---

Dear Sir,

I found the article in SR No.283 by David Ward very interesting and a largely accurate reflection on the state main line steam finds itself 31 years after 6000 broke the steam ban.

Whilst, from firsthand experience, I think that some of the costs quoted are rather inflated (if anyone is paying £250 for a PTS refresher and associated medical costs they really ought to look elsewhere), the fact remains that the overall economics of main line steam operations are very poor and will not stand up to the challenges ahead. Within 10 to 15 years main line steam as we know it will be dead for the reasons he suggests.

However, I am at a slight variance with his views on the way forward. Yes to regular routes with regular services, yes to a much higher quality product but no to using pre-1960 steam locomotives forever and a day. Why ? Largely for the reasons David Ward has himself highlighted:

• Reliability will inevitably fall and thus maintenance costs will continue to increase as the locomotives get older.
• Coupled to this will be ever more stringent safety requirements. TPWS may cost upwards of £10,000 and be technically achievable on steam locomotives but what of ATP ?
• The supporters are ageing, i.e. those doing the hard graft are ageing. Where are the required numbers of younger volunteers? In short they are not coming forward. So who will maintain the locomotives and be support crew for mainline steam even if all other problems were to miraculously vanish?
• Line capacity issues are not going to go away and will likely get worse, as suggested. What can a steam locomotive with a top speed of 75mph, poor power to weight ratio and thus slow acceleration do about this? Not much I'm afraid to say.

So do I consider mainline steam is soon to be dead and buried? Well no, it needn't be. The solution I feel that David Ward has missed has been presented within these pages over the last few months, namely David Wardale's proposed Class 5AT 4-6-0. The '5AT' addresses all the problems listed above and is designed for the modern railway. Its modern (proven) technology will reduce operating costs to well below that of any steam locomotives of the past. A crucial design objective for the '5AT' is to achieve very high reliability. Locomotive maintenance will be reduced considerably and will not require hoards of people to look after it. In summary the '5AT' is designed to meet the challenges of tomorrow in a thoroughly practical and realistic manner. Of course, the locomotive must pay its way and regular trains of the sort David Ward suggests will be required to make the project financially viable.

It is regrettable that, almost certainly, we are at the start of a long decline for preserved steam operations in general. I feel that am not over-stating things when I say that steam could well die out completely on the main line in the medium and longer term without the '5AT' (and, of course, future developments of the class).

Yours faithfully,

Martyn Bane

Page created: 4 June 2003