Heathfield branch developments

[brianusa]

A pity  indeed.

 

Brian

[The Stationmaster]

Sources within NR, still loyal to the Captain, have informed me that the Heathfield branch has now been officially mothballed until at least the autumn of 2018. This is to save on maintenance inspections etc. I knew this was coming before I retired, and there was little I could do to oppose it, given the current lack of freight interest on the branch.

 

There will almost certainly be a 'minimum notice period', which any FOC can make use of, to require the branch to be brought back into use again.

 

Even more unfortunate was the discovery that the curve at the Newton Abbot end was now too sharp (following a revision of Standards), to allow passenger operation over it, without a check rail being fitted, hence this has effectively ruled out any further charter operations to Heathfield for the forseeable future, a great pity.

 

It would be interesting to know how many passenger train derailments brought about the risk assessment which led to the revision of the standard relating to the provision of checkrails (or maybe one shouldn't ask such questions of NR)?

[brianusa]

NR seems to have secret place where all sorts of mischief is planned.  Sudden gauging and pathing problems are well known and now this one.  For years, passenger trains ran over this very piece which has been there for years and now all of a sudden when they want to mothball the branch, they come up with this one.  Just another way of ridding themselves of unwanted property.

 

Of course reality probably says they're right but enthusiasts tend not to lend themselves to reality. 

 

Brian

[Re6/6]

Even more unfortunate was the discovery that the curve at the Newton Abbot end was now too sharp (following a revision of Standards), to allow passenger operation over it, without a check rail being fitted, hence this has effectively ruled out any further charter operations to Heathfield for the forseeable future, a great pity.

'..revision of standards.....just like the fitting of new handrails at Newton Abbot Station some years ago just six inches lower than the original Victorian ones so we now have double handrails on the steps...

 

Time to shoot nanny.

[phil-b259]

Sources within NR, still loyal to the Captain, have informed me that the Heathfield branch has now been officially mothballed until at least the autumn of 2018. This is to save on maintenance inspections etc. I knew this was coming before I retired, and there was little I could do to oppose it, given the current lack of freight interest on the branch.

 

There will almost certainly be a 'minimum notice period', which any FOC can make use of, to require the branch to be brought back into use again.

 

Even more unfortunate was the discovery that the curve at the Newton Abbot end was now too sharp (following a revision of Standards), to allow passenger operation over it, without a check rail being fitted, hence this has effectively ruled out any further charter operations to Heathfield for the forseeable future, a great pity.

 

At least its being kept intact. What some may forget is that back in the days of British Rail this sort of scenario would have seen the line ripped up and sold off in indecent haste. While some may think it a shame that charters can no longer visit the line, the brutal truth is that the national rail network is not the plaything of enthusiasts and with the Treasury breathing down the neck of NR demanding savings, the move to mothball it is a reasonable response to the lack of traffic.

 

As has been mentioned, the line has potential - all it needs is for the right set of circumstances to come together e.g. new housing in the vicinity of Heathfield plus political will by local Government causing a Park and ride setup to be viable for example.

[phil-b259]

NR seems to have secret place where all sorts of mischief is planned.  Sudden gauging and pathing problems are well known and now this one.  For years, passenger trains ran over this very piece which has been there for years and now all of a sudden when they want to mothball the branch, they come up with this one.  Just another way of ridding themselves of unwanted property.

 

Of course reality probably says they're right but enthusiasts tend not to lend themselves to reality. 

 

Brian

 

Standards change in light of experience. To take a rather radical example before the Titanic sank there was no requirement for lifeboats, afterwards there had to be enough lifeboats for every passenger. However today that does not apply - because experience has shown lifeboats are not that great when it comes to the public and an emergency - so we now have the more expensive MES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_evacuation_system on many ships instead.

 

Another example today might be bridge testing - read old board of trade reports and very often the principle test was to drive one or two of the companies heaviest engines across it and make sure there was no sign of collapse. That is unacceptable today as it puts workers at risk so much more emphasis is placed on verification by computer modelling or other tests during construction and material sampling etc to provide the necessary answers.

 

In the case of check rails, the standards will have been revised to take into account the much grater understanding we now have about the rail wheel interface, changes in trail profiles, weights, train suspensions etc wit the result that what may have been considered fine in the past is not so now. A case in point occurred not that long ago in Manchester where a class 57 became derailed primary due to a worn rail AND the lack of a check rail which would have prevented the derailment. IIRC older standards said the curve was fine not having a check rail but the newer standards said it wasn't.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/410639/140331_R072014_Ordsall_Lane_Junction.pdf

 

Recomendations (part of):-

 

The intent of this recommendation is to reduce the risk of derailment on small radius curves by ensuring that non-compliances with currently prescribed requirements for check rails are identified and mitigated. Network Rail should identify all curves that are non-compliant with Railway Group standard GC/RT5021 and Network Rail standard NR/L2/TRK/2102 in respect of the need to fit a check rail. For each identified curve, Network Rail should implement measures to adequately mitigate the risk of derailment. These may include one or both of the following methods, although other means of mitigation may also be appropriate (paragraph 110a, 111a and 111b):

 

(i)installing a check rail on the curve; and

(ii)managing rail lubrication on the curve to a suitable level of availability.

[Kris]

Shame that the branch is being mothballed, but better this than removed. 

[Captain Kernow]

 

In the case of check rails, the standards will have been revised to take into account the much grater understanding we now have about the rail wheel interface, changes in trail profiles, weights, train suspensions etc wit the result that what may have been considered fine in the past is not so now. A case in point occurred not that long ago in Manchester where a class 57 became derailed primary due to a worn rail AND the lack of a check rail which would have prevented the derailment. IIRC older standards said the curve was fine not having a check rail but the newer standards said it wasn't.

 

 

That's fine, Phil, as far as it goes, but it's not only people outside the rail industry but seasoned professionals within it, who cannot understand why a piece of railway is perfectly safe to be traversed by a Sprinter or HST loaded with passengers one day, and it's not safe the next.

 

Worse than that, is the absolute refusal of the responsible engineers to even consider any kind of dispensation in the light of the above, regardless of any potential customer/stakeholder fall-out.

 

The Heathfield line is not going to attract the level of investment that would support the installation of a check rail, so I do think that this is the end as regards charter operation, unless a more pragmatic approach to risk assessing individual charter bids is adopted.

[The Stationmaster]

That's fine, Phil, as far as it goes, but it's not only people outside the rail industry but seasoned professionals within it, who cannot understand why a piece of railway is perfectly safe to be traversed by a Sprinter or HST loaded with passengers one day, and it's not safe the next.

 

Worse than that, is the absolute refusal of the responsible engineers to even consider any kind of dispensation in the light of the above, regardless of any potential customer/stakeholder fall-out.

 

The Heathfield line is not going to attract the level of investment that would support the installation of a check rail, so I do think that this is the end as regards charter operation, unless a more pragmatic approach to risk assessing individual charter bids is adopted.

 

In a past life I regularly used to plan 'excursions' of Royal Train stock along the Heathfield branch - with no problems at all.  

 

I can but presume that even if a line is fit for the passage of a member of the Royal family some jobsworths are so frightened of their own skin and lacking in practical knowledge and experience that they will 'mitigate' absolutely anything and everything for fear of recriminations from on high.  It is pretty clear to me from what movements have been made over this line in the past that it can be safely traversed by numerous different types of passenger rolling stock up to and including Mk 3 coaches provided that they travel at the correct speed and the track is properly maintained.

 

I understand this has all come about as a result of the RAIB Report on the Ordsall Curve derailment and while the lack of a check rail was identified in that Report as being a factor which failed to avert the derailment it also notes other contributory factors.  I learnt many years ago that in many cases derailments, particularly of the nature of that on Ordsall Curve very rarely result from one thing being 'not quite right' but are almost inevitably due to a combination of factors.  To react to only one without considering the others is, in my view, not the right way to proceed (although we do not of course know what other relevant Instructions have been issued by NR) and is certainly not the reaction I would expect of an experienced PWay engineer.

[brianusa]

Its not only the railways.  Recently over here there was a freak windstorm that blew over a tree killing a passing motorist.  This was due to clearance for a housing estate but subsequently all the other roadside trees have been cut in the 'interest of public safety".  These trees have been there for years and now the place looks like a disaster area.  Such is the power of those who "are so frightened if their own skin and lacking in knowledge and experience that they will mitigate anything and everything".  (to borrow a phrase)

 

Brian.

[Finch]

Thanks for the update Captain Kernow.

 

Although it's sad to hear that the Heathfield line will be mothballed it's great to hear that the line won't be ripped up and houses built across it (yet!).

 

It's rather bizarre that the line has been withdrawn from use for passenger excursions. Is this to say that when I, with many others, traversed the line on the GWR HST last year that our lives were in some sort of immediate danger? How about the many laden freight trains that have trundled along that curve over the years, were they also at risk from derailing in to the path of an oncoming HST? I can't imagine a check rail would cost the earth. Who knows, perhaps the revenue could be generated by a passenger excursion?...

 

Here's hoping that someone, other than us enthusiasts, will realise the potential of this line and bring it in to full time service and away from the clutches of eternal mothballed limbo.

[Captain Kernow]

Thanks for the update Captain Kernow.

 

Although it's sad to hear that the Heathfield line will be mothballed it's great to hear that the line won't be ripped up and houses built across it (yet!).

 

It's rather bizarre that the line has been withdrawn from use for passenger excursions. Is this to say that when I, with many others, traversed the line on the GWR HST last year that our lives were in some sort of immediate danger? How about the many laden freight trains that have trundled along that curve over the years, were they also at risk from derailing in to the path of an oncoming HST? I can't imagine a check rail would cost the earth. Who knows, perhaps the revenue could be generated by a passenger excursion?...

 

Here's hoping that someone, other than us enthusiasts, will realise the potential of this line and bring it in to full time service and away from the clutches of eternal mothballed limbo.

Well, everyone on those excursions must clearly have been in retrospective peril, there's little more to be said on the matter.

 

I've never truly got my mind around this rule, where you can run stock round sharp curves without check rails, but can't run the same stock, at the same speed, around the same curve, if there are passengers on board. You're allowed to do it ECS, where you may have staff on board, but clearly that doesn't matter.

 

When I was working, I tried for a long time to get the then/current track engineers to agree to the one-off passage of a passenger charter train around the curve linking the main line at Liskeard and the Looe branch. In conjunction with the charter operator, we looked at various mitigations to control the risk to passengers, in the unlikely event of the coaching stock derailing at the 5 mph speed that applies.

 

Even though their predecessors had allowed such loaded moves in the last, as risk-assessed one-offs, the subsequent track engineers would not be budged, even though standards hadn't changed (and this was before the above-mentioned Inquiry had been completed).

 

The extra time required for passengers to detrain and rejoin the coaching stock on the branch platform at Liskeard, and vice versa, is often a show-stopper in terms of timing such charters, although some have run in this way.

 

Following the above refusal for that charter train, one enthusiast/charter type organisation even offered to raise a 5 figure sum to install a check rail at Liskeard. I asked the PW to quote a price for this, and of course, the figure that came back was far in excess of the amount offered by the enthusiast/charter type organisation, so nothing was ever done.

Edited June 5, 2016 by Captain Kernow

[Torn-on-the-platform]

 

Hot off the press! Some good news for the old track bed at least. I tried to access this section of line last summer and it was too overgrown to be accessible.

 

They did a good job with the first bridge, so hopefully they will do much the same for this second one! I think I've posted a photo of it earlier on this thread but can't find it on my computer.

 

Edit: This comes from an easily sourced local magazine so I'm pretty sure its ok to not edit the picture to take out the contact details(?)

Edited July 27, 2016 by Torn-on-the-platform

[Rivercider]

WhatsApp-Image-20160727.jpeg

 

Hot off the press! Some good news for the old track bed at least. I tried to access this section of line last summer and it was too overgrown to be accessible.

 

They did a good job with the first bridge, so hopefully they will do much the same for this second one! I think I've posted a photo of it earlier on this thread but can't find it on my computer.

 

Edit: This comes from an easily sourced local magazine so I'm pretty sure its ok to not edit the picture to take out the contact details(?)

Last week I was in Moretonhampstead, walking in the area including the Wray Valley Trail, and noticed work going on at the second bridge, I look forward to being able to walk all the way to Lustleigh for a drink and lunch at The Cleave .

 

This is the site of the northern approach to the second bridge seen from the former trackbed looking south towards Lustleigh,

The bridge by Stewards Farm 20/7/2016

 

cheers

[Torn-on-the-platform]

I struggle to follow the track Southwards from Wray Barton, so I'm not sure how easy the next phase will be after this one. Word on the street in Moreton is that the Lustleigh residents aren't too keen on the intrusion and I don't doubt that the residents of Lustleigh (or Baskerville!) station won't be giving up their garden, so I can imagine that there will be quite a lot of deviation required.

 

There is a section of trackbed to the North of Bovey Tracey that, to me, continues to provide a lovely atmosphere. It really is easy to imagine a pannier on the morning goods running through the trees there.

[gateman49]

My wife and I cycled along the Templar Way a few weeks ago and I spoke with the current owner of the crossing cottage at Teigngrace.  She thought that the last time that part of the line had been used was for the overnight stabling of the royal train so I presume that Her Majesty won't now be able to sleep tight there again!  

[Rivercider]

I struggle to follow the track Southwards from Wray Barton, so I'm not sure how easy the next phase will be after this one. Word on the street in Moreton is that the Lustleigh residents aren't too keen on the intrusion and I don't doubt that the residents of Lustleigh (or Baskerville!) station won't be giving up their garden, so I can imagine that there will be quite a lot of deviation required.

 

There is a section of trackbed to the North of Bovey Tracey that, to me, continues to provide a lovely atmosphere. It really is easy to imagine a pannier on the morning goods running through the trees there.

Me & Mrs Rivercider walked some of the track bed north of Bovey last month through the Parke Estate,

amongst other things there are a couple of Western style concrete lineside huts to be seen, one in collapsed state,

we got quite close to Lustleigh walking from the Bovey direction.

 

Further to my post of 20/7/2016 at Stewards Farm (post 289), this was the state of play in early October as the next footbridge went in:-

compare this to the view from 20/7/2016 posted earlier

Stewards Farm (Wray Barton?) 7/10/2016

 

With the new footbridge in place

7/10/2016

 

cheers

Edited October 23, 2016 by Rivercider

[brianusa]

I always hope for some kind of revitalization of this branch but so far............................

 

Brian

[Re6/6]

Taken at Teigngrace today.

 

Sadly nature is slowly taking over.

Looking North.                                      

 

The old loading area.

 

Desolation Row.

The old Stover Canal bed, next the the railway, which is very slowly getting restored. http://www.stovercanal.co.uk/ A fair distance to go yet. I have been told by Mrs  'Baron' that at rare extreme high spring tides water has been seen as far up as this spot 

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Re6/6

[Kris]

Sad to see this reversion to nature, however at least the track is still in place and connected to the national network. 

[Siberian Snooper]

It has not taken long for nature to reclaim her own, I use the crossing on a regular basis when I visit my niece in Kingsteignton.

[Captain Kernow]

The line is still mothballed, and as no timber has gone from Exeter either for about a year, I'm afraid that the future seems a bit uncertain.

[Geoff Endacott]

Why don't they plant camphor trees along the line so that it can make its own mothballs?

 

Geoff Endaccott

[Captain Kernow]

Why don't they plant camphor trees along the line so that it can make its own mothballs?

 

Geoff Endaccott

Are they related to the buddleia species?

[Torn-on-the-platform]

I've finally had the chance to investigate the new bridge on the Wray Valley trail and include a couple of pictures in the dying light:

 

 

 

Unfortunately after this new bridge, the path deviates from the original tracked immediately, despite it appearing to be largely extant. Instead it follows the road on the other side of a thick hedgerow. It moves back towards the embankment, at Wray Barton, though this is the current limit of the cycle path. I can only assume that the cycle path will now rejoin the track bed as it continues South, as I can't see another option.

 

I'm sure I posted pictures of the other bridge on this thread, but turns out it was on this thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/35159-newton-abbot-to-moretonhampstead-line/ (post #7). Its taken 6 years to get the second bridge! Slow progress indeed!