE CONCERNS