The Crich workshop is currently resembling a mini-Coplawhill, the legendary works of the extensive Glasgow Coroporation tramway system. As the Museum gears up to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the closure of Glasgow’s tramway, work is well in hand to prepare two Scottish trams for the event following a prolonged absence from the main line.
Paisley 68 has been a resident of the workshop for the past few months, where it is being repainted into its later guise as Glasgow 1068. In the past week this has made good progress with the first traces of blue paint being applied to its upper deck decency panels. The Glasgow system was famous for using different colours to differentiate between routes, and Crich currently shows a wide range of these, with 22 showing the white route colour, 812 representing the yellow cars and 1115 featuring red paint on the between-deck panelling. However, even though both 22 and 812 were originally blue route cars, no Glasgow tram has ever carried this livery variation at Crich before and so 1068 will recreate another piece of the city’s transport heritage on completion of this work.
Adding to the excitement is the appearance of Glasgow ‘Coronation’ 1282 in the workshop where it is being commissioned for limited operation. As 1282 was the actual last tram to run on the Glasgow system, its return to action, albeit for just a few days, is highly appropraite and will ensure that it should rightly be the star of the show. It is not yet known what role 1282 will play in the ‘Glasgow 50’ event, and it has been suggested that it may run without passengers. Hopefully the opportunity will be taken to allow visitors to ride on the car – perhaps for a special ‘last tram’ re-enactment run with enthusiasts charged a modest fee for this privilidge? The chance to ride on this popular tram, which has not run since 2003, would surely prove popular with enthusiasts and could be the final triumph in what has been an excellent year for tram events at Crich.
Whatever may happen with Glasgow 1282, the efforts being made to make this event a success must be praised, along with the financial support of the Scottish Tramway & Transport Society who have made it possible. Don’t forget that the combined Glasgow celebration and enthusiast’s event takes place on Saturday 15th & Sunday 16th September – hopefully we might see you there!
Would it not be possible to launch a joint TMS/STTS appeal for the necessary funds together to get Glasgow 1282 back into full running order again? It seems a great pity that after so much money was spent on this iconic tram in the past, it has become another static vehicle which is not normally on full public display
It would be a good thing for 1282 to return to the operational fleet. However readers must be aware that it is normal for an all metal car to receive a major overhaul once every 30-40 years. Just look at the condition of your car after only 15 years (unless you drive a Volvo though like I do). Despite major work in 1978, 1282 really needs another complete strip down now. It may need substantial replacement of metal parts, such as part of the frames. Perhaps these were ok in 1978 but they are certainly not ok in 2012! Something to be expected after 72 years. Also one of its motors is defective, indicating that all of them need major overhaul. Yet, 1282 is iconic and really deserves to be restored. Hopefully funds can be fouund for this, perhaps through HLF now that the Olympics are nearly over? After all, 1282 is far more important than most of the steam locos HLF has sponsored.
Interesting comments there Wim. Although I like 1282 and am looking forward to seeing it running again in September, my personal view is that there are other trams more deserving of restoration work – although obviously opinions will differ greatly depending on who you ask. There are lots of TMS-owned trams that many enthusiasts are too young to have seen running – Sheffield 46, Grimsby & Immingham 14 and Nottingham 166 all spring to mind – and I also think that a Lottery grant should be submitted to restore the Manchester steam tram loco for historical reasons, as this would give Crich something totally unqiue and allow the three main types of tramcar to be demonstrated at the same museum for the first time ever in Britain (ie. horse, steam and electric).
As for the Glasgow cars, I wonder if 1297 could be overhauled and returned to use instead? A lot of time and money was invested in this car as recently as 2005, so presumably it should be in a better condition than 1282. It seems a great shame if all the work that was done has been largely wasted as I’m sure it wasn’t cheap.
1282 has a composite body as all body pillars are teak, with angle irons to give added strength and this can be verified in both editions of the publication ‘The Glasgow Tramcar’. Also, 1282 was built as two separate decks which were then married together, as were all production cars from 1143 to 1292.
Crich has a number of Snow Whites, beautifull trams lying dormant or worse: collecting dust at Clay Cross:
London 1
Edinburgh 35
Sheffield 46
Blackpool 59
Nottingham 166
Sheffield 189
Bradford 251 (ex Sheffield 330) (to represent the narrow gauge at Crich)
New York 674
Blackpool 762
Glasgow 1115
Glasgow 1282
I have let out MBRO 84, because the steam tram will become a separate project.
I have also let out trams such as Sheffield 264, Leeds 600 and Glasgow 1100, because their historical significance is little.
It might be worthwhile investigating the possibility to raise funds for a project Snow White. This means bringing all these trams together in one long term project, thus ensuring continuation of the Crich Workshop and their eventual restoration. It is a project lasting at least 25 years though. However, The Bluebell realised its northern extension project over how many years now?
The increasing number of ‘hidden assets’ of the Society is a cause for concern. The lack of out of the box thinking is a consequence of long embedded management at Board level and apathy on the part of Society Members. Wm Beukenkamp is right to list trams which no longer seem to merit display or restoration attention at Crich: although I question his dismissal of 600, 264 and 1100 as having little value in this regard.
Financial, market and economic realities all point to flatlining of the Museum’s income despite the considerable efforts of active Members and volounteers. The number of annual visitors is maintained only by the frequency of themed weekend events – each requiring especial effort to organise and stage. An ageing membership and vastly increased costs of personal travel for volounteers living away from the East Midlands have their own impact on the ‘business model’ of the Museum, which hitherto has relied hugely on ‘free labour’ in running of Crich Tramway Village. Operating costs of the ‘Village’ continue to rise inexorably whilst admission revenue has actually declined when inflation is taken into account; although this is rarely if ever mentioned in the Society’s accounts over recent years.
A wholly different approach is required if any of the trams in the Society’s collection are to find themselves benefitting from extensive refurbishment. Clearly the only route to securing workshop time at Crich is through external funding by groups such as the TSO, London Tramcar Trust, STMS as well as continuing private bequests. Unless a tram has a dowry – it is destined to gather dust among the lengthening queue of dormant assets. The case of Blackpool rail coach 298 is a symptom of ill-judged decision making in which a classic exhibit remains incompleted after thirty years of restoration effort – whilst the Board find itself ordaining the acquisition of a tram with the same origin without any original content other than its bogies and underframe.
As someone engaged in conserving Blackpool’s traditional trams I naturally abhor a strategy by the Society which shunts out of sight the likes of the important One Man Operated tram, Dreadnought 59 among others trams from different systems. Continuing on the present course the Society will end up with many more trams in ‘cold storage’ as well as a ‘hidden collection’ which is not accessible to public or indeed Society Members. –
To be fair there have been marked improvements to the Museum in the renewal of the Exhibition Hall display, in the excellent archive facility and currently the park infrastructure and layout. But fundamental problems face the future of the Society, its assets and a sustainable operating Museum. These require more than a pro forma re-appointment of Members to positions of Management when commercial know-how and ability to deal with market realities is essential.
The Society is operating a leisure business which needs more than consultants with experience in writing up grant applications to this or that funding given body. Until fresh thinking is introduced to the Museum’s governing arrangement – I doubt that Snow Whites identified in Wim’s message will ever reach the Ball – at least in our lifetime.
I empathise with the