Controversial railway opinions (without a firm foundation in logic..)

[yorksrob]

Reinstating it in its original form (single track with passing loops west of Alton) wouldn't provide much benefit though. To be useful it would need to be double-tracked, which would be very much more disruptive, especially through Alresford where the existing cutting is very narrow. The outcome would be more like EWR than Watercress Line.

But what problem is it trying to solve? When the main line is closed, Southampton and Weymouth trains are diverted via Havant and Guildford, without too much of a time penalty. A reinstated Mid Hants would only bypass a shorter length of the main line, and offer little if any benefit over a diversion via the Direct.

You can achieve quite a bit with a relatively short section of single track. The borders line is longer than this would be and manages to provide a regular interval service.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You can achieve quite a bit with a relatively short section of single track. The borders line is longer than this would be and manages to provide a regular interval service.

Agreed. And I guess there's always the option to redouble Alton-Farnham, which might then keep the single sections to not longer than presently exists. On the other hand, Alton-London probably has a lot more constraints from interaction with other services than the Borders line.

But what problem is it trying to solve? When the main line is closed, Southampton and Weymouth trains are diverted via Havant and Guildford, without too much of a time penalty. A reinstated Mid Hants would only bypass a shorter length of the main line, and offer little if any benefit over a diversion via the Direct.

I would think the problem it's trying to solve is, allowing more journeys to be made easily by train in order to get more people out of cars. Reinstating Alton-Winchester and using it to extend London-Alton trains to Southampton would provide a rail service to Four Marks, Alresford and Kingsworthy (combined population of all three places ~ 15K), allow London commuting from them (either directly or changing at Winchester), and also allow journeys between Southampton/Winchester/etc. and Alton/Farnham/Aldershot/etc., most of which are fairly significant population centres. With a change at Aldershot, it would also open up journeys from the Southampton area to the Camberley/Frimley area, and provide a more direct option for Guildford (although depending on connections, that might not be quicker than changing at Woking). So it opens up a lot of different flows.

 

[Falcon1200]

That was cutting a massive chunk through virgin down land. Reinstating a pre existing railway is a different kettle of fish altogether.

I'm not so sure about that, given that many lines have now been closed, and dismantled, for 50 if not 60 years; Most locals will not remember trains running there at all!

 

[yorksrob]

Agreed. And I guess there's always the option to redouble Alton-Farnham, which might then keep the single sections to not longer than presently exists. On the other hand, Alton-London probably has a lot more constraints from interaction with other services than the Borders line.

Yes, I'd forgotten that there's a long section of the existing line that had been singled.

 

[Falcon1200]

If we're suggesting nationalising preserved railways I propose that Transport for Wales nationalise the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland railways, upgrade the line speed, and run battery railcars.

Yes! in fact, electrify them too and turn them into British versions of the Rhaetian Railway.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If we're suggesting nationalising preserved railways I propose that Transport for Wales nationalise the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland railways, upgrade the line speed, and run battery railcars. The existing steam services can continue as the Jacobite does on the Welsh Highland, and the preservation societies would retain ownership of all infrastructure not directly necessary for the railcar service.

Always thought it was odd that the Vale of Rheidol ended up in BR ownership despite being of minimal strategic value. Though it being complete and in use in 1948 (unlike the Ffestiniog and WHR) no doubt helped. The Ffestiniog didn't reopen through to Blaenau until 1982, so was of similarly limited strategic value until then.
As much as many of us like to scoff at the idea of reopening Aberystwyth to Carmarthen, doing it as a narrow-gauge line could make (marginally) more sense. A cheaper alignment might be possible, and less land-take required. Still very much pie-in-the-sky of course!

If GBR was to have a narrow-gauge division though, I'd start with the Lynton & Barnstaple.

 

[simonw]

Always thought it was odd that the Vale of Rheidol ended up in BR ownership despite being of minimal strategic value. Though it being complete and in use in 1948 (unlike the Ffestiniog and WHR) no doubt helped. The Ffestiniog didn't reopen through to Blaenau until 1982, so was of similarly limited strategic value until then.
As much as many of us like to scoff at the idea of reopening Aberystwyth to Carmarthen, doing it as a narrow-gauge line could make (marginally) more sense. A cheaper alignment might be possible, and less land-take required. Still very much pie-in-the-sky of course!

If GBR was to have a narrow-gauge division though, I'd start with the Lynton & Barnstaple.

The V o R was owned by the GWR, hence why it ended up as part of BR.

 

[generalnerd]

Like others have said above, make nationalised narrow gauge services - but here’s the catch that makes my post unique and special - build new ones on beeched lines, but run the trains as if they were a Mainline train (integrated fares, etc)

 

[The Planner]

Like others have said above, make nationalised narrow gauge services - but here’s the catch that makes my post unique and special - build new ones on beeched lines, but run the trains as if they were a Mainline train (integrated fares, etc)

Why would you rebuild as narrow gauge? What would be the point.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Why would you rebuild as narrow gauge? What would be the point.

Because if you combine it with HSTEd's idea of rebuilding the rail network in tunnels, you wouldn't need to bore such wide tunnels so it'd be cheaper. Duhhh!

 

[Class450/4DES]

Not only should Alton-Winchester be reinstated, but given the effective ban on new third rail the route should be electrified with 25kV overhead wires, and a fleet of new trains suitable for the route should be provided. When not required by National Rail the Mid-Hants Railway would continue use the line, and the electrification would allow preserved electric trains to operate.

That is a good idea. It gives EMU's such as 455868 a home to reside.

 

[generalnerd]

Why would you rebuild as narrow gauge? What would be the point.

I didn’t know we had to involve logic in this discussion

 

[Pigeon]

Yes! in fact, electrify them too and turn them into British versions of the Rhaetian Railway.

Well, the original power station's still running...

 

[yorksrob]

Ashington and Oakhampton were open lines rather than line rebuilding on an old alignment - does this have implications in grandfathering? I’m thinking whether they can use the earthworks largely as is, but maybe if the line is closed then modern standards on cutting and embankment slopes would be required? It’s noticeable on things like Norton Bridge bypass how the space taken up is significantly wider than old lines.

If it does have implications in terms of "grandfathering" then that's an area for the Government to slash red tape.

If it's safe enough to be permitted under grandfather rights, it's safe enough full stop.

Not only should Alton-Winchester be reinstated, but given the effective ban on new third rail the route should be electrified with 25kV overhead wires, and a fleet of new trains suitable for the route should be provided. When not required by National Rail the Mid-Hants Railway would continue use the line, and the electrification would allow preserved electric trains to operate.

I'd reroute the Mid Hants preserved railway down the Meon Valley. Plenty of disused trackbed down there for use.

 

[43096]

That is a good idea. It gives EMU's such as 455868 a home to reside.

Please could you explain how 455868 would run under 25kV AC…

 

[D6130]

If it does have implications in terms of "grandfathering" then that's an area for the Government to slash red tape.

If it's safe enough to be permitted under grandfather rights, it's safe enough full stop.



I'd reroute the Mid Hants preserved railway down the Meon Valley. Plenty of disused trackbed down there for use.

True....but very little population - and rebuilding West Meon viaduct would cost a fortune. An ideal scheme for this thread though!

 

[yorksrob]

True....but very little population - and rebuilding West Meon viaduct would cost a fortune. An ideal scheme for this thread though!

Fewer people to complain about thrash and whistles surely !

There's even a tunnel if I recall (which enhances the railway experience).

 

[D6130]

There's even a tunnel if I recall (which enhances the railway experience).

I believe it's now a mushroom farm!

 

[Thebaz]

I believe it's now a mushroom farm!

I went to a rave in that tunnel when I was at university. Also the band I played in recorded a track in there!

 

[yorksrob]

I believe it's now a mushroom farm!

I can't stand mushrooms anyway - yuk !!

 

[Meerkat]

If it does have implications in terms of "grandfathering" then that's an area for the Government to slash red tape.

If it's safe enough to be permitted under grandfather rights, it's safe enough full stop.

That’s not how it works.
Reducing the slope on operating railways is very expensive, making the safety gain unaffordable.
Building a new line with substandard earthworks would be adding risk and going to end up in court.
You don’t have to rewire your house because the regs for new build are safer.

 

[Indigo Soup]

You don’t have to rewire your house because the regs for new build are safer.

If you were making substantial alterations to your house, you would have to bring the wiring up to modern regulations.

Likewise, if you were building new infrastructure on a disused line, you'd presumably be expected to make it compliant with modern engineering standards. I'd guess that those standards allow for case-by-case assessment of specific structures, but you'd still have to comply with the results.

 

[yorksrob]

That’s not how it works.
Reducing the slope on operating railways is very expensive, making the safety gain unaffordable.
Building a new line with substandard earthworks would be adding risk and going to end up in court.
You don’t have to rewire your house because the regs for new build are safer.

The former freight lines to Okehampton and Blythe required some rebuilding and improvement to be reopened to passenger usage. However, I'm assuming (feel free to wade in if I'm wrong in this) that as they hadn't officially closed, they didn't require the full remodelling of earthworks and structures to new railway standards.

If a reopened line could be reclassified to this level of intervention, they would presumably become more affordable.

 

[Class450/4DES]

Please could you explain how 455868 would run under 25kV AC…

I see there have been misreads from both ends as the forum title states "without a firm foundation in logic". But you can add OHLE to a 3rd rail unit. Its been tried in the USA. This image of a Hawker Siddeley EMU on google for example. So it COULD be possible. But the MHR could just use 3rd rail.

 

[43096]

I see there have been misreads from both ends as the forum title states "without a firm foundation in logic". But you can add OHLE to a 3rd rail unit. Its been tried in the USA. This image of a Hawker Siddeley EMU on google for example. So it COULD be possible. But the MHR could just use 3rd rail.

What you mean is you missed the bit about 25kV in the post you replied to!

But if you want to put a pan on top of a 455 (nice flat roof on the ex-508 trailer of a 455/7...) then I'd suggest running it on a tram system. And I would suggest that raising the pan under 25kV would be something you'd only do once!

 

[Bald Rick]

If it does have implications in terms of "grandfathering" then that's an area for the Government to slash red tape.

If it's safe enough to be permitted under grandfather rights, it's safe enough full stop.

The former freight lines to Okehampton and Blythe required some rebuilding and improvement to be reopened to passenger usage. However, I'm assuming (feel free to wade in if I'm wrong in this) that as they hadn't officially closed, they didn't require the full remodelling of earthworks and structures to new railway standards.

If a reopened line could be reclassified to this level of intervention, they would presumably become more affordable.

It’s not a case of ‘grandfathering’.

Engineering codes (standards) apply equally.

The issue is that lines that have been out of use for some time are much more likely to have suffered degredation in earthworks, structures and the like, simlly because they have not been inspected let alone maintained. Therefore it is much more likely that they will need some form of remedial works, or even complete reconstruction.

As we have seen with EWR (and many other new lines built on the route of a former line), some existing structures and earthworks have been re-used where they are suitable for the required specification.

 

[Class450/4DES]

What you mean is you missed the bit about 25kV in the post you replied to!

That's why I said both ends.

But if you want to put a pan on top of a 455 (nice flat roof on the ex-508 trailer of a 455/7...) then I'd suggest running it on a tram system. And I would suggest that raising the pan under 25kV would be something you'd only do once!

Okay.

 

[yorksrob]

It’s not a case of ‘grandfathering’.

Engineering codes (standards) apply equally.

The issue is that lines that have been out of use for some time are much more likely to have suffered degredation in earthworks, structures and the like, simlly because they have not been inspected let alone maintained. Therefore it is much more likely that they will need some form of remedial works, or even complete reconstruction.

As we have seen with EWR (and many other new lines built on the route of a former line), some existing structures and earthworks have been re-used where they are suitable for the required specification.

I suppose that bodes well (or at least, ok) for some routes which were not too heavily engineered in the first place.

 

[The Ham]

I wasn't aware of that -- where did the track run through Basingstoke? I imagine that post-war 'new town' status meant the track bed must have long since vanished, but if it hadn't closed and we hadn't had the town planners in, then there would still be a viable route through the town.

According to:

Rail Map online - historic railways, railroads and canals

UK, Ireland and US historic railways, railroads and canals. Includes waggonways, tramways, stations, metro and narrow gauge lines displayed on an interactive Google Map.

www.railmaponline.com

At least part of our run along the allotment of the ring road between Morrisons and B&Q.

Although it wouldn't be much further than the old route to bypass Basingstoke to the west and avoid having to bulldoze part of Basingstoke (unless you think that may improve thinks so want that to happen anyway - I couldn't possibly comment).

 

[BazingaTribe]

According to:

Rail Map online - historic railways, railroads and canals

UK, Ireland and US historic railways, railroads and canals. Includes waggonways, tramways, stations, metro and narrow gauge lines displayed on an interactive Google Map.

www.railmaponline.com

At least part of our run along the allotment of the ring road between Morrisons and B&Q.

Although it wouldn't be much further than the old route to bypass Basingstoke to the west and avoid having to bulldoze part of Basingstoke (unless you think that may improve thinks so want that to happen anyway - I couldn't possibly comment).

Interesting -- sort of going round the Lister Road hill? Another thing to note about local topography is that the existing line from Reading to Winchester runs through the local hill ridges. We were a coaching 'gap town' like a number of similar places in the area like Reading and Beaconsfield where valleys cut through sections of hill on the road to London. So to get anywhere you'd have to be aware of the undulating countryside.

And yeah. I like living here myself for a lot of reasons, but I'll be the first to say the post-war development hasn't aged well. I live in Brighton Hill and the best thing you can say about my house is that it's sturdy. A colleague from where I work in property management saw photos when I was trying to find someone to pave over my garden who wouldn't completely rip me off and said I had chosen the right era of house -- third quarter of the 20th century brick homes tend to be better built than the ghastly concrete town centre buildings.

I'd imagine a new line wouldn't be noticed much among all the roadworks that Winchester Road gets. The main roundabout up by Asda was under renovation for two years. We bought our house very quickly (back in the piranha tank buyers market of 2015 where you basically had to get in before the open day otherwise you'd be bid up out of the affordable range) and my mum, who took me to see it before work one morning and had the offer in and accepted by teatime spent the next few years apologising to my husband that she'd condemned us to live on the wrong side of that roundabout for my husband's job. (He died about 5 1/2 years ago and my mum only recently admitted that he'd apologised to her for transferring a heap of junk from one house to another -- she helped us both buy the house and move in -- after she'd apologised for bouncing him into a house in the 'wrong' part of town.)

Sadly I think the time for a cross-Basingstoke rail route has passed. I doubt the planning applications south of the town would succeed either -- thing is that it's not really just NIMBYism, but that people are now more aware of what they might lose to unrestricted development rather than restoration of brownfield site within towns themselves. We need to do a lot more with what we have in terms of better public road transport before we start ordering more rails.

(Incidentally, earlier this evening I heard a train horn despite living nowhere near the existing railway line. A ghost of light rail past, perhaps? Although it sounded very modern.)