Bluebell railway extension

[Michael Delamar]

we had a good thread going on the old rmweb..

 

I cant seem to find any updates on whats been happening over the last few months, the bluebell site was last updated in october, and the latest shot on fotopic was 1,12,09.

 

has much been happening? anyone know any updates on East grinstead station, the trackwork and the tip itself.

 

cheers

 

Mike

[phil-b259]

we had a good thread going on the old rmweb..

 

I cant seem to find any updates on whats been happening over the last few months, the bluebell site was last updated in october, and the latest shot on fotopic was 1,12,09.

 

has much been happening? anyone know any updates on East grinstead station, the trackwork and the tip itself.

 

cheers

 

Mike

 

Work at East Grinted has continued with further work on the platform wall, preparing the viaduct for track, installing service ducts etc, preparing rails and fixings, etc. As for the tip itself it is now planned to lay track over the viaduct towards the north end of the tip and take it out by rail. The trains will be powered by GBRF and end up at Calvert although the Bluebell will hire a loco to shift the wagons between the tip and E Grinsted. Current plans are for the spoil trains to start in March although this is not deffinate as weather and the need to spend 5 weeks relaying the line through sharpthorne tunnel in the spring may delay things.

[Michael Delamar]

I like the idea to take it out by rail, thanks Phil

 

 

 

 

[Anglian]

I think it was reported in one of the magazines that GBRf have capacity due to less work being around. As a result the Bluebell have been able to get a good deal that helps both parties. Must admit I'm very excited about this project.

[Neal Ball]

Plus there is now another excellent scheme to raise vital extra pounds! - You can buy the waste by the pound on Ebay - all for 99p

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Prime-1960s-domestic-household-waste-Bluebell-Railway_W0QQitemZ150406528273QQihZ005QQcategoryZ130QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Like they say, every penny helps, or in this case every 99p - at the moment 169 units have been sold.

 

I can now be seen walking into my offices with Ebay print-outs - spare us 99p!

 

Plus of course if you wanted to buy shares in the extension you can by using the defferred payment scheme, or of course just a Tenner for the tip.

 

Full details of the fund-raising are here:

 

http://bluebellrailwaytrust.org.uk/supportus/6WF-1HQ/AnniversaryAppeal.aspx

 

I am just a member, now share holder, but feel it's a great cause to support.

[Neal Ball]

There is more here:

 

http://www.bluebellrailway.co.uk/bluebell/whats_new.html

 

Have you pledged your 99p yet?

[Edge]

There is more here:

 

http://www.bluebellrailway.co.uk/bluebell/whats_new.html

 

Have you pledged your 99p yet?

 

Yup , even donated ??1 to Haiti while I was at it. What a Philanthropist I am.

[Bruciethefish]

Two shovelfuls duly bought & paid for...

[craigwelsh]

Better than the rubbish you get in many pound shops...

[Mr Brunel]

Update on the Bluebell website :

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/extprog.html#jan10 (copy and paste the link)

[Bruce Depot]

Thanks for the update, always an interesting read.

 

Will continue to watch with interest...

 

good luck

 

Keith

[Michael Delamar]

cheers for the update mr brunel

 

its probably because Im thick but I cant work out how the membrane and tubing on the viaduct work, ie how does the water get into the plastic tube drain??

[The Evil Bus Driver]

I believe the material used to make the tubing is porous and then it lays on top of a bed of waterproof material such as clay. There are now pictures from the EG site showing the ballast (Its actually reached the other side of the viaduct now!) and the membrane being glued together. It looks like they'll be able to move more stuff by train and take large numbers of lorry movements off the roads, which around that area are narrow lanes, trust me, the 473 bus goes down them between Kingscote and EG. It was just like doing rail replacement but with an RML!

 

Incidentally does anyone have a track plan for what will be there or hasn't it been decided yet? I do remember a discussion in Bluebell news where they were thinking of using pre-cast concrete sections and building what (to me) looked like a 30's style Art Deco station.

[phil-b259]

Incidentally does anyone have a track plan for what will be there or hasn't it been decided yet? I do remember a discussion in Bluebell news where they were thinking of using pre-cast concrete sections and building what (to me) looked like a 30's style Art Deco station.

The track plan is quite simple (not that you could fit much into the space available anyway) with just one platform line and associated run round loop plus the connection to Network Rail (i.e. 3 points + one catch point to protect from NR runaways). As for the station building....well originally the Bluebell prepared plans for a long thin traditional looking wooden building between the platform and the station entrance adjacent to the headhunt. That has been put on hold however as there is a desire by the local council to get the dreadful 1970s CLASP mainline station replaced which could provide the opportunity for some sort of joint structure. The only snag with that is it would be some distance from the Bluebell's platform as the need to retain the road rail access just south of the mainline platforms means the Bluebell's platform must be a physically separate structure. All this may however mean the initially the station consist of nothing more than a few portacabin style tempory buildings pending a more permanent solution being implemented.

[Neal Ball]

......

Incidentally does anyone have a track plan for what will be there or hasn't it been decided yet? ................

 

 

Personally I would like to see double track from the station across the viaduct and down as far as Kingscote station. Operationally it would offer more flexibility. (Even better if Kingscote to Horsted Keynes could be double track but that can not happen.)

 

The reasoning is that when main line charters arrive, say on Giants of Steam weekend, with an already busy timetable, where will the stock be crossed? That is even before you start to consider where the main line stock will be stored. - The line to Ardingly I guess, which puts paid to Brake Van rides along there!

 

Which loco will be the first to arrive by train? - Tornado??

 

How about a Sheffield Park to Swanage trip behind the S15

[Ian J.]

...Even better if Kingscote to Horsted Keynes could be double track but that can not happen...

 

With only one bridge that was rebuilt to single line width I don't see that it can't happen, just that a second bridge would have to be put alongside it. Of course that would be somewhat costly for too little advantage probably.

 

I was looking at it on Google Maps, and also looked at the old Ardingly branch as well. Considering how short that line is I do wonder if reconnection to the national network might have been easier via that. However, if the Bluebell had gone down that route (literally!) it might have made the reconnection via East Grinstead less compelling and put that work back any number of decades...

[phil-b259]

I was looking at it on Google Maps, and also looked at the old Ardingly branch as well. Considering how short that line is I do wonder if reconnection to the national network might have been easier via that. However, if the Bluebell had gone down that route (literally!) it might have made the reconnection via East Grinstead less compelling and put that work back any number of decades...

 

 

Replacing the demolished 5 arch viaduct just outside Horsted Keynes would hardly have come cheep, though I concede it may well have not been as much as clearing the tip will cost. The real issue with the Ardingly branch is it would end up in the middle of nowhere, much like Sheffield Park or Horsted Keynes. Also the station site is still a well-used aggregates depot and as for any chance of running into Haywards Heath - you can forget it. The Brighton main line including Haywards Heath is already running at maximum capacity there is simply no room to accommodate Bluebell services not to mention the requirement for all mainline locos to be fitted with AWS, TPWS, 'black box' data recorders, etc and all coaching stock to be mk2 or later (unless boxed in by non passenger vehicles).

 

 

Therefore while an Ardingly extension would provide a physical link with the main line, it would not allow passenger interchange between the two, one of they key aims of the East Grinstead extension.

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Personally I would like to see double track from the station across the viaduct and down as far as Kingscote station. Operationally it would offer more flexibility. (Even better if Kingscote to Horsted Keynes could be double track but that can not happen.)

 

The reasoning is that when main line charters arrive, say on Giants of Steam weekend, with an already busy timetable, where will the stock be crossed? That is even before you start to consider where the main line stock will be stored. - The line to Ardingly I guess, which puts paid to Brake Van rides along there!

 

Which loco will be the first to arrive by train? - Tornado??

 

How about a Sheffield Park to Swanage trip behind the S15

 

Last time I was up there I was driving the bus between Kingscote and East Grinstead. I did get talking to the chairman, Roy Watts (partially about his own RM and how Burgess Hill being cut in two because of the London - Brighton cycle ride meant he couldn't bring it that day). Doubling of the track between Horsted and Kingscote did enter the conversation, and someone said they're getting the EG extension out of the way first but it has apparently been talked about. Great idea imho but would need some planning as signals, etc would need adding/moving/altering.

 

If any trains ran from NR onto Bluebell metals my thinking is that they would head for Sheffield Park, where if the train arrives late enough there would be stabling facilities there, as any railtours would presumably head back to London early enough in the evening to free up the sidings for the Bluebell service trains. They could also split the train for storage at SP too

[Ian J.]

The real issue with the Ardingly branch... ...and as for any chance of running into Haywards Heath - you can forget it. The Brighton main line including Haywards Heath is already running at maximum capacity there is simply no room to accommodate Bluebell services not to mention the requirement for all mainline locos to be fitted with AWS, TPWS, 'black box' data recorders, etc and all coaching stock to be mk2 or later (unless boxed in by non passenger vehicles)....

 

 

Therefore while an Ardingly extension would provide a physical link with the main line, it would not allow passenger interchange between the two, one of they key aims of the East Grinstead extension.

 

Could a halt not be constructed at Copyhold Junction on the down side just for Bluebell services? Could even just be a single line platform with a push-pull service (using the H ) :icon_idea:

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Could a halt not be constructed at Copyhold Junction on the down side just for Bluebell services? Could even just be a single line platform with a push-pull service (using the H ) :icon_idea:

 

Of course, they could have a line physically isolated from NR but on the formation, possibly running into platform 4 at HH, although this would cause a bottleneck in the down direction. Another option would be to use part of the car park for a new platform with a fence between B.R. and N.R. metals. Space would be limited for a runround but a loop could be created near Copyhold junction whereby the train runs in, lets everyone off, backs out then the loco runs round, then the train backs into the station again, the passengers board and then the train leaves.

The Bluebell would have to buy a strip of trackbed and then separate it from the NR line by a fence. Scrap the points between the Ardingly line and platform so that they are completely separate. The safety case alone would be mind-numbingly complicated and the cost absolutely prohibitive. Much better to have a station just north of Copyhold Lane bridge and a bus transfer to Haywards Heath

 

This is, of course, assuming the aggregates depot has closed by this point. Is it privately owned or rented off NR?

[phil-b259]

Current thinking is that the only way it would be possable for the Bluebell to run into Haywards Heath is to lay a 5th track between Copyhold Junction and the sidings to the north of Haywards Heath station leading to a new platform in whats currently Haywards Heath station car park. Indeed when considering their plans for re-developing the area around Haywards Heath station the Bluebell was consulted on what facilaties it would need so as to ensure the land required was protected from development. However this can only happern with the closure of Ardingly stone terminal as it requires the removal of the freight run round facilaties and cripple siding at Haywards Heath.

 

The alternative of a station at copyhold has likewise been considered and while easier from an opperational point of view, it brings its own problems. Firstly the roads suronding it are narrow so car parking is out requiring the provision of a Bluebell funded connecting bus (as at Kingscote) for any Bluebell station with public access. Secondly a mainline station (with asociated car parking) is only viable if there is extensive new housing development to the north of Haywards Heath to help finance it, something that the residents of Haywards Heath will fight tooth and nail to prevent. Thirdly opening yet another station on the congested Brighton line actually decreases the overall line capacity so there are serious questions that even if the money were found whether it could be acomadated without an unpopular reduction in service levels from the Sussex Coast.

[The Evil Bus Driver]

Does it really need a fifth track though? If the platform 4 loop at Haywards heath is kept as is but the connection to the Ardingly line is severed then they'd only need extra width for a short stretch. There are two sidings on the Down side (Which I think they use to run round Aggregate trains) so the only additional space in the car park that would be needed would be 10' x 500' or whatever length 7 coaches plus loco takes up. The big problem is the aggregates depot. I don't think Hanson's will move out any time soon so that's the biggie. I really don't know if they just lease that site or if they actually own it. Perhaps that would be worth looking into as the Bluebell could object to the lease renewal on extension grounds...

 

In the meantime I think ketches halt platform would make an excellent Avins Farm station, with a footpath to the main road and the bus link to Haywards Heath, forming part of an Ardingly Show ground to Haywards Heath and Sheffield Park Gardens (via the station, of course) through service perhaps?

[phil-b259]

Does it really need a fifth track though?

 

Yes (although that does include the asorbtion of the down sidings, etc so as you say the actual length of new track is small). The Brighton main line is too busy to accomadate any Bluebell services, as are the current four platforms at Haywards Heath given that it represents the only overtaking oppotunity between Three Bridges & Brighton not to mention somewhere to split / join trains without blocking the main line. Don't forget the main reason for extending the 3rd rail to Horsted Keynes was to avoid terminating trains cloging up Haywards Heath, even though it had been expanded to 4 platforms as part of the Brighton scheme.

 

I don't think Hanson's will move out any time soon so that's the biggie. I really don't know if they just lease that site or if they actually own it. Perhaps that would be worth looking into as the Bluebell could object to the lease renewal on extension grounds...

I doubt that would get you anywhere especially as the bulk movements of agregates are one of those traffics the railways are elimentally suited and I carn't see the resulting increase in lorry movements asociated with Ardingly's closure going down well with the local enviromentalists / councils. Realistically the only situation where I can see Ardingly shutting is if better facilaties are developed somewhere else in the Haywards Heath - Hassocks / Lewes triangle. Any new site however would have to do battle with a formidable trio of NIMBY residents, hostile local councils and those groups dedicated to prevent any development in the Sussex countryside

[Neal Ball]

Does anyone have any inside information when in March the tip will be cleared using GBrf? - I understand there is going to be a weeks trial, ahead of the main excavation, not sure how long that will be for. The current line should be fully connected through to EG at some point this summer.

[Michael Delamar]

not sure Neal, hopefully someone here will know, Id like to know when or if they have started tracklaying at East grinstead

 

Mike