Network Rail gives us loads to read

Fair play to Network Rail. The infrastructure owner has committed to Down Main that it will welcome suggestions for improvements to new guidelines on the loads steam can haul. Intended to replace historic ‘loads books’, the new guidance is a hefty piece of work that lays out what different locomotives can haul over different routes (SR457). Its creation is one result of the Office of Rail and Road’s ‘steam summit’ last year. However, while it is broadly welcomed, there has been specific criticism of some aspects; last issue for example, Steam Railway’s own Mike Hedderly of the Railway Performance Society argued that NR’s definition of ‘leaf fall’ season is too long. Now, longstanding performance analyst Doug Landau has also weighed in with his concerns, specifically about Shap. Doug - who timed his first train in 1960 - has analysed no fewer than 140 logs of both Shap and Beattock and concluded that the ‘leaf fall’ Shap limits are too harsh. Why? Because in that rugged landscape there are basically no trees. In ‘leaf fall’ season the new guidelines say the biggest engines - such as LMS and LNER ‘Pacifics’, and the GWR ‘Kings’ - should generally have their loads reduced from 13 to 11 coaches. However there are further restrictions for gradients steeper than 1-in-100; for Shap, the autumn limit is down to nine. However, Shap, claims Doug “is so windswept it almost deserves specialist attention. There are very few trees except at the top, and they’re evergreen.” “It is of note that there is not a single instance of adhesion problems giving rise to traffic delays,” he says, and “any such effect on running times has been minimal.” Indeed, he maintains that the “most frequent cause of slips” is not leaves at all - but “the flange lubricator at Scout Green.” The good news is that NR charters man Nick Coles has shown himself to be receptive to suggestions. “The steam load and length guidelines are the sum of considered input from the charter industry, but that’s not to say they are an end product,” he told me in late September. “The guidelines have ‘trial’ status at the present time, and suggestions are welcomed for discussion.” The guidelines now fall under the Rail Safety and Standards Board’s ‘heritage standards’ group, and SR will be delighted to pass on your thoughts.