jhb171achill

Indeed; I share that concern. Despite good noises being made, freight facilities in Dublin have again been reduced, Taras have gone, and there’s even less left now. And still not a syllable about Foynes.

You’re 100% right about the 1967 bubbles, and I suspect others too. ALL my recollections were of all over grey ones, and going to school beside the GNR main line I saw them daily. I never saw a single black chassis - in a world where every single solitary goods vehicle was all grey, it would have stuck out like a sore thumb. But - there’s photo evidence of black too. My conclusion is that some were black but most grey - and when they painted the “bubble” bit orange eventually, the grey continued on the chassis.

You have it in a nutshell, Mol! I doubt if a solitary wagon type which ever ran anywhere on any line of either gauge on this entire island ever had less than almost as many variations as members! Your excellent research and posts have not only pointed this out and illustrated it, but illuminated this fact to a new and younger generation, who have unfortunately never seen anything but trains comprising a standard number of entirely identical wagons or coaches….. hence the excitement when an ICR has 5 instead of 6 coaches…..!

Trailer part way too big for Irish equivalents.

What’s the older corgi one? I could use a few of those.

Very much looking forward to that!

September 1968, and the goods for Tralee is ready to leave. At Castletown Junction the first five wagons will be detached to be added to the Tralee - Cork goods. At Mallow, two will be detached, one for Thurles and one for North Wall. The other three will go to Cork, with one onwards for the West Cork system over the Cork City tramway, to go to Dunmanway. The remaining wagons on the train are all for Tralee, Lixnaw, Abbeyfeale, Newcastle West and Limerick, with one for Nenagh. That's the way it was..............

Excellent piece of work!

Several comments above relating to money. With the exception of (from memory) some 6 or 7 individuals, Irish railway preservation has never benefitted from the financial largesse of super-wealthy people as it has in Britain; and within the low numbers we HAVE had, the single most generous one I've been aware of in the last 35 years would still not be of the ilk of Alan Pegler, or the Rampton Trust with its seemingly bottomless pit of money. Time and time again, arguments are put forward here which sometimes come from within the enthusiast community, sometimes outside it, for example, well-meaning people who take the view that various long closed lines would be an absolute boon to tourism if reopened, with an attendant implication of financial self-sustainabilit, or better - as a result. We need to get this quite straight: (a) any cost of any such thing will be astronomical. Neither private individuals nor local authorities, still less central government, have ever been prepared to put up the money needed for such things, be it a reopened IE line or a preservation operation. (b) As stated before, there isn't the interest. This is how we differ from Britain, which we can but envy. In summary, England alone has something like ten times the population of all of Ireland. Ireland has a single standard gauge preserved line, and a total "main line" 5'3" gauge mileage of about 5 miles. If the English, specifically, had similar levels of interest, there would be perhaps nine or ten lines there, with a total mileage of about 45. As we know, there is very considerably more than that, both in mileage and in terms of actual number of preserved lines. Instead of about 9, England has OVER 200, plus endless museums. Have a look at the narrow gauge. Excluding WSVR, which to be fair is more of a pleasure ride than an actual preserved railway, we have the C&L & Finntown (which is so impossibly remote that it's hard to see its long term future) which together total about three miles. Look at the Welsh narrow gauge; and Wales has a smaller population than Ireland! I can think offhand of 12 lines there with 130 route miles. There is simply no comparison. As stated before, we must nurture what we have, and help where we can. Be content with reality!

True, though the growing “feral element“ is arguably worse elsewhere!

Never heard that - pity nothing like that happened!

A reopened Waterford to Tramore line in any shape or form would have been magnificent! (Thought for an ultra-simple layout; if open today it would probably have a pair of two-car 26 class on it and nothing else!)

What’s the reason?

Was thinking that VERY thing last night! Fantasising about what a colossal donation to Downpatrick would cover!

I believe so…. dunno when available, though.

While it may or may not be the case with this specific gate, that's exactly the type of location these signs were cast for. They are / were specifically gate signs.

Iconic yokes indeed (though it was the MPDs, rather than these, whicg pulled goods trains). They kept the NI railways going through most of the troubles, being the mainstay for the last quarter of the 20th century. Not my own cup of tea, but of immense historical value. Parcels were always seen as "passenger" business rather than goods trains.

My final murmurings on preservation relate to how such schemes might operate - or not - in the modern environment in Ireland. This applies equally to north and south. Some of our existing schemes have been around a while and others are new. It is tempting to think that those well-established will be around when the newcomers are gone, but this does not automatically follow. Without going through a list one by one, some thoughts occur to me. Several decades ago, two prominent and experienced members of the RPSI Committee (or board, or whatever it's called now) investigated the establishment of a designated tourist train route, on which highly-maintained heritage stock could operate a regular timetabled tourist service each summer, perhaps once a fortnight. The idea was light years ahead of its time, but would have required paid staff. The route was to be Connolly - Rosslare - Limerick and back, with the relevant tourist sights along the way, a holiday of several days. At the time, restrictions on wooden-bodied stock were beginning to come into being, and this route with low service levels and single track was about the only thing you could do without the impossible restrictions on heritage stock that would apply today. For a multitude of reasons - money being a big one - this never happened. Since then, main line operation has become more challenging. It used to be that by far the biggest money-spinner was the annual RPSI May Tour (doggedly referred latterly to by the awful and offensive title of the "International Railtour" by some). One of its main attractions to the 90% on it (who, as mentioned earlier, were almost all English) was that in Ireland we could do things that couldn't be done on the railways of the Republic of Brexit, such as wooden stock on main lines, main line speeds, runpasts and goods-only lines. As these activities became restricted, then banned or impossible, less came. The highest number of passengers that I recall was 341. By the early 2000s it had dropped considerably, and had Santas not arisen and in themselves become the No. 1 earner for the RPSI, the Society would certainly have gone under, I reckon by about 2010. On the very last May Tour we overnighted in Waterford, and I scanned the room where the Saturday night dinner was being held. Not only were the numbers few - it was shocking to see the age profile; no new participants for years. The May Tour was dying on its feet, and while i have no evidence to back this up, and I may be wrong, I had the feeling that overall, the tour could scarcely be doing much more than breaking even. It was a sad sight. A heritage railway can adapt or die. Downpatrick have had dinosaur days, diesel days and all sorts of other family events, as do places like Stradbally and Dromod. Operating on a public railway with astronomical costs and on tracks you don't own, but share with timetabled public transport, is always a challenge - but an even bigger one now is timetabled paths. Since the RPSI last plumbed the depths of Derry, Kerry or Galway with STEAM, paths have become fewer. Sidings and suitable places to turn a locomotive or take water even fewer. I am unaware of a single reliably operable turntable outside Dublin now - the last couple of times Claremoris was used, there were problems. So it's tender forst one way - but tender engines (of which the society owns but one) have less coal capacity. There came a time when automatic door locking became the norm; the RPSI adapted by having marshalls at each door. Enclosed toilets are now the norm too; how long before the RPSI's main line stock MUCT have both these features? Conversion to central locking and retention toilet tanks (and suitable unloading facilities for same!) would be an absolutely eye-wateringly expensive exercise. Increasing regulation is also something the Society must contend with. Having done some of this myself years ago, when it was in its infancy, I can attest to its mind-numbing boringness; nobody joins a heritage volunteer operation to fill in legally-binding forms. But it MUST be done, and done completely and properly. "It's all becoming too much of a job", I hear you say. yes, indeed - but this is precisely why such bodies need more and more volunteers; please join one now! It is also a point we much reflect on when valuing those who currently do it. Timetable paths, I suspect, will become the most difficult issue in the future. The population is increasing. Many lines are operating services at the absolute peak of their ability to do so. The RPSI trains are therefore now largely confined to Sundays. Nobody in their right mind would expect a public transport provider, funded by taxpayers' money, to delay or cancel public services to accommodate a steam train excursion. Add to that the cost of running a museum, and the increasing need to insure, pay for crew training matters and proving runs, and various types of professional compliance inspections, and one can see that great care must be exercised financially by the society into the future. When anyone asks "Well, why don't they restore 184 or "Lough Erne", or such-and-such an old wooden coach lying around Whitehead, there's the answer; it's so far down any sensible priority list that it's not even on it, nor should it be. There are only so many volunteers (please JOIN!) and there is only so much time, and money. Fine, fine; but what about the heritage lines? Neither Dromod nor Downpatrick nor Stradbally need to worry about delaying the 11:00 Heuston-Cork (please change at Mallow for pints in Killarney). Nor need they worry about double-blocking, track access charges, or overhead electric wires. The 12:00 to Inch Abbey will never delay the midday up Sligo. These are smaller lines, though. Therefore, the fares are smaller. It may well be that a Welsh narrow gauge line can easily charge £60 (say €70!) for a return trip for one person, but no heritage line - even if it was ten rather than two miles long - would get a single fare-paying passenger here. While Irish people statistically spend a greater proportion of their disposable income on family days out and / or entertainment than in Britain, there isn't the same interest here. Downpatrick and their ilk can charge the equivalents of maybe €5 to €10 and get away with it - but not more. So, income sources are limited. But - driver certification, steam boiler repairs, pressure vessel insirance and a whole host of other stuff is exactly to the same standards, therefore big money. Most of these organisations need volunters too. (Please JOIN - did I mention that?) Modern and increasing societal pressures on fuel sources play a part too. On a recent RPSI trip, I heard a member of the public on the platform at Connolly saying to their friend "how do they get away with making all this smoke?" Whatever about that, it is known that even in Britain, coal supplies are becoming challenging for many operators. OK, how about heritage diesel? Well, that's going out of favour too. We can certainly kick both of these cans well down the road for now, but by the time the current generation of active preservationists are of my vintage, this will probably become a major issue. Nothing lasts for ever. We must appreciate what we have now, and where at all possible, assist in its execution and operation. If we do not, we can hardly complain if future circumstances restrict or obliterate it.

And in proper carriages, not identikit tin-can Mk 1s and Mk 2s...............!

Exactly.

In a quiet moment, half considering a bit of a railway jaunt. It is possible to cover the whole railways system these days in just seven days. Anyone fancy it? All are weekdays except one Saturday, so it would be six days on the trot, one Sunday off, plus the Monday. I won't bother quoting trains times, but these are possible. Day 1 - Dublin - Belfast - Bangor - Belfast - Portrush - Coleraine - Derry - Belfast - Larne Harbour - Dublin (entire NIR system - from Dublin and back!) Day 2 - Dublin - Rosslare - Dublin - Hazelhatch - Heuston; tram to Connolly, and return to Howth. Day 3 - Connolly - M3 Parkway - Docklands - Sligo - Connolly (Evening trip to Howth could also be done this day) Day 4 - Heuston - Limerick Junction - Waterford - Heuston Day 5 - Heuston - Midleton - Cork - Cobh - Tralee - Dublin Day 6 - (Saturday service) Dublin - Westport - Manulla - Ballina - Dublin Day 7 - Heuston - Limerick via the nenagh branch - Limerick jct - Limerick - Galway - Heuston

Back again. I will comment first upon the various proposals that were made which resulted in an investigation. Some of this stuff I may have mentioned before, other stuff I have yet to comment on. I will then comment on clamours that I am aware of, both current and historical, and offer my thoughts on those based on what I know happened with the others. Spoiler: what follows may in many cases be interpreted as negative in some ways, but practicalities always triumph over optimism. If there are both, the vision of founders, interpreted as optimism, will be seen as what drove the project from an idea to reality, but it would never have happened without attention to the realistic practicalities! Anyway....... In no particular order, let's go back to 1972 and then move forward. In the early 1970s a proposal was made within the RPSI, still very northern-based then, to reopen Scarva to Banbridge. Several influential members lived in the general area and were therefore vary familiar with the territory. I do recall that a figure of €250,000 was bandied about for completion of the whole thing; but translate this into todays prices we have over £4.2 million. Bear in mind that in that day and age, consultancy reports, safety assessments and various other health and safety expenditure didn't exist, and nor did local government, national government or EU support for such things. Therefore a real cost today would be far north of 4 point something million sterling. This is like expecting a rural village Men's Shed to cough up the guts of 5 million sterling for a scheme of some sort. On that basis alone, the scheme fell; one of the advantages touted at the time that a main line connection at Scarva would be a boon in attracting business is highly questionable, though it would have enabled transfer of stock from Whitehead. The scheme did not go ahead on finance grounds alone. But HAD the cash been fouind, with multiple river bridges, such a railway would have been very heavily loss-making, and would have wiped the society out at birth. Banbridge is a busy town - I know it very well - but it's hardly a tourism mecca. Proximity to Belfast, though, and the main road to Dublin, would have certainly worked in its favour (more so, even, than the DCDR) but wouldn't have been enough on its own. Overall, though, the negatives heavily outweighed the positives. The DCDR has at various stages in its history been very dependent on payouts from the local county council, therefore would NOT have survived its first twenty years in its own right. A wholesale overhaul of its operation about 25 years ago plus asccess to Down Council funding for many years enabled its survival - thankfully. Because of its unique circumstances in that way, we may leave its history as it is; it's well known. At one stage in the 1990s, two businessmen wrote to the RPSI with a query, which I followed up. At the time, both J15s were out of use at Whitehead, and no plans existed for their rehabilitaion, as 184 is a basket case and 186 was deemed to be too slow for main lines. These men were friends of each other who owned businesses around Co Carlow area, or thereabouts. They had been on holiday in England with their families over a bank holiday and had visited the Severn Valley, where packed six-coach trains were bumbling about all day, all solid with people. "Business opportunity!", they thought - believing that if they could replicate this in Ireland they'd be on to a goldmine. They had no interest in, or background in, or knowledge of, railways at all, let alone heritage ones. Their initial question was "Have you any old steam trains you could sell to us?"..... I think this must have been about 1990 or so. I dropped them a line on RPSI headed paper stating that the society was not in a position to provide consultancy services, but that the answer to their question was no. I ended by telling them that I could assist them with their questions in a private capacity and quoted my phone number. A few days later I got a call. They told me they had a potential budget of IR£10 million - a colossal sum in those days if they were actually correct, and that they already owned some land through which the line they were looking at passed through. I can't fully recall now, but it was about five miles on either the Shillelagh or Tullow branches; in each case heading north from the terminus. I told them they would need two steam locomotives at least, plus a diesel shunter like a G. There is no point in advertising a steam railway with only one locomotive, as typically an operating steam loco spends two out of every ten years out of traffic for maintenance. I told them they would need several coaches and a minimum amount of maintenance vehicles. I told them they would need to have properly trained steam drivers, firemen and maintenance people. Same for coaches. Based on the operational plan they had, I told them how many people they would need for a public operating day. With Senior still alive at that stage, I got him to do up a detailed analysis of what ballast, track, points and signalling were initially necessary, plus details of what was required to maintain both this and the several bridges. I told them that scenes like those they had seen on the SVR, quite simply, had never occurred on any heritage operation in Ireland - the annual RPSI May Tour never filled more than one coach with people from the entire 32 counties - the rest on board were all English! If England didn't exist, or the good English people had levels of interest like us, that May Tour, for so many years an iconic part of the RPSI landscape, and by far the major preservation event on this island, would simply never have run at all. (Thank you, England!!). I suggested that a two coach train would be appropriate and adequate, and ventured to suggest that passenger railway carriages need specialised maintenace as well - plus, the whole lot need inspection pits, covered accomodation, lots of insurance and security, water towers, a coal pile and a locomotive shed. Oh, bridge maintenance too. On mentioning how their proposal would be run, I was informed that their shop staff somewhere would operate it. They did not intend to form a preservation society - always a bad move. Bottom line - I had worked out the most optimistic set of figures (easy, as I was then au fait with current heritage railway finances!) and it showed a very substantail subsidy being necessary. They politely thanked me and I never heard from them again. In the 1990s, I was approached by my good friend Selwyn Johnston, of Headhunters in Enniskillen, seeking assistance with recording the memories of the then decreasing band of railway staff of the GNR still alive. He interviewed Senior plus all sorts of other people from the GNR. In the process of all this - and it's a very long story - it became evident that a proposal existed to reopen a mile and a half of the SLNCR south of Belcoo. I travelled down there and expertly guided by Selwyn, met and spoke to a number of people who were at the forefront of this. From the outset, it was clear that as a very rare exception in the world of well-meant proposals, I was dealing with people who were very firmly grounded in practicality and sustainability, and had no wishy-washy ideas about them, or visions of double tracked express lines from Glenfarne to Derry............ everything was very properly worked out. We had a public meeting, and it appeared we were good to go. Verbal agreement were made with CIE to have the SLNCR Railcar "B" (now at Downpatrick) sent to England for restoration (£160,000 - reasonable even then by a bus restoration firm). It would be fitted with a more modern Gardner engine. Support and maintenance was then available in Ireland (Cork, I think). I discussed three matters unofficially with the RPSI members within whose remit permission would have been needed. One involved the transfer of "Lough Erne" as a static exhibit in the (then still standing) SLNCR goods shed at Belcoo. The other involved the transfer of ex-MGWR six-wheel coach there; it was on RPSI premises but was still actually privately owned (it was officially donated to the RPSI after this scheme fell through). Finally, discussion centred round the long term loan of ex-NCC Railcar 1, then (as now) at Whitehead sans engine. An identical Gardner engine would be purchased for this. During the troubles, the bridge across Lough Macnean, which led to the proposed terminus at Lough Macnean lakeside, a local beauty spot, had been blown up by the British Army. Agreement was reached that they would rebuild it - a very MAJOR issue. What made this scheme different was that it was deliberately designed to be a sustainable, low cost railway. With a stock of two railcars with identical, simple to maintain engines, and one six-wheel coach for overloads, and for maintainence a G class and a flat bogie wagon - that was all - it would be simple. Agreement was made with two elderly sisters who lived in the Belcoo station building that once they died they would will the station to the railway - in the meantime a temporary platform with the adjacent community centre handling all ticket sales and car parking. At the other end, a platform a la Inch Abbey, with the six-wheeler parked down there as a waiting room for wet days (not that, of course, Fermanagh and Cavan ever get wet days.......!). So what about volunteers? Again, long story, but many answers were found, plus, on an operating day only a handful were needed, and NO steam engines; just quirky old railcars - mch as the SLNCR did have - one being authentic. It is quite possible RB3 could have ended up there too, I suppose. You'll note I've said nothing about the all-important funding. Well, this was all at the time when the country - north in particular - was AWASH with EU, ERDF, IFI and other funding; the "Peace Money" honey pot was there for the taking for anything cross-border - and this was. Rural area? Yup, tick that off. Border area with financial hardship? Sure! We're good to go. Well, this one was so near, so far. There were five landowners across whose lands the line would operate. On the northern side, A, B & C; on the Cavan side D & E. From the outset, A (upon whose land public access was to be made, and where the maintenance shed for the stock had to go), B, D & E were all in favour, but C in the middle was aganist it. A deputation of us asked for a meeting with him. He was under the impression that the railway would work every day, and that loads of tourists would be all over his land. We reassured him one by one on all the points he raised, and to our delight he changed his mind. Now we moved forward. Funding was obtained from Fermanagh Council for 100% of exploratory matters, feasibility studies, engineering reports and so on. Then, the bombshell. The significant landowner A changed his mind too, on the basis that anything C agreed to, he would oppose; small town begrudgery at its best. We found out why - there was a long running personal dispute between the two, of which toxic politics were but one element. This one matter killed the scheme stone dead, as by and by the potential funding schemes were closed to new applications, and those still open required a much higher portion of costs to be paid by the promotor - at this stage, a still-nonexistent society. So that was that; to this day, I feel that this was the single most financially stable scheme ever proposed here. The experience gained with this led to another thing, potentially bigger. In 2008 or 2009, I was invited to participate in a study group - Niles of this parish was also within this group comprising enthusiasts - some with considerable experience, and professional railwaymen (one regarding track). Through contacts we also had the ear of RPSI loco and coach people. Our remit was to examine whether or not any suitable site could be identified within a 45 minute drive of Dublin for a suitable full-size heritage railway. The parameters were as wide as possible - even including a "green field" site if necessary, where there never HAD been any railway. At our first meeting, we identified some 18 sites, as far north as Omeath, as far south as Bunclody, Co Wexford (green field site - 2.5 miles along a riverbank). Two locations on the Kingscourt branch, one on the Shillelagh line, two or possibly even three sites on the Tullow branch, and Trim to Athboy (4.5 miles) were considered. Our first full meeting eliminated 15 of these point blank for various reasons. Again a long story, but with issues ranging from land availability for maintenance facilities, sight-lines onto public roads, and access points for low loaders containing rolling stock. One way or another, no-brainers. But the remaining three were worthy of investigation in detail, we thought. One of these - I can't remember which - was eliminated soon after, leaving two. One was Trim to Athboy, anf the other was Ballinglen to Tinahely. The first seemed ideal. The second was doable, but much less practical for several reasons. It was decided to survey and investigate the Trim scheme in detail. Informal verbal agreement was made to acquire two G class locos and three or four RPSI coaches. Like the Belcoo scheme, low cost, low maintenance and low numbers of volunteers needed for operation were envisaged. Like Belcoo, these matters looked promising; we intended to recommend operation like a sort of 1963-Loughrea type of scene. While both original stations were gone, there was room to build new "replica" types, like at Downpatrick. Room was available for car parking, low loader access and maintanance facilities / storage siding at each end. We started interviewing landowners, but came up aganist a problem like Belcoo! About half of the tracked - and in the middle! - was owned by a landowner who was having absolutely none of it, or so it seemed. But we felt that if a critical number of local personalities might have become involved, this might have changed. Avoiding yet another long story, with a scheme which was "oven-ready" we produced our summary, which was passed on to several prominent local people. As at Belcoo, where there WAS potential local buy-in, we felt that for the Trim scheme to be sustainable, considerable involvement of local people was needed. There was complete disinterest among all to whom we spoke locally in any involvement or funding. I'm talking 100% disinterest. Not one reply. So, again, that was that. We had done our work in the research, which is what we set out to do; we were not established as a preservation society by choice - we all had other lives! But our research showed that the single most practical scheme within a 45 minute radius of Dublin - major tourist town at one end and a motorway striaght to Dublin at the other - was of interest to precisely nobody locally. A final scheme I was consulted about involved a site on the former Achill branch near to, and including Mulrany station house, back sometime about then too - I think late 90s. The property was for sale with a mile or so of trackbed. The proposals suggested were about as utterly impractical as one might get - I won't bore the reader with the details, but even if it HAD been practical to build (with Welsh Highland-style scenery, albeit obly for a mile), it's in the back of beyonds to most people. Zero local market of any size to make it sustainable - probably the single least practical idea I had then encountered. Needless to say, nothing happened. The kettle beckons; in my next long-winded tome I will comment on the even greater challenges that exist in 2025 in terms of setting up or operating a preservation scheme.

WARNING - LONG POST! This is a big story with many aspects. I will comment on them broken into the main issues of cultural background first, followed by the practicalities faced by promoters and (once opened), operators. The single biggest takeaway, for those who prefer not to read major tomes of stuff, is that experience and reality show clearly that there is not, as already stated, even a fraction of the interest here as seen in Britain. So before going on, why not? Many of the comments on other posts are correct, albeit one controversial; while it is not, and never was, a prevailing majority view that "the British built the railways", or worse, "the British built the railways to control us", amongst let us say, the less educated in rural areas, you would very occasionally get views along those lines. We may dismiss these instantly, as only a small minority would ever have taken such views, and they are as crassly, abjectly and completely wrong as they are downright pathetic. I have had that told to me personally (once!) by someone of a rural disposition; he was surprised when I stated the ACTUAL history behid our railways' construction, to say the least. So, moving on to preservation. To operate a preserved railway, before you even put pen to paper you need a potential MARKET. No matter how enthusiasts might wax lyrical about a railway in a remote turf bog or up a mountain away from any significant population centre, if there isn't a ready market - not of seasonal tourists, but of LOCAL people who will populate lucrative Easter Bunny and Christmas events, it's not going to be sustainable. If it isn't sustainable, it will have to be subsidised, either by a local authority or by a rich individual. As the DCDR have found, changes in local government have led to profound changes in their attitude to anything tourism-related, especially when it comes to throwing public money (from a public who may have zero interest in said attraction). If by a rich individual, what happens when he dies - especially if he has treated the whole enterprise as his personal property, with no formal preservation society in place to run it? We have already seen personally-owned schemes struggle into oblivion when those who developed them age. It's a shame, but this is the first of many points of reality that the misty-eyed "ideas" people amongst us enthusiasts - and there are many of them - fail to grasp. Without a good market, don't start it. It will end up as a closed, vandalised scrapyard. Personally, I'd almost rather see something scrapped than subjected to the indignities of rust, vandalism, graffiti, robbery of parts, and other such obscenities...... OK, though, the DCDR has Belfast 50 minutes away. That's the market sorted; Whitehead likewise for the RPSI's museum (and Cultra), and Dublin, which holds some 22% of this island's entire population for the RPSI's Dublin market. So, we have a market. What's next? Volunteers, of course. These pages, and many other organs of the antisocial media, plus occasional other sources, are full of clamours such as; 1 "They should reopen the line from (population centre) to (scenic place). It would make a FORTUNE!" 2 "Why don't the RPSI / ITG / C&L / West Clare / DCDR (or others) DO something about XYZ locomotive / coach. It's a disgrace they're letting it rot!" 3 "Well, I wouldn't be interested in going to X until they get Locomotive ABC operational" 4 "It's a crime that the very last X class diesel wasn't saved!" There are, of course, answers to those questions - most of them very justifiably unsuitable for a family audience. Question 1 above - No, they SHOULDN'T reopen it. It never even covered costs when open - and that was before road competition. Any anyway, who is "they"? If it's you, dear commentator, and you want it happen, empty your wallet towards the project, start up a society, and give up all your free time to try it! Don't want to? Then don't lecture others. And no, it will NOT "make a fortune" - it will need you to fundraise to keep it afloat. Question 2 - Why SHOULD the DCDR, RPSI and all those others do anything? Will you help? Will you donate? Will you turn up every weekend in all weathers to struggle with what the RPSI's loco engineer once quite correctly described as "redundant, life-expired old equipment"? Plus the "disgrace" bit - the comeback answer is that "it's en even bigger disgrace they you are lecturing from the armchair without lifting a finger"! Question 3 - Not interested? Then don't comment. Bye bye. Or, roll up your sleeves, give up your time, learn skills, volunteer and above all get your wallet out, and restore it yourself. Question 4 - If it's such a crime, you're an accessory - because you didn't save it either! There are many many, more such comments, sometimes outright accusations, but few related to any reality; but the bottom line is the same. There are many with no interest, and some with ideas of sorts, but which are impractical for reasons of time, manpower and money. All preservation schemes on this island struggle to maintain enough volunteers to commit to weekly maintenance and operation. As former treasurer of both DCDR & RPSI over a period of over 25 years, I can attest that in both organisations there were individuals who usually deliberately did not claim expenses to which they were entitled - in some cases quite significant sums of money - and several who privately donated personal sums to each society. But such people may be numbered on the fingers of one hand across this island. On one occasion in the 1990s, a member approached me and told me that he was prepared to donate €60,000 to the RPSI if a certain locomotive was next to be restored. An engineering assessment was conducted and it was discovered that the loco in question was in a much worse state than it looked, and the cost - thirty years ago, remember - would be three to four times that much. Our member was a very wealthy man - I knew that as he was a customer of the bank I worked in - but the poor fella died of cancer before any thoughts on this scheme were carried further. Now, in Britain, such people are thankfully two a penny, and involving sums with several zeros after them in comparison to the above. We simply don't have that, end of. There is utterly no point in pretending otherwise. Grand ideas and wish lists are emotionally-driven. Actual successful, sustainable preservational operation is different. Emotion and practicalities are oil and water. So, having started this bit on volunteering, let's get on to money. Preservation is eye-wateringly expensive. Locomotives - be they steam, diesel, or propelled by fairy dust - cost a huge amount to keep in traffic. Steam engines require lengthy periods out of traffic for legally-required boiler lifts, inspections and so on. And, they need specialist knowledge. Carriages need to be fully compliant with modern health and safety standards, as does track. The days of sticking some sort of oul temporary bit of track down and running anything that will move "Sure it's just a few hundred yards" are all gone. There WAS a time when that would do, and it's a miracle nobody was badly injured or worse - but that's rightly gone now. I personally recall a near-miss on preserved property in which a volunteer very very narrowly missed death; I saw another which could have also resulted in at least severe injury, and I am aware of another where a volunteer was badly crushed. I also recall the period (about 20 years ago) when health and safety matters, hitherto not fully taken seriously when off NIR or IE property, were being gradually introduced. In RPSI Dublin, RPSI Whitehead and Downpatrick, and at one other site too, some volunteers actually left, in one or cases unfortunately on bad terms, as they felt that new rules were spoiling their enjoyment of their hobby and were too draconian. "Sure we don't need all that - we're not Irish Rail"; and "Yer man* is being a dictator - I'm away!" (* = the (volunteer) H&S person at that place) - were just two of the comments I heard. A shame, yes, bad to lose them, but a perfect example of how emotion and practicality will come into conflict - the latter MUST always in, for the safety of all. So - location, market, volunteers and finance. Omit one, and the scheme is guaranteed to fail. Where does this leave us? Stradbally and Dromod: operational many years now. Both are sufficiently small that their low cost base, and the low number of volunteers necessary for a public operational day make up for their comparatively less population hinterland market, when compared to Whitehead, Dublin and Downpatrick. Thus, they are sustainable as currently operated as one is easily accessible from Dublin, and the other is on a main line railway line. Plus, they have enough (more than enough?) equipment on site, and of an interesting variety, to be sustainable. Setting up a new one? There's nothing left. Say we all clubbed together here and bought a 2 mile bit of the Croom Branch. What will we run on our "heritage" railway? A redundant 26 class railcar from Cork? Hardly fits the image. OK, you might say, the public don't care - a beautifully restored 0.6.0 with gas-lit six wheel carriages are an "old train". A 1990s IE railcar is also an "old train". Fine - but they won't be queued out by enthusiasts. I'm going to pause this now, and when I come back later I will discuss the various schemes I was involved with research for, back in the day, and what the pros and cons were for each. Tis dinner time, and I've a three-year-old to mind for a couple of hours. And yes, he knows the difference between a 29 class, an ICR and a DART; gawd help him. Exactly. Local business interests too, and in the west of Ireland the larger cattle dealers also had a big hand in it.

Downpatrick is really playing a blinder here. ….and this from a dyed-in-the-wool steam-head! (Though I’ve a soft spot for “C”s and 121s, but don’t tell anyone…) Very well done; the DCDR and ITG will be the (only) flag-bearers for 5’3” gauge into the future - as such, they deserve all the support we can all give.

That was indeed one of the potential schemes proposed.