Nuclear Flasks to Valley; why not the Amlwch branch?

[Ben B]

I was visiting my family in Amlwch a couple of weeks back, with a visit to the nature reserve near Llangefni, where the mothballed (and probably never-to-reopen) railway to Amlwch runs through the middle of it.

 

I was wondering if anyone knew why the nuclear flask traffic for Valley Power Station was never routed along this line?  Were there clearance/curve problems?  The Blaenau Ffestiniog branch was surely more curved, particularly through the town stretch, and flask trains managed that.  The Amlwch line carried various chemical and similar traffic, so it couldn't have been the risky nature of the traffic, and it wouldn't have been problems fitting in around a regular passenger service as that was long gone.  I got to to the point of wondering if BR just didn't want to allocate a strategic traffic to a route which they probably desired to close.  Yes it would still have road convoys, but where Valley Power station to Amlwch is about 5-6 miles of road transfer on a reasonably straight road, the power station to Valley is 12 miles with some fairly tight curves and a few villages. 

 

Just curious really.  With the talk of Valley power station having a possible future expansion, I can't imagine the old Amlwch branch figuring in the re-opening.  The Welsh Assembly seem determined to keep it closed and sell it to Sustrans to be another cycle path, so presumably it means more road convoys back to Valley.

[br2975]

I can't answer your question, but I believe the power station was called "Wylfa" not "Valley" which was the location of the rail head.

[pb_devon]

It will probably be due to the cost of keeping the branch line track etc maintained to a suitable standard.  That cost would be wholly to the nuclear traffic, whereas the main line would be standard track access.

[The Stationmaster]

Probably due to loaded flask wagons being too heavy for something or other on the branch - maybe even due to the state of the track or formation.

[Steamport Southport]

Was scheduled for reopening as part of the Government funded schemes for reopening railway lines. Anglesey Central Railways have a 99 year old lease on the line from Network Rail. No cycle paths are being considered.

 

Last info was from just before Lockdown.

 

 

As for why nuclear traffic didn't use the line, could it be the chemical traffic being seen as a risk? They definitely needed barrier wagons at each end and between the loco. Used to always be Rats when I visited the area.

 

http://www.penmorfa.com/Archive/one.html

 

 

Jason

[Wheatley]

A loaded Flatrol MJ (original 6 wheel version) was something like 90 tons. Axle weight was lower than a 24/25 (15t v 18t) but the GVW was higher. Although those 37s and 47s in SS's link look quite heavy ...

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Wheatley

[Wickham Green too]

Maybe the Powers That Be at Wylfa didn't fancy the prospect of sharing the branch with anything ...... I was just reading the new Steam Beano and it sounds like the Vale of Berkeley Railway is having problems along those lines.

[Steven B]

Perhaps the land needed for the flask wagon siding was more easily available at Valley compared to Amlwch, or it was easier to fit in with the other traffic timetabled for the line. Valley's population is smaller that of Amlwch which may also have had an impact.

 

Steven B

[Northmoor]

On 14/09/2023 at 11:07, The Stationmaster said:

Probably due to loaded flask wagons being too heavy for something or other on the branch - maybe even due to the state of the track or formation.

Since the flask would have to be transshipped from the power station to the railhead regardless of where that was, it could just as likely been the condition/weight limits of local roads that was the factor and when the power station was built, it was the road from the Valley direction that would have been improved for all the construction traffic.  A nuclear flask loading point in the middle of Amlwch probably wouldn't have been enthusiastically welcomed by the populace either.

[The Stationmaster]

21 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Since the flask would have to be transshipped from the power station to the railhead regardless of where that was, it could just as likely been the condition/weight limits of local roads that was the factor and when the power station was built, it was the road from the Valley direction that would have been improved for all the construction traffic.  A nuclear flask loading point in the middle of Amlwch probably wouldn't have been enthusiastically welcomed by the populace either.

Although there was at least one nuclear flask loading point in the middle of a built up residential area elsewhere.

[Fat Controller]

I suspect the Flask Facilities may have been  built on the site of existing installations from the construction phase

[009 micro modeller]

On 14/09/2023 at 11:52, Steamport Southport said:

Was scheduled for reopening as part of the Government funded schemes for reopening railway lines. Anglesey Central Railways have a 99 year old lease on the line from Network Rail. No cycle paths are being considered.

I heard at one point that they were considering a cycle path and a railway, though not sure how this would have worked as I don’t think the formation is wide enough to put both side by side. There does seem also to have been one iteration of the scheme involving a National Rail reopening to Llangefni, with a heritage line then continuing on to Amlwch from there, although they might have changed from that now.

[Northmoor]

58 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I heard at one point that they were considering a cycle path and a railway, though not sure how this would have worked as I don’t think the formation is wide enough to put both side by side. 

Before it was closed and lifted in the early 90s, the Cynheidre branch from Llanelli had a cycleway running alongside the track, fenced off from the line obviously.  It wasn't wide but it's surprising what can be fitted in the formation of a single track railway.

[009 micro modeller]

6 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Before it was closed and lifted in the early 90s, the Cynheidre branch from Llanelli had a cycleway running alongside the track, fenced off from the line obviously.  It wasn't wide but it's surprising what can be fitted in the formation of a single track railway.

Actually there is a bit of the Amlwch line (I can’t quite remember where) that already has a tarmac cycleway/footpath on it. But it’s laid very close to the extant track and not fenced, so would probably have to be removed if it did reopen.

[Ben B]

1 hour ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I heard at one point that they were considering a cycle path and a railway, though not sure how this would have worked as I don’t think the formation is wide enough to put both side by side. There does seem also to have been one iteration of the scheme involving a National Rail reopening to Llangefni, with a heritage line then continuing on to Amlwch from there, although they might have changed from that now.

 

Yeah I'd heard that too, though I gather Sustrans have had their eye on the route for a while purely for a cyclepath. Would seem a shame not opening as far as Amlwch, especially as there would be the possibility of new industrial development on the brownfield chemical works site.

 

Having explored the remains of the line, it seems criminal to leave it closed. Ok so Okehampton showed that in this day and age it would cost a phenomenal amount of money for even a '4 sprinters a day, single track, bare concrete platform-station' branch with probably 2-decades-worth of lucrative work for a consultancy firm, but...

 

...the formation is intact as far as I can tell, barring where the overbridge was ripped out at Llangefni (the fact it was meant to be replaced, and never was, probably hints there was no intention of entertaining reopening). The other bridges need looking at, and the track replacing, but it would be far less work than the Borders Railway. If the WAG really were serious about cutting road traffic, you'd think it would have been an easy win, but they seem to be more in favour of more diesel buses at 20mph :(

[009 micro modeller]

1 hour ago, Ben B said:

barring where the overbridge was ripped out at Llangefni (the fact it was meant to be replaced, and never was, probably hints there was no intention of entertaining reopening).

There is a bridge near Holland Arms though under a road, with fresh looking ballast (or at least it was a few years ago) and I wonder if that was put in specifically so that it could be reopened if needed.

 

1 hour ago, Ben B said:

Yeah I'd heard that too, though I gather Sustrans have had their eye on the route for a while purely for a cyclepath. Would seem a shame not opening as far as Amlwch, especially as there would be the possibility of new industrial development on the brownfield chemical works site.

I think the thinking was that Llangefni would be more of a destination for people commuting (in and out, council offices there etc.) and that the rest of the line didn’t quite justify the same level of service/funding but that having it as a heritage line would mean it was kept open in some form anyway. It does seem as though the preservation group are steadily getting on with things though, and parts of the line are very nice and scenic, though I wonder if the length of the line will potentially prove a bit too much. I will try and have a quick look next time I’m visiting family on Anglesey.

 

 

1 hour ago, Ben B said:

Having explored the remains of the line, it seems criminal to leave it closed. Ok so Okehampton showed that in this day and age it would cost a phenomenal amount of money for even a '4 sprinters a day, single track, bare concrete platform-station' branch with probably 2-decades-worth of lucrative work for a consultancy firm, but...

I agree and have also enjoyed exploring bits of it over the years. I think though that Okehampton involved a slightly unusual set of circumstances (including it having been in use and maintained during the time when it was closed) and I wonder how applicable it is to other closed lines, even those like Amlwch where a lot of the railway is still there.

[Ben B]

33 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

There is a bridge near Holland Arms though under a road, with fresh looking ballast (or at least it was a few years ago) and I wonder if that was put in specifically so that it could be reopened if needed.

 

I think the thinking was that Llangefni would be more of a destination for people commuting (in and out, council offices there etc.) and that the rest of the line didn’t quite justify the same level of service/funding but that having it as a heritage line would mean it was kept open in some form anyway. It does seem as though the preservation group are steadily getting on with things though, and parts of the line are very nice and scenic, though I wonder if the length of the line will potentially prove a bit too much. I will try and have a quick look next time I’m visiting family on Anglesey.

 

 

I agree and have also enjoyed exploring bits of it over the years. I think though that Okehampton involved a slightly unusual set of circumstances (including it having been in use and maintained during the time when it was closed) and I wonder how applicable it is to other closed lines, even those like Amlwch where a lot of the railway is still there.

 

Bits of the line do look in good nick; when I was in France in August there were railways which looked far more overgrown and abandoned, and were in fact still active. I think the heritage group have made a good effort at clearing weeds, maintaining the formation, if only to keep it looking enough like a railway 

 

Removing the bridge at Llangefni was, I think, the result of collision damage but the fact that it appears there's no intention to re-instate it is a good hint of the future, or at least what the priorities of officialdom are. I kind of get it, they want to prioritise tall lorries over an abandoned railway... but it could easily be used as the prospective replacement cost to sink the whole thing. When the Dudley Bypass was being built, there was a clause that the bit of the mothballed railway they lifted had to be relaid and formation restored as soon as work was done, against possible reopening.

 

What worries me is that Okehampton shows how even a recently-used line (which had carried heavy freight, and occasional passenger runs) apparently needs an almost-total upgrade, at vast expense. Likewise even a basic station (judging by the new ones at Soham and near Bristol) cost millions for what is, effectively, an unmanned halt with a pre-fab concrete platform and a telescreen. I'd guess costs like these, and the innevitable consultant work to repeatedly re-establish the business case, would put restoring the branch into HS2 costings territory. Not to mention TfW don't seem able to roster enough trains to meet existing capacity.

 

It's why I wondered if the Nuclear freight option would be on the cards: the much-mooted redevelopement of Wylfa nuclear (which may, or may not, happen on a seemingly weekly basis). Would a strategic freight line provide a better case for re-opening the Amlwch branch?

 

It's been talked about a lot for the Trawsfynned branch, and the mothballed section from Blanaue Ffestiniog, if their power station gets re-lit, and seems equally unlikely.

[AMJ]

I'd have thought that the traffic to the power station will have been based upon how frequently they envisaged the loads to arrive/depart.    Looking at Real Time Trains at Heysham the service from there is on an as required basis.

[CazRail]

There have been proposals with Wylfa B for a new railhead to be constructed in Rhosgoch, for both the construction and waste traffic. However, the sum given for re-instating the line by NR put paid to it, and Wylfa B itself looks like a no-go now aswell. 

 

As nice as it would be to have the line re-open, and as good as the work by ACR to clear the line is, I'm struggling to see it re-open. The consortium that was put together to do something with the line(from the Restore Your Railways scheme) has also gone silent.

[tynewydd]

On the original topic, I was told by my father that the road from Valley to Wylfa was improved a lot for construction traffic - especially as some especially heavy components such as the transformers were sent by ship to HolyHead and transported to the site along it.  There were one or two very large cranes at Holyhead opposite the station near the dry dock and I recall they were also used to put locos stranded by the Menai Bridge fire onto ships to get back to the "the mainland". 

So given that road was being improved anyway - adding to the yard at Valley was probably a natural for a road/rail transfer when compared to reinforcing and in some cases widening the Amlwch branch. 

My Dad has an interest in both areas as his father had been a curate at Llanerchymedd and had bought a cottage near Valley (before the days of Y Fali or Y Dyffryn) in the 1920s.