Railways and Preservation - Swanage An Environmental Disaster?

[009 micro modeller]

23 hours ago, papagolfjuliet said:

 

Anything of Penrhyn origin is likely to stay put, but I'd expect Vesta and Haydock and Beckton No.1 and Hawarden and Kettering Furnaces No.3 to move elsewhere.

 

But why are we assuming Fire Queen would stay? It’s not a Penrhyn loco. That said, I wonder where else it could go - the obvious answer is perhaps back to Llanberis, to the slate museum, but I’m not sure they’d have a suitable space to display and conserve it there.

 

Sadly a lot of heritage sector organisations have had to make cuts recently so I’m not too surprised, but this does seem an odd choice. Is it perhaps that they’re thinking of removing the very short operating line in the yard at Penrhyn Castle? Or I suppose (conjecturing but not too wildly) they might just be planning to loan the other locos to appropriate locations for display (i.e. closer to where they actually worked) and focus on displaying and interpreting the Penrhyn (and possibly Dinorwic) locos as part of the story of the local slate quarries, which would make sense. In this context it’s interesting that Watkin has moved: https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/10518/watkin-returns-to-caernarfon/

 

Although I find this a little odd, as I thought that Llanfair (already at the WHR and another 3ft gauge Penmaenmawr De Winton) was originally intended to be the one displayed in the new Caernarfon station. Edit: it seems this is still displayed at Dinas. (The third and I think the oldest 3ft gauge survivor is Penmaen, still in the quarry.)

Edited March 9, 2021 by 009 micro modeller

[tomparryharry]

On 05/03/2021 at 13:42, 009 micro modeller said:

 

If the Conwy Valley line is working, the museum at Betws-y-Coed is actually in the station. The Great Orme Tramway is also interesting.

 

 

I expect there’s a bus from Merthyr but not sure how viable this would be. I’d also be interested in any information about visiting the Brecon line by public transport for future reference - despite having previously visited the area a few times I haven’t climbed Pen-y-Fan yet, and managed to visit the BMR the year before the extension opened so would like to go back now it’s open all the way up, and hopefully climb the mountain at the same time.

If you do decide to climb Pen-y-fan from the BMR side, make sure your well protected from the elements. Ponsticill Junction is one of the jump-off points for the mountain rescue, and I've witnessed a few being brought down.  The weather can & will turn down by the minute. 

 

[009 micro modeller]

30 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

If you do decide to climb Pen-y-fan from the BMR side, make sure your well protected from the elements. Ponsticill Junction is one of the jump-off points for the mountain rescue, and I've witnessed a few being brought down.  The weather can & will turn down by the minute. 

 

 

I always try to be careful and take the right clothing etc. in case, so hopefully I would be OK. Anyway, I wasn't necessarily thinking of walking up from the BMR but probably doing the two on consecutive days while in the area.

[009 micro modeller]

On 03/03/2021 at 12:53, caradoc said:

 

Pedant alert: The junction station for Lakeside was Ulverston, which is about 18 miles from Carnforth ! And even without the road scheme, the physical junction was a mile or so from the station, so preserving a main line connection would probably have been, sadly,  impossible.  

 

 

On 03/03/2021 at 12:56, 009 micro modeller said:

 

Thanks for that, I hadn’t realised. So what was the plan exactly? I know Steamtown was originally (supposedly) meant to be part of it.

 

On 03/03/2021 at 13:10, caradoc said:

 

I'm not sure how they intended to run into Ulverston (if indeed that was ever seriously considered), but would assume Carnforth would have supplied the locos for the line. 

 

 

I was having a look at some more Lakeside stuff earlier today and found this: https://www.national-preservation.com/threads/lakeside-haverthwaite-railway.32887/page-7

 

Third post down suggests that the idea was to trip the locos on the main line to Ulverston at the start of each day. If this was actually the plan I sense that problems would have arisen later even if not initially in any case. Presumably you’d either have to have everything main line registered or have the locos hauled by a main line diesel to Ulverston (possibly still requiring some form of registration), paths would need to be available and you’d need to ensure enough locos had been put on the branch to cover failures during the day. I suppose it might have worked if the transfers were done less frequently than daily, with some basic loco facilities on the branch, but I’m sure there must be more to it than that.

[Ben B]

21 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

 

 

I was having a look at some more Lakeside stuff earlier today and found this: https://www.national-preservation.com/threads/lakeside-haverthwaite-railway.32887/page-7

 

Third post down suggests that the idea was to trip the locos on the main line to Ulverston at the start of each day. If this was actually the plan I sense that problems would have arisen later even if not initially in any case. Presumably you’d either have to have everything main line registered or have the locos hauled by a main line diesel to Ulverston (possibly still requiring some form of registration), paths would need to be available and you’d need to ensure enough locos had been put on the branch to cover failures during the day. I suppose it might have worked if the transfers were done less frequently than daily, with some basic loco facilities on the branch, but I’m sure there must be more to it than that.

 

Interesting indeed.  I wonder if they were acting on the assumption that the mainline would be downgraded or even closed eventually, giving them a more free access?  With the general running-down of heavy industry in Cumbria in general and Barrow-in-Furness in particular, maybe they were banking on eventually the line being shut altogether, or even just singled?

[009 micro modeller]

2 minutes ago, Ben B said:

 

Interesting indeed.  I wonder if they were acting on the assumption that the mainline would be downgraded or even closed eventually, giving them a more free access?  With the general running-down of heavy industry in Cumbria in general and Barrow-in-Furness in particular, maybe they were banking on eventually the line being shut altogether, or even just singled?

 

I suppose if it was singled that would allow an entirely segregated preserved line to be laid in place of the second track. Also potentially at the time the movement of stock over the main line would have been more acceptable, that wouldn’t solve all of the apparent practical issues though. The distance from Carnforth to Ulverston would be greater than the length of the branch.

[Zomboid]

The only way it could have been practical would have been too have a running shed on the branch and stock only going to Carnforth for more significant attention, and quite possibly by road.

 

One could imagine a similar arrangement existing between the GWS at Didcot and the Cholsey & Wallingford, if they wanted somewhere to give their engines and carriages a bit more of a run than they can get at the shed. As a punter a such cooperation and the option of a combined ticket (maybe even including the main line train between the two) would have quite a lot of appeal.

[009 micro modeller]

40 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

One could imagine a similar arrangement existing between the GWS at Didcot and the Cholsey & Wallingford, if they wanted somewhere to give their engines and carriages a bit more of a run than they can get at the shed.

 

Although I understand in Didcot’s case that there would be the interesting additional complexity of all movements in and out needing to go by rail, even if only for a short distance (unless that’s changed).

[Zomboid]

I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why it hasn't happened, the complexity getting stuff in and out of Didcot being only one.

[RJS1977]

Yes, the expense of getting stuff out of Didcot (involving both a rail move and a lorry) is probably the main reason we haven't hired anything from them (at least in my time at the CWR). Also, of course, if anyone wants a ride on say the steam railmotor, it's easy for them to go to Didcot for it, whereas a more distant visiting loco effectively has a new audience.

 

In terms of joint ticketing, whilst we've never offered a joint ticket, we have for the last few years been part of a discount scheme where visitors to the CWR get a voucher entitleing them to £2 off at Didcot and vice versa (also valid at Pendon, STEAM, Swindon & Cricklade and Chinnor). Nothing as yet regarding including the GWR fare between the two but as Mark Hopwood's now our President, never say never!

[-missy-]

17 hours ago, Zomboid said:

One could imagine a similar arrangement existing between the GWS at Didcot and the Cholsey & Wallingford, if they wanted somewhere to give their engines and carriages a bit more of a run than they can get at the shed. As a punter a such cooperation and the option of a combined ticket (maybe even including the main line train between the two) would have quite a lot of appeal.

 

I have always felt that the best thing that could happen to the C&WR is for the GWS to take over the railway completely.  As you say, it would give the GWS the ability to run their rolling stock and engines over a (slightly) longer length of rail and it would be a great opportunity for the GWS to recreate a classic GWR branchline using their resources.

 

Missy.

[RJS1977]

A few years back, I might have agreed with you.

 

However over the last few years I've had the feeling Didcot (and I mean no disrespect to them) have enough on their plates already. So I don't really think they would have the capacity to take on Wallingford as well. And of course the difficulties of moving stock between the two sites would be the same irrespective of who operated the CWR.

 

On the other hand, current CWR management have installed the Maindenhead canopy, extended and paved most of the platform, and added heritage lighting and fencing (all during pandemic conditions!). There's a signal box on order from NR and I believe the water tank is currently undergoing refurbishment ready for installation. There's a long way to go (we don't as yet have a permanent station building) but everything's moving in the right direction.  

Edited March 26, 2021 by RJS1977

[FraserClarke]

The GWS covers more than Didcot of course, but there is more than enough to do in developing DRC. It's not really trying to be a heritage railway in the sense of others, and the strategic vision focuses much more on being a living museum. I suspect productive 'coopetition' with other local railways is the way forward.  A discounted train ticket between Cholsey and Didcot would be fantastic wouldn't it!

DRC and CWR both got a shout out in parliament yesterday 

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=886641025217029&id=101861917948838