The Blackpool Heritage Trust are developing exciting plans to add to the diversity of the operational heritage tramcar fleet, but we can’t do this without your help! Avid followers of our progress will know that we have recently acquired two very unique vehicles, Paisley & District tramcar no.16 of 1904 (later Glasgow 1016), and the Blackpool Illuminated Hovertram 735 of 1963. Both of these trams will be superb additions to our fleet once restored, and will afford us with show-piece vehicles of which we can all be proud for many years to come.
Paisley 16
Our ‘phase one’ project is to restore the 4-wheel truck from this tramcar to create a rolling chassis onto which we can then rebuild the body. To complete this we need four brand new steel tyres, at a cost of £500 each. We have already received our first very generous donation of £500 – which will buy us one tyre. Can you help us to fund the other three? Once we have the foundations of the tram in place, work can then progress towards rebuilding the body and recreating the missing components that will allow Paisley 16 to take its place on Blackpool’s Promenade within a reasonable timescale.
Any donation, no matter how big or small will help us to achieve the target and move us towards having a fully overhauled truck for this lovely little tramcar. Donors of £500 or more will be invited to Rigby Road when the work commences, to see the progress for themselves.
Illuminated ‘Hovertram’ 735
The Blackpool Hovertram returned to us in September 2016 after almost a decade away and having spent periods of time in both Beith, Scotland, and Sunderland. Latterly in the ownership of the North Eastern Electrical Traction Trust (NEETT), the tram initially came back to us on a long term loan.
However, NEETT have now presented us with a unique opportunity to actually purchase the Hovertram outright, which will allow it to remain as part of the Blackpool collection, in perpetuity. We feel that this is an opportunity that we should not miss, as it will reunite the entire 1960’s illuminated collection under one umbrella and in their original home at Rigby Road.
NEETT have very generously agreed to accept a figure of around half of the £7000 that they have themselves invested in the tram in terms of purchase, moving and storage. We are therefore aiming to raise £3,500 to allow the famous illuminated Hovertram to stay in Blackpool, where it belongs!
Again, any donation no matter how big or small will be very much appreciated, and will help us to secure the future of the Hovertram here in Blackpool. Donors of £500 or more will be invited to come and inspect the tram themselves, and to hear first hand about our plans for its future return to use.
To donate, please send a cheque to the “Blackpool Heritage Trust” to 16 Seventh Avenue, Blackpool, FY4 2ED, making it clear whether you wish your donation to support Paisley 16, or illuminated Hovertram 735. Alternatively, we would very much appreciate monthly standing orders. This form of regular contribution allows us to forward plan our projects, and will help us to build on our achievements so far and deliver the world class collection of Heritage trams that we all desire to see. The BHT’s standing order forms can be found at: http://www.blackpoolheritage.com/htrust/donate/
The above text was supplied by James Millington of the Blackpool Heritage Trust as a press release. We hope that many readers of this website will show their support to these extremely worthy causes, so that we can enjoy a more diverse operational heritage fleet in Blackpool, hopefully in the not too distant future.
An archive image showing a Paisley tramcar in as-built condition; this is how car 16 will look when it is restored and running in Blackpool.
The illuminated Hovertram is seen on the occasion of its return to Blackpool last year, which could become permanent now that its owners have offered to sell the tram. (Photos courtesy of the Blackpool Heritage Trust)
I sincerely hope that, when restored, the Paisley car will NOT look as it does in the black-and-white image, since that appears to show it with at least two lower-saloon windows smashed, a rocker-panel damaged and the dash badly deformed, presumably as the result of a crash.
Much as I look forward to these Trams running again, would fund raising for something like the much missed Princess Alice not be more of a priority? And surely quicker to complete?
Suppose 1016 appeals to different sector of the enthusiast market. You would hope Scottish enthusiasts who might not necessarily support an alternative Blackpool Tram project will really get behind it.
Likewise the Illuminated Hover Tram you would hope attracts support from “Friends of the Illuminations” etc.
Mind no reason to say they cant have an Alice appeal in near future alongside these though. As purchasing Hover Tram (has no effect on workshop capacity) and presumably the wheels for 1016 will be purchased from contractor so no effect either.
Thank you so much, Ed, I fully support your comment!! I have always highly commended the work done by Bryan Lindop and the Heritage Team, especially those working voluntarily on the front line. However, the withdrawal of Princess Alice, reactivation of 718 and increased use of B fleet Balloons on heritage diagrams (don’t mind an occasional one in colder weather) and no sign of work being done on the likes of 8, 642, 304, 632, 634, 761, 642 is beginning to disappoint. Are 272&T2 scheduled for repair this year? I realize that a lot of this is dependent upon revenue (had my head bitten off once before for daring to comment), but it would be nice to know what is planned for the true Blackpool heritage fleet in the near future.
Regarding your list of trams not being worked on lately, mention should be made of Coronation 660. I consider that one or other Coronation should be made available (preferably 304) in order to fill an obvious omission in the heritage fleet. From a personal view point, I have largely lost interest in riding on the heritage trams recently owing to the omission of what were my favourite types of tram; they never run is the stark assessment. I think that far from drumming up support for ‘foreign’ trams, attention should be focused on true Blackpool vehicles. 706 should be high on the list for restoration also.
Patience Please Gentlemen…
I have full confidence that most of the trams mentioned will return to the tracks eventually. I do agree though that ‘Alice’ is a kind of ‘figure-head’ or ‘Talisman’ for the fleet and is badly missed so would be a personal priority for me…
It is also worth noting that of your list:
Much effort WAS made to try to return 304 to service last year but ongoing issues that were never fully resolved in it’s 2002 restoration proved too complex at the present.
761 is not owned by the BHT and is only stored at Rigby Road so would need formal agreement with its owners before any work is considered.
OMO8 only ever had a cosmetic bodge job and will need a lot more work than many seem to think.
The rest of your list are effectively duplicates of type already represented in the operational fleet, so not the highest priority.
As Chris says above, these two appeals do not preclude any other appeals being launched. If you have a strong feeling for a specific car, you know where to send the cheque (5-figure sums preferred!)
Moot point about which comes first, not to many trams in the UK on ebay or alike SO
if one is available and as Blackpool have storage, workshop, staff etc hopefully some money then probably reasonable to extend the fleet as it is a viable part of the transport in a holiday resort. My previous comments regarding fleet livery and some diversity, this would fit well. Not forgetting the Lytham car.
Tother argument about which is needed more 700 or the like comes also with the thought that its there, known condition, but as there are many 700 series available can be sidelined for a period of time. Like any preservation to much of one thing not the best to keep your client (Joe public).
Another side worth consideration is that the NTM does have a surplus of cars either not used or in store, complete and without to much expenditure then “foreigners” could be seen WORKING not static or confined to a mile of track, both sides win and generate publicity for each other. 66 amply reason for these words. I dont see that they need to be showpieces and cotton wooled they are working machinery.
I am happy to put hand in pocket for preservation and hope the right choice is reached that satisfies the masses.
For the people behind this site and other users of the trams Thank you.
Dave.
Does the Trust have,say, a 5 year plan for the completion of the restoration of Blackpool Standard car 143 and English Electric railcar 279 ? It seems that Blackpool is trying to accumulate all of the fleet extant at the time of the demise of the pre-updated system. Why are so many of the prewar doubledeck English Electric cars needed ?
It will always be a matter of personal preference, but I do concur very much with David B’s response. 304 did run in May 2014 and looked remarkably well following a period of outside storage. However, there was then a problem with the brakes and it has not run since, yet we were expected to be grateful when 718 appeared in plain condition last year – a horrible reminder of our TramwaY at a very low ebb. Time marches on and not a great deal seems to be happening with the other much loved and more important trams, although I do appreciate that expenditure has been required at short notice to rewire 227 and 604. “Foreign” trams are a welcome novelty in Blackpool: back in the mid to late 1980s several operated frequently on specials following the Centenary celebrations at no extra fare, but these should be borrowed rather than expensively restored at Rigby Road.
If the Heritage operation is to prosper it needs to appeal to the general public as well as enthusiasts. Illuminated trams are always popular (there is also demand for them outside the illuminations period), and Blackpool receives many visitors from Glasgow, who I am sure would be attracted to a ride on a Paisley tram.
Sorry but they won’t be attracted to ride on a Paisley Tram – its out of memory. A Glasgow Standard, Coronation etc yes buecause its within living memory.
This is of course why nobody rode on LUT 159, or Sheffield 74, or Rack 2 etc at Crich. Out of living memory.
There are a lot of interesting comments here and I’ll try and deal with the topic as a whole in one go rather than respond to each individual post… I do agree with a lot of what is being said here, but I also sympathise with the Blackpool Heritage Trust and Heritage Tram Tours, who will probably never be able to keep everybody happy!
I’m equally frustrated by the apparent lack of progress with certain cars, but as others have stated, money is the main thing holding them back (workshop capacity is also an issue). Standard 143, Coronation 660, ‘Princess Alice’ 706 and the Hovertram 735 are four trams I believe should be high priorities for workshop attention, but how to finance them all? Each tram would need a five or even six figure sum to be returned to running order, which is simply not available at present. The decision to apparently prioritise the Paisley car is a little odd, but it will give Blackpool an old-fashioned open top tram which the general public seem to love. I hope it may attract support from people who may not have otherwise supported a Blackpool restoration project, but we shall see.
I think at present the heritage operation has to focus largely on the commercial side of things, by trying to provide vehicles that the general public want to ride on. In my opinion, it is therefore quite right that an OMO car and a Railcoach are not high priorities, as I highly doubt that either would attract many, if any, more passengers. Hopefully in time the crowd pleasers in the fleet will earn enough money to allow these trams to have their turn, but donations from enthusiasts will almost certainly be needed even then!
The emphasis on Balloon cars is maybe less than ideal, but if we think back to October half-term week last year, they had about 6 or 7 deckers on illumination tours and could probably have filled more, so the demand for these trams to offer a top deck ride through the lights is still there. I agree to some extent with comments that the B Fleet are being used too much on flagship duties, but there is little other option unless more traditional Balloons can be restored to service, which again won’t come cheap! Running a Brush car instead of 700 or 719 would just lead to bigger queues and either more people grumbling, or lost revenue as potential customers walk away.
I think its a bit harsh to criticise the fact that 718 was reactivated whilst 706 was withdrawn as neither event was connected to the other: 718 needed about 2 weeks of attention to run, whereas most other trams mentioned here need months of extensive work costing thousands of pounds. So it was more likely a case of, do you want 718, or nothing ‘new’ at all? That said I will agree with Neil A’s comment about its plain white livery being a reminder of the tramway’s darker days from the past. I know the tram has been a useful addition to the fleet but I’ll admit that I think it looks hideous and have no desire to ride on or photograph it in its present condition.
All these views are my own, and overall I do strongly believe that the custodians of Blackpool’s heritage trams are doing a great job!
You beg the question, do the general public want a heritage service as such or do the just like riding a double-decker? The B fleet were the pick of the bunch and were adapted for use alongside the lrv fleet.
Regarding OMO 8, isn’t there a pot of money somewhere to aid its ‘full’ restoration? I would have thought that would have moved it up the queue. Also what about 704, has there been any indication from the owner of what the plan is for that and a rough timescale.
Yes there is but my understanding is that this is a fraction of what is needed to return it to running order. Contrary to what some people think OMO 8 has never been fully restored, its had some work done to make it look decent and was made operational for the 125th anniversary but it will need more than that to be used on the heritage service.
No idea about 704 but if we go by the comments in this thread then people want rough timescales for quite a few trams – it won’t be possible to do them all at once or probably even within 10 years! Let’s try to be realistic and balance what we want to see with what is realistically achievable.
8 HAS £1000 in the pot but requires a complete rebuild including underframe. It also has a limited appeal to the general public.
Couldn’t agree more with some of the above comments. The acquisition of Paisley 16 was a completely bizarre decision by the Blackpool Heritage Trust which should be concentrating all its efforts into creating a comprehensive and unique collection of local trams.
This latest appeal seems to show that 1016 has jumped the queue for attention ahead of much more worthy causes (Princess Alice, a Coronation) which would add much to the current operational fleet. Yes 1016 is an all important open topper but it is not representative of anything Blackpool ever operated and far more deserving Blackpool open toppers exist (Dreadnought 59, Princess Alice) upon which the money currently being asked for could far better be spent.
How about expending time and energy and funds to repatriate the remains of Toastrack 163 from America and creating another open topper as well as a unique and very Blackpool vehicle that way? Or spend it on Lytham 43 which is in a similar state to 1016 albeit without a truck.
I suspect that this latest appeal is likely to fall on deaf ears for many who would much prefer to see their money going towards trams which are synonymous with Britain’s oldest electric street tramway and not waste it on a Glasgow interloper.
143 does not belong to the Trust yet so why would they touch it? 706 is an open topper an that is the ‘cash cow’ of any seaside business. If you have a hot day and enclosed Trams are out people will not ride. simple as.
Decapitate some B Fleet trams?
B Fleet Trams are not Heritage Trams and must be left as they are to be operable 365 days a year as part of the LRT reserve/specials fleet.
Crikey we are a negative lot at the moment aren’t we!
Bearing in mind the youth of the organisation and the developing and growing operation is amazing whats been achieved. There are 12 different trams listed in the comments that various of you are expecting to be progressed, clearly there’s a need to keep feet on the ground.
I expect the priority is to develop a suitably large operating pool by dealing with quick wins before bigger jobs are tackled. I suspect we will be pleasantly surprised at what develops over the next year or so.
Looking back – we have seen the return of 675/85, 680, 701, 715, 723 and 737 in the last couple of years so I’m sure more will follow.
Surely you aren’t classing 16 and Hover as quick wins?
Obviously not.
The Paisley car if restored to ‘as built’ condition represents a type used by most UK tramways, the photo shows an open topper, very suitable for the seaside !
Blackpool however NEVER had that type of Tram. Lytham had similar…..so paint it blue!
We are not being negative, but just feel a little disappointed after the very positive leap forward made during 2013-15 with, as mentioned, the splendid resurrection of many much loved trams. Now things appear to be less progressive and we just keep being ordered to stump up cash. My retort is that if I am to continue visiting Blackpool 3-4 times a year as I have done for the past thirty years, there needs to be an incentive. Numerous B fleet Balloons, which are actually intended to operate like Flexities at no extra cost to the traveller, on heritage service is not an incentive.
Your hardly been ordered to stump up cash!
As its only March, there’s still plenty of time for more trams to be added.
Bearing in mind as well the heritage service is operating additional winter mileage but doesn’t have many heater fitted cars, so the B-fleet cars are pretty useful.
I think it is time that a dose of reality crept in.
When the tramway upgrade was completed it could so easily have spelled the end of all heritage operations, perhaps there would have been the B fleet trams and a few high profile heritage vehicles kept for very special occasions. Instead we have been spoiled rotten with regular heritage operations and events and a massive fleet of vehicle for our future enjoyment – are we not very lucky indeed!
Personally I am very happy to enjoy what we have today and would be very grateful if perhaps every year or two another vehicle joined the operational pool. That would far outweigh any expectation I might have had a couple of years ago.
I also feel that the trust is on to a loser putting one or other tram up for restoration over another – this discussion shows that we all have our favourites and and each support the merits of one particular car over another. I personally would prefer a ‘Tram restoration fund’ that people can pay into and leave the decision making up to the experts at Rigby Road based on work required and anticipated return. Everyones favourite will turn up eventually!
Having just attended the most recent Winter Gold weekend, I have to say I was incredibly impressed and feel that the history and heritage of the tramway is in safe hands. Much gratitude to all involved.
*Applauds* Brilliant post here, well said David!
As an aside, how many ‘new’ trams have been added to the running fleets at Crich, Beamish, Heaton Park etc. in the last 5 years? By comparison I suspect that Blackpool have done rather well really!
Are those of us visiting Blackpool and buying our tickets for the heritage service not already contributing towards the restoration of other members of the fleet? I’ve asked this question before, but don’t recall getting a conclusive answer. How is the revenue from the trams now split up? If a heritage ticket also allows us to travel on the totally uninteresting plastic ‘things’ (which I makle a point of never doing) then what percentage of the heritage fare goes back to the general tramway pot and what percentage goes to heritage operations and restorations?
The biggest overhead in any business is staff wages, so with heritage operations now having so many excellent and dedicated volunteer staff their running costs must have fallen quite considerably.
The other question is why has the overhaul of key vehicles like Princess Alice not been planned in advance and budgeted for to keep down time to a minimum? Does BT no longer employ skilled staff capable of keeping these vehicles on the road?
I don’t mind the high turn out of balloon cars. They are a unique design that has always been especially suited to Blackpool’s high-capacity operations. What really annoys me though is that so much money was wasted with the pointless B-fleet modifications. This was an especially bad move on 700, which was butchered long after it had become obvious to eveyone that the B-fleet was not going to have as much of a role as was first thought.
B-fleet modified vehicles should NEVER be seen on heritage operations. What they should be doing is full stage carriage operation on the prom between Fleetwood service cars as was originally planned.
Perhaps 700 could be properly restored to as-delivered open top condition, while retaining modern safety features such as low voltage lighting and hallogen headlights, which can all be hidden to make a tram to modern standards but with an authenticly restored look?
As far as I’m aware the only piece of actual restoration work that has taken place on any of the operational heritage fleet is the fitting of traditional lifeguards and fenders to one Brush car, plus Peter supplying and fitting his excellent re-created heritage blinds. All other work has been simply hiding modern features behind a coat of paint. 648 is a particularly bad example of this. Boat 600 is another.
Also, if some revenue from heritage tickets is going to the general tramway coffers, then £100,000 to restore something like Princess Alice should be at least partly funded by BT. It’s no more than they’d be happy to pay for one of those fancy grey buses, which only has a 15 year lifespan!
The heritage service also needs to operate longer into the evening. The ticket prices are simply not worth it for the few hours these cars are running. My thought is to have a basic hourly heritage service the full length of the line between 9am and 11pm. Also how about a sympathetically converted dining tram like the successful operation in Melbourne?
What I believe the trust should do next (and it would cost basically nothing) is make a public statement about what their eventual goal is for every car in the fleet? Are they all to be restored and if so, to what condition? 30s? 40’s 50’s? 60s? 70s? 80s? 90s? I’d also be interested to know who owns what these days.
One thing is for sure… Selling off the old trams has definitely cost more money in the end than keeping them would have done. Was the hovertram sold for the standard £2,000? £3,500 to buy it back minus £2,000 (guess) from the original sale means that decision alone cost in the region of £1,500
I can’t be bothered to cover all of your points – most of them are tired and have been answered over and over again – but I will state that your fares do NOT cover restorations. Just the same as your admission fee to Crich Tramway Village does NOT help to restore a tram like LCC 1. It pays to keep everything ticking over; don’t forget these trams are old and need regular maintenance! There may be volunteers crewing them but the workshop staff, although much reduced in number, still need to be paid to keep them all running. I think most people seriously underestimate the hidden costs of operating historic vehicles. As for the cost of selling trams to get them back, I’m sure that crystal ball of yours would have been really handy a few years ago had you been kind enough to let BTS have a look at it!
To be blunt ‘Franklyn’, if everyone felt like you then there would be no heritage service in Blackpool and all the trams would be sold or scrapped, in fact I doubt that tram preservation would exist. Somebody has to pay for your hobby!
To answer a few points – the second afternoon tea tram was cancelled for lack of interest so no need for a restaurant. Melbourne is also flat – soup up Gynn?
they do run 10 till 11 ish its called the illumination season. If you want Heritage tours into the evening you need to pay a duty engineer, wear and tear on the vehicles etc.
Its cheaper than Crich and you get a longer run so I fail to see how its not good value.
There is a lot going on behind the scenes we know nothing about – so when the time is right information will be available. this is a business not a museum and everything must have a business case.
The price at Crich gives 12 months free re-admission, for approximately 280 operating days a year. Add free access to the Depot, Exhibition and Workshop viewing area and I think you get fantastic value for your money. Why, when defending Blackpool’s decisions, do so many enthusiasts have to take a side-swipe at Crich?
For the 100000000th time B FLEET CANNOT RUN STAGE CARRIAGE THEY CAN ONLY RUN SPECIALS/SUPPLEMENTARY SERVICE. They are not needed most of the time or they would be running. From the time they were conceived until now things have changed.
I’d also like to add that, whilst admittedly the use of B Fleet as honoury heritage cars is less than ideal, some of us actually do welcome it as they give a bit of extra variety. Also as I mentioned previously, had they not been used during last year’s illuminations there would have been a lot of angry people left waiting in the cold for a tour of the lights because there were no other high capacity cars available to run. Not exactly a good way to run a business that needs to make more money is it?
The B Fleet worked well on tours as the vast majority of the public want a comfortable sit down ride through the lights and were happy to pay the tour price for an ‘exclusive’ tram. Anyone who specifically wanted illuminated and vintage, on the whole, was happy to wait.
If I may take some of your points:
700 cannot be touched as it is B fleet.
The B fleet were never planned to run full length service , they were to run on supplementary service.
They won’t tell you how the money is split because they have no obligation to!
Why would BTS put money in? they get no revenue from heritage. Any split will compensate the fact that passengers are on LRT and not paying as they have bought a Heritage ticket – its their rightful share of the fare.
You have no idea what the wages and costs bill is and neither do I but I suspect its not that different to what is taken – I do know, for example, that something like a roof fuse is over £100.
600 was worked on pre-Heritage era and they have never claimed to have worked on it.
648 was sympathetically treated to an original look, no restoration was ever claimed. It was to give the look of how it was.
You cannot make a statement of intention when part of the fleet isn’t yours and you don’t yet have charitable status.
A service hourly the full length of the line is pointless. Heritage makes its money on the prom on a nice day, and specials always did. (I know this because I was told by a member of staff). Very few ordinary punters want a 2 hour round trip! It makes its money standing at North pier and looking attractive. how many cars and crews do you think you would need anyway?
Likewise an evening tour service would be nice but how often is the weather amenable? Even in summer Blackpool can empty after tea.
You forget that what we have now was never envisaged – it was 20 retained Trams includuing the B fleet on hires and illuminations. To have running now what we have is nothing short of a miracle.
I.am just about Totally fed up reading these post not by what they say but by the sheer lack of simple observation and thought on the part of the poster alledged enthusiasts who by definition take an interest and find out about what they are interested in. They do not seem to have noticed that the depot power has been foo for all winter while the roof is repaired and even for the Gold weekends trams had to be towed out. So the ones at the front get used. SIMPLES! The other points at not worth answering as the posters have no wish to understand manpower constraints or cash issues and would ignore anything they are told. Why the blazes do the Volunteers bother if this is how their efforts are received? Why are others of us getting involved in attending and planning events?
Regarding your second observation, on the contrary, I think that everyone who posts a comment fully understands the financial implications for the restoration of all these cars-143, 660, 663, railcoach 279, 706, the Hovertram, OMO 8, the Lytham car, Paisley 16 etc.; an amount probably not far shy of £1,000,000! As far as available manpower, which is obviously limited, there is the question of limited available space in the workshops. I doubt that even half of these trams will see restoration in the next 10 years, but we can always hope.
As for people having no wish to understand cash constraints, I would say that asking questions about the priority being given to the Paisley car over potentially lower-cost ‘wins’ is precisely what people are trying to do when they are being asked to donate their hard-earned money to that particular restoration, and a brief outline of the thinking behind it will do far more to change the minds of doubters than the ‘pay up and shut up’ policy which you seem to be advocating – and which I am sure that Bryan does not.
As an active volunteer I find all this arguing rather disheartening. Basically nothing will ever get done without support. The operation in its current form is still only in its third season – the accepted time for a business to find its feet is 5 years. If you campare it to early Crich, look how long it took them and they are still working on it 50 odd years later.
So basically come and support, ride, spread the word, donate if you can and all these trams will come back. There are sound business reasons why things have and haven’t been done – no I don’t have all the information so please don’t ask!
As for the B Fleet early season it may not be everyones cup of tea but they are heated, double deck and they are kept active which helps prevent failures later!
“When I were a lad” in the late ’60s onwards it was the remaining part of Blackpool’s somewhat careworn system and precious little else in the UK. Count your blessings and give your support to what we now do have.
I’m a tram enthusiast
I visit Blackpool to see trams of all variety shapes and colours modifications or originals I’m a enthusiast which means I love every aspect of trams no matter what.
so if its the tramways decision to fund the hover tram and paisley tram then then its there decision and I’m like I said a tram enthusiast that likes trams in all variants and I will continue to fund such a amazing project so if it has a new modification or if the b fleet are on heritage services It does not matter as I am a enthusiast that will enjoy ever aspect that the tramway holds
The team at Blackpool transport are doing an amazing job, in getting theses trams back into running conditions.
Perhaps it would be a good idea if somebody was to conduct a quick survey either on here or on Facebook,in which people can then vote on which tram, they would (if they had control) give preference to in the workshops and more importantly they would be willing to donate a reasonable amount of money towards. I would put 706 to the top of my list as I personally think it a tram which attracts tourist and I love riding up the top on a sunny day!!!!
Please can everybody stop moaning. I applaud Bryan and his team for everything that they have achieved to date. Without people like this we would have no heritage trams at all in Blackpool.
I will continue to attend the events every month and enjoy riding on whatever trams are put out.
BHT keep up the good work, we appreciate it.
Well said David. If you support the Blackpool heritage trams then you support the decisions that are made in good faith even though they might not be your own personal choice. With the combination of restrictions due to the work at Rigby Road and operation in January and February requiring trams with heaters I would guess it would be a fairly heavy B fleet presence or no service, simple as that. You can’t expect them to shunt the wholedepot around when everything has to be dragged. The service is not run exclusively for enthusiast and ordinary members of the public would not be ‘best chuffed’ with a no-heat tram in the middle of winter. Personally for what it’s worth I am not a great supporter of the Paisley tram in Blackpool but if that is what Bryan & co have decided to specialise on then so be it. When you’re faced with a lot of supporters who all have vastly different views on what the priorities should be then the only thing you can do in Bryan’s position is realise that you can’t please everybody and stick with your plan to restore the ones that will attract the most custom and thereby contribute the most revenue to the cause.
I fully second the vote of confidence and gratitude to Bryan and his team.
Here here – now get yourselves to Blackpool and give some support!
I’ve followed this debate and have to confess that I’m confused by the various views expressed. As I understand it the “Heritage ” tram service in Blackpool is supposed to be operated solely by heritage trams. So what’s the problem with the modified Balloon cars operating the service. After all they are the same vintage, 1930s, as all the Balloons albeit modified so that they can be used when required to supplement the every day service provided by the Flexities. Yes, I know some will say but they have been modified. But can anyone point to any Balloon car that is still in anywhere near original condition? The very obvious modification visible to any casual observer who has known these trams for a few years has been the introduction of pantographs as replacements for trolley poles. A seemingly minor, though no doubt very practical, modification that has completely altered the appearance of these trams.
As for number 16 not being a Blackpool tram, I couldn’t agree more. However, neither is Bolton 66 so does that have to go home as well?
66 has been in Blackpool since 1981 and is not requiring hundreds of thousands of pounds of work. If 16 was a complete tram and running it wouldn’t be a problem – its taking the money off home grown trams which people are complaining about.
the B Fleet are LRT reserve and whilst running on gold days on heritage to please the enthusiast, people are complaining about regular use because its the equivalent of putting a Dennis dart on the London Heritage route sans a Routemaster! Sopecials one day as LRT then Heritage the next just doesn’t wash. Now personally B fleet on early season Heritage because they are warm and double deck is fine, but as soon as they may be required for extra duties then it should stop to avoid any confusion.
And yes, 717 is near original, 715 and 703 in late 80s, 701 early 90s – I could go on. The B fleet are buses inside (except 700 which will always be an anomaly and I’d agree is actually more Heritage then most of thwe Heritage balloons!)
I wonder if anyone has actually said why 706 (Princess Alice) is being ignored? Surely at this early stage in its life Heritage needs all the money it can get and that comes from riders, in summer riders on open top double deckers and boats. Don’t sideline your cash machines!!!
706 has only been off the road for just over a year and its already being ‘ignored’! Posts like this give the impression that the Heritage Trust sidelined ‘Princess Alice’ out of sheer spite – its been withdrawn because it hasn’t had any serious work done to it for over 30 years, and its underframe is the 1934 original.
I had hoped that, after the incident with 272 last year, people would be more understanding of the fact that patching up old trams is not a sensible strategy anymore, and that many of the fleet need full overhauls… apparently not!
For the record I’d rather see 706 restored than the Paisley car, but I can see arguments for both; certainly the fact that Blackpool have very few pre-1930s cars in their fleet goes in 16’s favour, and these tend to be very popular with the general public. I have no idea about the costs of restoring either car, but to be honest I suspect they may be a lot closer than many people would assume. Whilst 706 is complete, 16 is a more basic car – little more than a wooden box with seats on top really – so may be easier to rebuild?
This is all starting to get a bit tedious now.
I stick by my comments about twenty posts back, and if I was involved with the wonderful heritage operation at Blackpool, I would be starting to wonder why I bother what with the apparent lack of appreciation shown in the majority of these posts.
Be grateful for the variety of trams you get to enjoy today.
Be happy when a new tram appears, whatever it might be.
Support the people on the ground in Blackpool delivering the services and events and trust them to make the right decisions about the future fleet and operations.
Above all, support the operating days by buying tickets and demonstrating the worth of developing the heritage side of the operation.
Enough said.