Swanage to Wareham reopening delayed

[bishdunster]

Apparently , the new through service to Wareham has been postponed, due to the class 121Bubblecar and 117 3car DMUs currently at Eastleigh having had the axles condemned after ultrasonic testing, due to corrosion. Delivery of replacement axles is quoted to be 16 weeks, and new bearings 28 weeks as the bearings are imperial sizes and will have to come from the U.S.A. The service will not now start until either late 2016 or possibly early 2017. Bad news for all concerned after all the hard work by so many people over the last 40 years . It beggars belief that this country was at the forefront of the heavy engineering industry for centuries, and now we have to wait 28 weeks for bearings to be supplied from the U.S.A. A sad reflection on the state of the nation:-x

 

[SpacePhoenix]

In the summer time are all of SWT's DMUs spoken for (between service trains and maintenance)? if they aren't could SWT operate "Summertime Specials" to Swanage?

 

[NSEFAN]

It's not that surprising when you think about it. The rolling stock being used is very old, so such things should be expected. Why would parts be stocked in readily-available quantity for what must be a handful of remaining units? Perhaps in the mean time an arrangement could be sought with Hastings diesels to provide a unit? Their units are already suitable for mainline running and would be more authentic to the route than a class 117 or 121.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

It's not that surprising when you think about it. The rolling stock being used is very old, so such things should be expected. Why would parts be stocked in readily-available quantity for what must be a handful of remaining units? Perhaps in the mean time an arrangement could be sought with Hastings diesels to provide a unit? Their units are already suitable for mainline running and would be more authentic to the route than a class 117 or 121.

Yes, I was just thinking about Hasting Diesels too, their unit would be fine on the line.

Surely another preserved heritage line may have something suitable they could let to the Swanage Railway?

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, I was just thinking about Hasting Diesels too, their unit would be fine on the line.

Surely another preserved heritage line may have something suitable they could let to the Swanage Railway?

In the longer term, there seem to be a few preserved thumpers around the place. Perhaps they could come to an arrangement for one of them to relocate.

 

[341o2]

Yes, I was just thinking about Hasting Diesels too, their unit would be fine on the line.

Surely another preserved heritage line may have something suitable they could let to the Swanage Railway?

The problem is that any stock only passed for carriage of passengers under a LRO would not be permitted to do so on the national network, hence the work being undertaken on these units.

Was there for the winter warmer, the crossing gates at Norden have been installed

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The problem is that any stock only passed for carriage of passengers under a LRO would not be permitted to do so on the national network, hence the work being undertaken on these units.

Was there for the winter warmer, the crossing gates at Norden have been installed

Apart from the installation of TPWS equipment and central locking, what else has to be modified or installed for a preserved train to run on the national network?

 

[edwin_m]

Since it appears the Swanage trains are intended to share track with relatively fast and frequent SWT services, I would expect the units used would need to comply with the restrictions on Mk1 and similar stock (which I think catch some but not all DMU classes) and also require central door locking. The dispensation given to the NYMR on the Whitby line, where other passenger trains are slow and infrequent, probably wouldn't be acceptable ehre. There is a precedent in the use of 121s on Chiltern and formerly ATW but it appears DMUs from other lines might be ruled out by the Mk1 restriction or at the very least need TPWS and central door locking.

TPWS may not be a huge change as it was designed to be easily substituted for the AWS equipment which almost all DMUs would have carried during their service lives. But I imagine central door locking would involve fitting locks and associated wiring over the whole unit, which would be pretty costly and probably incompatible with preserving any vehicle considered to be of historic value. The Swanage website also mentions on train monitoring and recording, which has been fitted to some heritage steam locos so probably more difficult than TPWS but less difficult than CDL.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the mk1 restrictions have largely been relaxed in terms of the need for barrier vehicles etc, and in any case, Swanage's first gen DMU's would have been caught up in them anyway had they remained.

In terms of CDL, both the bubblecar and 117 have a high density door layout AFAIK, so a 205 wouldn't cost any more to fit CDL I would have thought.

They would probably need to have GSMR radio fitted though.

 

[swt_passenger]

In the summer time are all of SWT's DMUs spoken for (between service trains and maintenance)? if they aren't could SWT operate "Summertime Specials" to Swanage?

Already done, and discussed in previous threads. SWT DMU services Waterloo to Wareham (for Swanage) on summer weekends were included in the same TAA that resulted in the Yeovil Jn/Penn Mill/Westbury extras.

Here you are, you were in the discussion: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2088008&postcount=12

 

[edwin_m]

I think the mk1 restrictions have largely been relaxed in terms of the need for barrier vehicles etc, and in any case, Swanage's first gen DMU's would have been caught up in them anyway had they remained.

In terms of CDL, both the bubblecar and 117 have a high density door layout AFAIK, so a 205 wouldn't cost any more to fit CDL I would have thought.

They would probably need to have GSMR radio fitted though.

Each operator of vehicles that fall under the definition of Mk1 has to have its own safety case and operating rules to address the collision risk. Using a different type of DMU might invalidate this and require different risk mitigations, especially if it is considered less crashworthy than what was previously going to be used. Also measures such as manual bolts and stewards, suitlable for railtours where the doors are only used every few hours, may not be appropriate for a much shorter shuttle service. For DMUs there is also a greater fire risk so emergency evacuation could be more of an issue.

I don't dispute that CDL could be fitted to other classes of DMU, it's a question of whether it is cost-effective to do so for a short-term use and also whether the fitment would damage a historic vehicle particularly if it is the only survivor of its kind.

I agree GSM-R would be needed, but is probably fairly simple to install and if necessary the driver could be issued with a portable handset.

 

[455driver]

Surely another preserved heritage line may have something suitable they could let to the Swanage Railway?

Their wheelsetsvwill probably be in the same state as the ones on the units from Swanage, perfectly usable on a preserved line at 20mph but no good for use on the mainline.
Then there are secondary door locks, OTMR, GSMR etc to fit so it wouldn't be viable to 'borrow' a unit and equip it, although borrowing one already fitted would be viable.

I wonder if the 'scrap' wheelsets will find further use somewhere, assuming the tyres are okay?

 

[dgl]

hastings diesels have 1001 which is mainline certified (according to the fleet list on their website, also confirms it has CDL, OTMR and GSM-R) and has done a railtour to Swanage before (and thus is cleared for the route) so that could be an option. But the real question is have they go the money to hire it temporarily and would they want a new type of stock that they would have to learn to maintain.

 

[Firesprite]

A Hastings unit was based at Swanage between June 1990 and January 1993. It was some time ago, but maintaining unit at the time was not a problem.

The main thing is services do have to start by the end of 2016 due to the requirements laid down in the grants agreements. The question is how.

Swanage do have a mainline cleared Class 33, shame it's not 33111 otherwise push pull working with a 442 (Blue sky thinking).

There is the Vivarail class 230, totally untested in service conditions.

In the short term outside the main peak timetable, it would be possible to use a couple of mainline passed coaches with the 33. In July and August there would not be time in the timetable to allow the 33 to run round at Swanage. Possibly if turned around at Corfe Castle.

 

[fgwrich]

Swanage do have a mainline cleared Class 33, shame it's not 33111 otherwise push pull working with a 442 (Blue sky thinking).

.

If only! 108 may be more mainline ready than 111 (108 & 111 are both owned by the Class 33/1 Preservation Group.) being an ex Fragonset machine - along with Nemesis Rail's 33103. A 33/1 could also Multi Work with the Bluebells 'rouge' 4VEP, although it would require a few modifications to the VEP for ETH.

The other 33 at Swanage - 012 - Is currently at Nemesis's place at Burton having it's new Bearings refitted. If you want to get an idea about how costly and frustrating replacing bearings can be, then unfortunately they're the group to ask given their misfortune with 12s!

 

[antharro]

Hah, I was going to suggest a loco + 442 set, just for the hell of it. But (slightly) more seriously, "borrow" the diesel from the Lymington and replace it with a 456 borrowed from Wimbledon, I'm sure one missing 456 won't be a problem in London!

Hold on, isn't there a 458 at Bomo works at the moment? Steal that instead.

(And no, I'm not being serious with any of the above).

Shame to hear the date will be put back, I've been looking forward to it.

 

[Firesprite]

Services now to start at Easter 2017. As informed on Sunday while at the railway.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I never cease to marvel at the railway's talent in general for loosing a lot of time in projects for reasons apparently easy to overcome. I attribute this to my lack of knowledge, but Purbeck is bad for road traffic, the track is down and apparently ready for some time...

Andrew

 

[341o2]

I never cease to marvel at the railway's talent in general for loosing a lot of time in projects for reasons apparently easy to overcome. I attribute this to my lack of knowledge, but Purbeck is bad for road traffic, the track is down and apparently ready for some time...

Andrew

with due resoct, I disagree. If the "track has been there and ready for some time" why the need to sponsor a sleeper. Some 3,000 need to be replaced to upgrade track "sutiable for the occasional passage of charter trains" to regular passenger services

http://www.swanagerailwaytrust.org.uk/index.php/appeals/97-sponsor-a-sleeper

Just for starters

 

[455driver]

with due resoct, I disagree. If the "track has been there and ready for some time" why the need to sponsor a sleeper. Some 3,000 need to be replaced to upgrade track "sutiable for the occasional passage of charter trains" to regular passenger services

http://www.swanagerailwaytrust.org.uk/index.php/appeals/97-sponsor-a-sleeper

Just for starters

But there are bits of wood <just about> holding 2 steel rails at roughly the right distance apart so it is obviously fit to run a passenger train across isn't it, I mean it isn't like there are any inspections etc to pass or bits of paper to get is there!

 

[a_c_skinner]

Fair points, but there have been movements over that track. Anyhow I stick by my broad brush observation that Purbeck is a traffic jam and the rail infrastructure basically in place.

The target date has slipped by nearly a year for want of rolling stock. Months I could understand, if the stock were a write off too, but well, honestly.

Andrew

 

[CockneySparrow]

It's not that surprising when you think about it. The rolling stock being used is very old, so such things should be expected. Why would parts be stocked in readily-available quantity for what must be a handful of remaining units? Perhaps in the mean time an arrangement could be sought with Hastings diesels to provide a unit? Their units are already suitable for mainline running and would be more authentic to the route than a class 117 or 121.

Probably built to order which will take more time

 

[Firesprite]

The line has had to upgraded from a low speed freight line to a passenger line. Before the work started, the line speed in places was only 10mph. Swanage Railway only took control in September 2014.

A great deal of work has had to be carried out including 1,200 wooden track sleepers replaced, half a mile of track replaced, A quarter-mile-long embankment given a major upgrade which required 1000's of tons of spoil which needed time to settle, Bridges repaired, Undergrowth and drainage cleared along six miles of embankments, A replacement set of points at Furzebrook. Along with a upgraded road crossing at Norden plus signalling and Crossing Box and a new road-rail interchange for stock transfer. All this has been done in the last 15 months while at the same time maintaining the existing line between Norden and Swanage. A credit to all involved in the project.

 

[theironroad]

Let's not forget that the vast majority of the work on this project is carried out by unpaid volunteers doing an excellent job.

Happened to pass by the new Norden crossing today and it all looks very smart.

 

[L&Y Robert]

I'm wondering how the new through service to Wareham will be handled at Wareham. Will the train come to the Up or Down platform? Although it could come into either, it will inevitably have run on the Down "Wrong Road" at least as far as the crossover, which suggests it would be better to complete the run on the main line by arriving into the Down platform. But is the service designed to connect with any main line services, some of which themselves require the Down platform?

 

[Firesprite]

For the time being until the foot crossing is closed and replaced with new ramps to the bridge. All services will use the down platform. As Network Rail will not allow use of the crossover and sidings until this work is done. It would have been better to have reinstated the up bay instead.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Is the fitting of central locking the only thing that would need to happen to any Mk1s above the solebar? If it is could they get the two Cromptons main line certified and top&tail 5 mk1s?

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

​

For the time being until the foot crossing and replaced with new ramps to the bridge. All services will use the down platform. As Network Rail will not allow use of the crossover and sidings until this work is done. It would have been better to have reinstated the up bay instead.

Someone told me that the unused bay platform on alongside the London bound platform was to be use for the Swanage services, there is just enough room for a loco run around there too. However that may be something for the future. It would be logical.

 

[theironroad]

For the time being until the foot crossing is closed and replaced with new ramps to the bridge. All services will use the down platform. As Network Rail will not allow use of the crossover and sidings until this work is done. It would have been better to have reinstated the up bay instead.

Trains from swanage can terminate and tiurn around in the up platform at Wareham without crossing the foot crossing. Up platform is bi-directioknal since resignal.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

​

Someone told me that the unused bay platform on alongside the London bound platform was to be use for the Swanage services, there is just enough room for a loco run around there too. However that may be something for the future. It would be logical.

Incorrect info. No plans to bring back up bay at moment.

 

[Firesprite]

Trains from swanage can terminate and tiurn around in the up platform at Wareham without crossing the foot crossing. Up platform is bi-directioknal since resignal.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Actual I was quoting from item seven of the minutes from the August 2015 Purbeck Community Rail Partnership meeting.

https://www.dorsetforyou.com/media/210121/Minutes-4-August-2015/pdf/PCRP_minutes_4_Aug_15_approved.pdf

As both crossovers are cleared for use. This does means that if the Swanage train is on the down track. A Weymouth bound train could use the crossover and call at the Up platform before using the second crossover to switch back. Therefore allowing a connection between trains. As to the up bay reinstatement could be costly as a load of S&T boxes are now in the way.