St Blazey Turntable

[brianusa]

That's precisely the point.  Millions were spent taking track and infrastructure out and many millions more spent to put it back.  The ill conceived singling is a classic example and how many branch lines could be useful today with all the traffic chaos.  Tavistock and Yealmpton area roads are congested but the railway is long gone and this is repeated all over the UK.

[Reorte]

Easy to be wise in hindsight though. There's plenty of removed rail infrastructure that we very probably won't need again, and would've cost a fortune to maintain. It sounds very much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. I suppose the best you can do is hope that you're not just reacting to a short-term change or the latest fashionable theory. Sometimes even if stuff is needed again it still makes sense to get rid of it in the meantime - I suppose it's not completely impossible to imagine a scenario where just about every station has its own goods yard again, but it's so unlikely that it would be better off just rebuilding them if the unlikely ever happens rather than spending a fortune maintaining them in the meantime.

 

Not that I think everything should be cut-throat business-driven either, a lot of interest, character, attractiveness and charm has gone from the world because of it. Finding a good balance is impossible, I don't envy anyone who has the job of trying.

[Captain Kernow]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but the last 50 years of railway history in particular has taught us (well, it's certainly taught me) that even if there is no apparent reason to hang on to any given particular piece of little-used infrastructure, one ought to nevertheless keep it, in case it can be useful again in future. To that end, I now spend a fair amount of time at work trying to persuade other departments of the validity of this view. This can work, especially if the infrastructure concerned can be mothballed in a controlled manner and in accordance with current industry consultation practices (ie. 'Network Change'). The Tytherington branch, for example, is now subject to a temporary Network Change and is out of use beyond the 0m 30ch point at Yate Middle, but there is a minimum notice period built into the agreement, so that an operator can give this minimum notice, and then legitimately expect the line to be restored to use.

 

Sometimes, even the most moribund and hopeless locations, which even I have agreed can be taken out, sold, and have student flats built on them, have turned out to have had a potential railway use.

 

St Blazey turntable is part of the overall depot area - it is owned by NR but leased to DBS on a long term basis, so DBS are currently responsible for all aspects of maintenance and operational safety etc. within that specified area. St Blazey was originally part of the programme to return locations to NR, but is no longer part of that programme. Burngullow is, but hasn't been handed over yet, and bear in mind that there, most of the sidings are actually Imerys infrastructure, the DBS portion is quite small.

 

The saga of this turntable isn't over yet, but I can't say any more here for the present.

[phil-b259]

The rush to condemn turntables, remove crossovers and lift sidings, will be cause for regret NR and the TOCs.  Already steam locos travel miles in non revenue service to turn around, likewise diesel hauled trains have the same problem to run around their trains.  It is getting impracticable for steam tours to travel west of the Laira triangle which precludes Cornwall, which is an attractive destination, in their itineries.  They learnt the lesson well from BRs hasty removal of this kind of facility years ago.

 

An why exactly should NR and the TOCs care exactly?

 

Steam operations are hardly a big money earner for NR and if truth be told they are actually a drain on resources both in terms of planning and arranging their paths through the congested network (including suitable water stops plus of course) with a wide variety of traction needing gauge clearance, plus compensating other operators when things go wrong. You remember the big outcry over compensation payments a year or so ago - well although charter companies have their liability capped, ANYTHING over this GETS PAID BY NR - its not written off as some might think. (Just as NR still has to pay compensation in the event of service disruption due to suicides). In a way therefore allowing steam charters to continue running is something of a social decision (including the effective subsidy NR gives as part of the compensation cap) which no truly commercial company would put up with.

 

Thats not to say I advocate restricting or banning steam from the network far from it - however rail tour travellers and lineside photographers have to understand that the day to day needs of the national railway system must come first and if it means diesel assistance or railtours not being able to visit certain areas due to the lack of turning facilities then so be it.

 

As for the lack of turning facilities....

 

Most practical railway folk accepted, long ago, that regular passenger operations (throughout Europe) are best undertaken by trains of the 'unit' type (by which I am not only meaning just EMUs & DMUs - a HST, a class 91 + Mk4 rake or the class90s + MK3s on the GEML are also basically 'unit' trains).

 

Diesels in the UK (in common with most of Europe and unlike American / Australian practice) have a cab at each end and do not need turning between journeys, so a simple set of crossoevers or a loop facility will do. Besides if pressed into passenger working on what should be a unit diagram  then top & tailing is usually necessary to keep to time or the provision of a shunter cannot be aranged (particularly where turnarounds are tight).

 

In fact Steam is the ONLY thing that needs regular turning these days (I say regular because there will always be the occasional need for other stock - but that can be dealt with by careful planning and the use of things like the Laria depot triangle).

 

As Mike says - if people in Cornwall (or elsewhere) feel they are missing out on Steam due to a lack of turning facilities then it is up to THEM to draw up a suitable funding package to keep the turntable at St Balzey going - because as has been ably demonstrated the rest of the railway is quite happy getting on without it and quite reasonably won't pay for something they don't use.

[TheSignalEngineer]

That's precisely the point.  Millions were spent taking track and infrastructure out and many millions more spent to put it back.  

 

 

Easy to be wise in hindsight though. There's plenty of removed rail infrastructure that we very probably won't need again, and would've cost a fortune to maintain. It sounds very much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. I suppose the best you can do is hope that you're not just reacting to a short-term change or the latest fashionable theory. Sometimes even if stuff is needed again it still makes sense to get rid of it in the meantime - I suppose it's not completely impossible to imagine a scenario where just about every station has its own goods yard again, but it's so unlikely that it would be better off just rebuilding them if the unlikely ever happens rather than spending a fortune maintaining them in the meantime.

 

Not that I think everything should be cut-throat business-driven either, a lot of interest, character, attractiveness and charm has gone from the world because of it. Finding a good balance is impossible, I don't envy anyone who has the job of trying.

It's surprising how quickly a railway deteriorates when it is not maintained. A couple of good growing seasons and it can be hard to see the track. Drains get blocked so cuttings flood, rabbits and foxes undermine embankments. Given the cost of maintaining in working order, even mothballed so it can be re-opened at relatively short notice, it doesn't take long to get up to the expenditure needed to completely rebuild a section of line.

 

Where I grew up our local branch closed in the 1960s. It had already lost its passengers to bus competition in the 1930s. In common with most urban lines its staple freight traffic was domestic coal. When smokeless zones came in most of that went, so it was down to a handful of wagons each day. Four miles of track with all of the bridges, embankments and cuttings were being maintained for that amount of traffic.

 

Don't forget that railways didn't start as a romantic Victorian playground for trainspotters, they came about purely as a business efficiency improvement by some very hard-headed men in the 1820s.

[Reorte]

Don't forget that railways didn't start as a romantic Victorian playground for trainspotters, they came about purely as a business efficiency improvement by some very hard-headed men in the 1820s.

Although the Victorians put more in to most of what they built than was purely necessary for function. Anyway, I was mostly agreeing.

[The Stationmaster]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but the last 50 years of railway history in particular has taught us (well, it's certainly taught me) that even if there is no apparent reason to hang on to any given particular piece of little-used infrastructure, one ought to nevertheless keep it, in case it can be useful again in future. To that end, I now spend a fair amount of time at work trying to persuade other departments of the validity of this view. This can work, especially if the infrastructure concerned can be mothballed in a controlled manner and in accordance with current industry consultation practices (ie. 'Network Change'). The Tytherington branch, for example, is now subject to a temporary Network Change and is out of use beyond the 0m 30ch point at Yate Middle, but there is a minimum notice period built into the agreement, so that an operator can give this minimum notice, and then legitimately expect the line to be restored to use.

 

Sometimes, even the most moribund and hopeless locations, which even I have agreed can be taken out, sold, and have student flats built on them, have turned out to have had a potential railway use.

 

St Blazey turntable is part of the overall depot area - it is owned by NR but leased to DBS on a long term basis, so DBS are currently responsible for all aspects of maintenance and operational safety etc. within that specified area. St Blazey was originally part of the programme to return locations to NR, but is no longer part of that programme. Burngullow is, but hasn't been handed over yet, and bear in mind that there, most of the sidings are actually Imerys infrastructure, the DBS portion is quite small.

 

The saga of this turntable isn't over yet, but I can't say any more here for the present.

I remember the first time the Tytherington branch was mothballed - and a period of notice for resumption of use was agreed between the engineers and the then Regional Freight Manager (I think it was about 4 weeks).  Anyway it was duly decided to resume traffic from the quarry and the engineers were informed accordingly - back came a cry from the S&T asking for extra time and quite a lot of money in order to get the signalling and, particularly, the level crossings back into full working order.  It turned out they had been robbing them for spares ever since the line was mothballed!

[winterbournecm]

I remember the first time the Tytherington branch was mothballed - and a period of notice for resumption of use was agreed between the engineers and the then Regional Freight Manager (I think it was about 4 weeks).  Anyway it was duly decided to resume traffic from the quarry and the engineers were informed accordingly - back came a cry from the S&T asking for extra time and quite a lot of money in order to get the signalling and, particularly, the level crossings back into full working order.  It turned out they had been robbing them for spares ever since the line was mothballed!

I was regularly up there in 1995 when Swindon crews started re-learning the road over the line with classes 37, 47, 56 & 58. All of the crossing were attended. It was no mean feat manually operating Iron Acton by-pass with no wig-wags working and lowering the barriers for the trains to creep across. Anyway, back to the St Blazey discussions!

[Captain Kernow]

An why exactly should NR and the TOCs care exactly?

 

One thing I will say on this, Phil, is that unless you are a large FOC with your own yards, infrastructure etc., as a smaller FOC, looking to start up a new flow (see if it works and grows), you are probably going to either have to pay the larger FOC to use their sidings (and this can be expensive), or you will look for a Networked Siding (ie. a NR siding). By their very nature, if they are going to be useable for this smaller FOC, it stands to reason that they may not be seeing much use up until that point. As such, others, such as keen PW engineers, may wish to remove said sidings to save on maintenance costs. Looked at in isolation, this doesn't seem that unreasonable. However, my take on this is that a more holistic view is required, as otherwise the premature removal of such sidings could be argued to constitute a deliberate compromising of the business potential of the smaller FOC, which thus may find it harder to grow etc.

 

There is freight traffic running from the West Country right now, which couldn't have got off the ground had it not been for use of NR sidings.

[phil-b259]

One thing I will say on this, Phil, is that unless you are a large FOC with your own yards, infrastructure etc., as a smaller FOC, looking to start up a new flow (see if it works and grows), you are probably going to either have to pay the larger FOC to use their sidings (and this can be expensive), or you will look for a Networked Siding (ie. a NR siding). By their very nature, if they are going to be useable for this smaller FOC, it stands to reason that they may not be seeing much use up until that point. As such, others, such as keen PW engineers, may wish to remove said sidings to save on maintenance costs. Looked at in isolation, this doesn't seem that unreasonable. However, my take on this is that a more holistic view is required, as otherwise the premature removal of such sidings could be argued to constitute a deliberate compromising of the business potential of the smaller FOC, which thus may find it harder to grow etc.

 

There is freight traffic running from the West Country right now, which couldn't have got off the ground had it not been for use of NR sidings.

I don't disagree with what you say however my comments were about turning facilities and run round provision were with steam charters in mind - FOCs don't need turntables or engine release crossovers in stations but do as you say require stabling, loading and run round provision.

[brushman47544]

I wonder if a comment by CK may be particularly relevant here, that St Blazey is on a long term lease from NR to DBS? Surely at the end of a lease, the leased assets have to be returned in the state they were taken on, unless something was specifically agreed to the contrary. If so at some point DBS would have to put the turntable back into operational order, so why not sooner than later?

 

Let's hope so but for now we really have to await developments

[Captain Kernow]

I wonder if a comment by CK may be particularly relevant here, that St Blazey is on a long term lease from NR to DBS? Surely at the end of a lease, the leased assets have to be returned in the state they were taken on, unless something was specifically agreed to the contrary. If so at some point DBS would have to put the turntable back into operational order, so why not sooner than later?

 

Let's hope so but for now we really have to await developments

The fact that it's leased by NR to the FOC isn't going to be particularly relevant in this case.

 

The FOC leases were drawn up at privatisation time and were done in great haste, with the result that - generally speaking - the FOC are not obliged to return the assets in the condition that they took them on.

 

 

I don't disagree with what you say however my comments were about turning facilities and run round provision were with steam charters in mind - FOCs don't need turntables or engine release crossovers in stations but do as you say require stabling, loading and run round provision.

Fair comment, Phil, but when it comes to steam charters on the main line, various external stakeholders start to take an interest, such as any detrimental effect on tourism in an area, should steam charters cease...

[The Stationmaster]

 

 

Fair comment, Phil, but when it comes to steam charters on the main line, various external stakeholders start to take an interest, such as any detrimental effect on tourism in an area, should steam charters cease...

Very true Cap'n - and Scarborough clearly showed one way ahead in this respect some years ago when the turntable was installed.  I also understand that 'tourism' money of some sort was injected into the Minehead project which included the introduction of the new turntable.  And perhaps these two examples could act as a pointer for Cornwall should they wish to protect and nurture a newer part of their tourist industry?

[phil-b259]

Very true Cap'n - and Scarborough clearly showed one way ahead in this respect some years ago when the turntable was installed. I also understand that 'tourism' money of some sort was injected into the Minehead project which included the introduction of the new turntable. And perhaps these two examples could act as a pointer for Cornwall should they wish to protect and nurture a newer part of their tourist industry?

Indeed and a working turntable clearly would be an advantage. However the point still stands, it's not DBS or NRs responseability to fund or take the lead in repairing an asset they don't need (though that doesn't rule them out of contributing were such a project put together).

[locoholic]

Surely the Eden Project could chip in a few quid to get the turntable back in working order, and does Cornwall have some kind of tourist board? And what about an appeal in Steam magazine?

[Captain Kernow]

Surely the Eden Project could chip in a few quid to get the turntable back in working order, and does Cornwall have some kind of tourist board? And what about an appeal in Steam magazine?

Interesting notions and I'll take note of these. As for Steam magazine, let's wait and see how things pan out...

 

Indeed and a working turntable clearly would be an advantage. However the point still stands, it's not DBS or NRs responseability to fund or take the lead in repairing an asset they don't need (though that doesn't rule them out of contributing were such a project put together).

I agree re it not being DBS responsibility, Phil, but ultimately NR owns the asset and our customer is directly and adversely affected by it's non-availability, so I think that NR does have some responsibility, and as such, I am trying to find a solution with all parties.

[phil-b259]

Interesting notions and I'll take note of these. As for Steam magazine, let's wait and see how things pan out...

 

I agree re it not being DBS responsibility, Phil, but ultimately NR owns the asset and our customer is directly and adversely affected by it's non-availability, so I think that NR does have some responsibility, and as such, I am trying to find a solution with all parties.

 

Its good to hear discussions are ongoing and I'm sure that within NR there are plenty of people who recognise the opportunities a working turntable would bring.

 

However as every businessman will agree you cannot pleas everybody all of the time however much you might try. The bigger an enterprise grows the less important 'niche customers' become from a financial or PR point of view - and lets not kid ourselves here, that is what steam operations are when you consider them in comparison to the TOCs, FOCs and the demands of the DfT & ORR. Just because something is a NR asset doesn't mean its fundamental to the companies day to day business - especially if it costs money to fix or repair. Working within said organisation (in the infrastructure side) its very evident money talks and who pays for specific assets is a hotly contested subject. Even within the S&T something as mundane as re-wiring a small section of a location case due to wire degradation can cause arguments as to whether it comes from the "Oppex" (operational / routine maintenance) budget or "Cappex" (small projects, minor renewals and enhancements*) budget. (In the highlighted situation the renewals team 'charged' the maintenance section a flat fee for the first 30 wires - after that it was some ridiculous figure like £25 per wire - it would have been cheaper for maintenance to do it but they couldn't spare the staff to do it themselves)

 

* big projects, etc are let as separate contracts at cooperate level

[Iron Horse]

You're not letting go on this are you Phil

[Xerces Fobe2]

 

Here is a photo from happier times

 

XF

[phil-b259]

You're not letting go on this are you Phil

 

Nope - especially after your intervention

 

Its just I am very concious that railway enthusiasts do sometimes really lose sight of the modern reality. Nothing in life comes free and railway infrastructure is no exception. As such NRs duty (in passenger terms) is to cater for the needs of Mr & Mrs average the majority of whom will never travel on a steam excursion in there lives. In this particular case* its clear that the only justification for the turntable is the steam charter market so I understand the stance NR & DBS are taking (which seems to be along the lines of "if an external stakeholder funds the repairs we are happy to co-operate and may even chip in towards the cost").

 

Also while it might be technically a NR asset, the fact that it was let on a 125 year lease to what became DBS with (as I understand it) no obligation as regards its operational state (thanks to the rushed privatisation procedure) means NR cannot force DBS to fix it themselves and will have to fund the work to make it operational again. This may not be cheap and there is a good case to be made that the money could be better spent on say enhanced waiting facilities at a FGW station for example given most UK passengers do not travel on steam charters regularly. On the other hand if a "turntable fund" is set up and contributions are received specially for the purposes of fixing / securing the turntables future, then the argument about "better spending the money elsewhere" cannot exist.

 

*Note that in cases like Neville Hill, the turntable there is used by franchised TOCs so its in everyones interest to keep it going (as it does play a useful role in rotating power cars) St Blazey on the other hand only hosted (in it later days) diesels with cabs at both ends not HST power cars.

[lmsforever]

Doubt wether the Eden Project will cough up as they are laying off workers and not getting the visitors they used to also local councils cant afford it but maybe Cornwall County Council could but will need a lot of talking to.

[Glorious NSE]

Also while it might be technically a NR asset, the fact that it was let on a 125 year lease to what became DBS with (as I understand it) no obligation as regards its operational state (thanks to the rushed privatisation procedure) means NR cannot force DBS to fix it themselves and will have to fund the work to make it operational again. This may not be cheap and there is a good case to be made that the money could be better spent on say enhanced waiting facilities at a FGW station for example given most UK passengers do not travel on steam charters regularly. On the other hand if a "turntable fund" is set up and contributions are received specially for the purposes of fixing / securing the turntables future, then the argument about "better spending the money elsewhere" cannot exist.

 

Lets throw a wild-card out here, I can't see that the turntable has any utility for DBS at present, So - if you're putting money to fund a turntable for steam charters in Cornwall, is BZ the best place for it? 

[Gary H]

Doubt wether the Eden Project will cough up as they are laying off workers and not getting the visitors they used to also local councils cant afford it but maybe Cornwall County Council could but will need a lot of talking to.

Unfortunately if anything, CC are worse off than Eden, tight as a two coats of paint!

[brianusa]

As most of it is already there, I should think so.  BZ is conveniently in the middle of Cornwall and actually has sidings and space for water and coaling facilities if necessary.  In view of previous comments about letting DBS of the hook, CCC would be a good place to start funding irrespective of pleading poverty (they all do that), as their dependence on the tourist business as a money maker is well known.

[Mallard60022]

Don't think this has been mentioned yet?

Fortunately Plymouth has a triangle so steam can still go to Plymouth or even down into Cornwall if the authorities don't mind LE tender first running back to Laira for turning. Then, if the train had travelled into Cornwall by steam, it would be sensible to have diesel back to Plymouth where the steam loco(s) take over again?

Perhaps the steam loco could stay on and be 'dragged' back to Plymouth as Cornish line speeds are quite low I believe and then the whole train could be 'turned' at Laira?

I can't think of any other 'triangles' west of Plymouth but that be a foreign land to me boy.

However it would be very very good if the turntable could be 'regenerated' in some way. I'd pay something towards it.

P