they already have a jct with the old grassington branch. just a matter of getting running powers. Must be too difficult
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
List of preservation railway's expansion plans in future
- Thread starter Gostav
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
UP13
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 373
AFAIK only 171s are compatible with 377s.
xotGD
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 6,075
The junction was taken out and would have to be reinstated.
Ploughman
Established Member
Not difficult just costly especially with the signalling.
swt class 450
Guest
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 1,909
If they electrified the Bluebell Railway line as well with third rail then you wouldn't have the issue of having to find a locomotive to drag it through. It could travel through under its own power.
UP13
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 373
Why would they though?
swt class 450
Guest
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 1,909
Because the Bluebell Railway was originally electrified so it would be good to restore it to that condition. It would mean that we would finally have a heritage railway to run all of the old preserved EMUs on. Also they could make a lot of money from Southern Rail for using the route as a diversion during engineering works. I know that electrifying it has certainly been mentioned and considered in the past. It would be good to see it happen at some point.
Paul Hitchcock
Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 287
Highly unlikely any extension of third rail electrification will be permitted despite the wishful thoughts of the gricer fraternity.
UP13
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 373
AFAIK the Bluebell wasn't electrified throughout although happy to be proved wrong.
Besides electrification would both be cripplingly expensive and a health and safety nightmare.
Besides electrification would both be cripplingly expensive and a health and safety nightmare.
Paul Hitchcock
Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 287
Just so on both accounts
bramling
Veteran Member
Only Copyhold Junction to Horsted Keynes was ever electrified, and that was only really done as it could be done as a simple off-shoot of the Brighton scheme. With no substation being required there was little work (and thus expense) required beyond installing the 3rd rail. I bet the voltage drop by Horsted Keynes was considerable!
HH to HK would be enough for the 3rd rail, as it had that before. About time all the preserved SR EMU's had a proper home, instead of split units, scrapped coaches (4DD) and being marooned in strange locations like airfields. Pity the equally fragmented modern railway has a variety of incompatible coupling designs, making loco haulage problematical. Rescuing trains now is far more of a problem than it used to be. Lack of Thunderbirds also a backward step. Anyway, Ardingly is quite low down in the Bluebell plans I believe, although not ruled out, so it is all academic.
Agree with both comments. And why bother electrifying when for a fraction of the cost you can modify a few steam locos to make them compatible with hauling 377s and 700s between Horsted Keynes and East Grinstead.
UP13
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 373
I'd like to think that was tongue in cheek but you never know with some people on here...
brought a wry smile to my face, but ... Too true!!
Alan Warren
Member
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 31
Seems like the Mid Norfolk Railway are making good progress with their extension northwards to North Elmham. These photos (from the MNR Facebook page) show progress (at Milepost 15.5) between February 2017 and yesterday.
CarltonA
Member
That's good, I've walked the line between North Elmham and County School. The existing track at County is still in reasonable shape and had a DMU vehicle stranded there containing a dummy of a sailor for some reason. The signal box looked on the verge of collapse however.
HaggisBotherer
Member
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 253
Funded by whom, though? The unpalatable truth is that the general public simply isn't interested in EMU preservation, but it's the general public that funds the vast majority of what happens in railway preservation. It's all very well enthusiasts saying that this should happen and that should happen, but unless they all dig their hands VERY deep into their pockets, or some vastly weathy benefactor is found, then it is - as you said about the Bluebell - entirely academic.
Paul Hitchcock
Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 287
A great pity there is no "like" facility on this site.
Gostav
Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2016
- Messages
- 414
I think this is due to not much really old EMU or loco (before WWII) can be saved or complete saved, for example, the LOR EMU is a beautiful wooden body classic EMU but only have 1 driving carriage saved, it is impossible running on the line. Most ex-WWII European electric locomotives have a different style than today: steam loco style wheels, side rods connected, box body- These are attractive enough, however in this country, it is so rare to survive.
HaggisBotherer
Member
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 253
I take your point, Gostav, but it is much more that the majority of people - and that goes for enthusiasts too - simply aten't interested in EMUs. Witness the Electric Railway Museum in Coventry which had a go and (for a long time before it was evicted from its site and the collection dispersed) simply couldn't attract enough public interest for it to look like anything much more than a linear-ish scrapyard (one for you, Paul).
The complete 4SUB arrived in reasonable condition, but there was never enough money coming in to keep the collection of vehicles in reasonable condition and water ingress did the rest. Hopefully it now has a brighter future, but if you see the achingly slow progress that is being made by the tiny group working out in the open on the single 4DD vehicle at Sellinge, I'm not holding my breath. Restoring a full EMU is pretty much a losing battle unless you have a bunch of very keen, hands-on people with deep pockets or can contract work out, like with the Swanage 4TC (not technically an EMU, but you know what I mean)
Full EMUs take a lot of money and work to maintain and also a lot of siding space... for something that the majority of the public isn't interested in. Hauled coaching stock is a lot more flexible and, with the vast majority of UK heritage railways using vacuum brake, air-braked EMUs also aren't attractive as hauled stock to most lines, whose majority of customers want to 'ride on a steam train'.
However, this has now gone way off topic. Back to expansion plans...
Paul Hitchcock
Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 287
The subject of "linear scrapyards" having been raised in the context of a thread about expansion plans,it is a good time to bang the drum of giving more priority to the elimination of such scrapyards over extensions. Quite a number of these lines have been going for forty or more years and it is time they got less scruffy.
I’ve had an idea.
It’d be nice if all of the ‘No hopers’ could be moved to one place, out of sight from the general public. Maybe somewhere in South Wales, near the sea..?
I’ve had an idea.
It’d be nice if all of the ‘No hopers’ could be moved to one place, out of sight from the general public. Maybe somewhere in South Wales, near the sea..?
I am trying to work out if you mean certain members of this board or rusty rolling stock
Haywards Heath to HK electrified to provide a place to turn round the local EMU service so it didn't block up the BML. Full electrification of S Croydon to HK & Tunbridge Wells West proposed in 1940 by Southern Region but put on hold due to WW2 (citing Southern 150 book here).
A viaduct was demolished (blown up) near Ardingly but the Bluebell has been donated two large sections by another line to bridge the gap. Major obstacles include Hanson depot & location of platform in HH.
Personally most likely scenario I think will be Bluebell's 4Vep based permanently at HK & then a clas33 or 73 purchased/leased to operate as push-pull service with no 3rd rail.
South to Lewes will probably never happen (A272, A27 tunnel, masses of housing in Lewes since 50s closure, increased mainline services).
nferguso
Member
We'd LOVE a connection but the £1.5m and rising) cost of a facing connection onto a 110mph main line is a little bit out of our reach!
don't think there's much of the line left much has gone under golf courses and housing
Rockhopper
Member
- Joined
- 29 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 736
Re being able to run older electric sets without third rail - I recall someone a while back coupling a diesel loco up to and EMU set and running cabling from the loco generator to the EMU so the EMU could move under its own power.
Rockhopper
Member
- Joined
- 29 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 736
Would expansion plans also include the possibility of upgrading and running the line they already have but at higher speeds? Tootling along at 25mph to comply with the light railway act is very unimpressive behind an A4 for example!
- Status