Steaming back into Ryde?

Not wishing to really get involved in this discussion but the Torbay & Dartmouth don't have toilets on their trains and I would hardly describe them as foolish.

 

This thread continues to be wayward! Hopefully whoever operates Pierhead to Shanklin, (assuming the railway is able to keep going which is not a given) will not have its station lavatories "wired for sound" in the manner of a certain tourist railway. This prompted paranoid thoughts of the "have they got CCTV as well" kind!

On board sanitation on this service is likely to be as high a priority as for Southern Vectis on their buses i.e. zero.

Incidentally whatever does run a future service will have a much more formidable competitor than was the case in 1967 when the line was electrified. Then a bus was likely to be powered by a Gardner 5LW mated to a crash gearbox which could only climb the steeper bits at a crawl. Complete with cart springs these vehicles were essentially pre-war in concept. Nowadays the buses have air springs, automatic transmissions and plenty of power. Many are brand new or nearly so.

Whatever rail vehicles come as replacements, the traditional I.O.W. scenario of "have a look in the scrap road, do it up and send it over; it will be better than what is there now", is less likely to succeed than it did in 1923, or 1967 for that matter. Equipment adequate to compete will result in greater capital cost.

P.H.

 

Maybe their passengers have stronger bladders. I must admit that it's been 40 years since I've ridden that line an I can't recall if they had loos back then or not.

 

The loo discussion was not just about IoW but please feel free to shift the goalposts back to the original discussion.

 

Should have added most of the stations are devoid of toilets as well.....

 

I suppose that if island line closes, it might be the best out come for the steam railway, that way the way will be clear to operate into esplanade, assuming they can afford the rent for the station, any public that want to travel to shanklin can catch the bus, assuming they dont have luggage or pushchairs and dont need the loo,
then one day, as long as the track bed gets protected, the line could be relaid, as a side thought, what would attract more visitor numbers? operating from ryde to wotton, or operating the heritage railway from Ryde to Shanklin ? had the line closed in 1967, through out, and the preservation movement started between say Brading ,and Sandown , what kind of position would the line have been in now, would we have seen the line re opened to shanklin,then ryde, and people saying, isnt it time to re open towards Newport ?

 

As seems to be par for the course, common sense seems to have evapouated in the course of this discussion in favour of points scorin and /or semantics. The IoW and T & D are relatively short lines and journey times are relatively short, so passengers can be reasonably be expected to hang on until they reach the terminus , where the time taken to run round affords them time to relive themselves if necessary. On the longer lines, however, the intermediate station stops are not long enough to guarantee that no-one will be left behind if the train is not to be delayed, and so on-board facilities are desirable. Like many things in life, the crossover point is not clear cut and the old companies knew that and built non-corridor lavatory stock for intermediate length runs.

 

I can't understand this pre-occupation with toilets. There is no preserved line long enough to need toilets on board. I need the loo more often nowadays than I used to, but still have never used a plane toilet, despite 10 hour flights. However on my latest flight of an hour duration, I noticed two people used the loos before the plane even took off, so maybe I'm being unfair.

 

I am surprised and disappointed that the Great Contrarian Paul Hitch has not yet shone light upon how "Byzantine" the structure of the 13 mile IOW rail network has become – involving as it does IOWSR, Stagecoach Group, Network Rail, HSBC Rail, and the Australian Infrastructure Fund Macquirie, who own and maintain the wettest 700 yards of it.

Of all of these firms, only one is legally island based. IOW Council is rather taken by the replacement of heavy rail by trams. The IOW political and business community enjoys a very intimate and Brotherly role in shaping the local actuality – which makes the future of Ryde-Shanklin partly a "lodge-istics" question (there are no less than 17 active Masonic Lodges there). Some of them will have noticed that the annual railway subsidy is £2 million, which is an attractive lump of cash if they can get their paws on it. IOWSR is probably right to be cautious, but it might be the perfect choice to lead and shape change. Their track record is impeccable.

This winter Island Line is acting very much in the heritage railway model, viz it is closed until March. It does not necessarily need four global/multi-national players to deliver a train service on 13 miles of line. Unified management, with one set of overheads, might be better placed to unlock the synergy and potential of the whole network to benefit the local economy. The present structure is unlikely to do that.

 

Trams would in fact be a good option for rail replacement if the Capital could be found.

 

Presume overhead power but wouldn't bridge at Ryde be a bit of a problem?

 

Good to see G-F-G join the discussion with a characteristically left field point of view. Yes, prior to 1923 my habitual journey from Esplanade to Haven Street would be over metals jointly or separately owned by four separate companies and we seem to have reverted!

If the railway were translated miraculously into perfect condition the real problem would still be the one seen from the platform at Esplanade. At high water spring tides, even on a still day, the sea is very close indeed to the tracks. Electricity and sea water tend not to be good companions so on a lumpy day trains stop at Esplanade and the unfortunate passengers either clamber into a minibus or walk down the pier. Additionally, modern trains, whether electric or not, tend to have a lot of electronic/electrical gear underfloor and apart from the pier there is Esplanade tunnel just waiting to be inundated!

My own favoured solution, given enough money (and adequate clearances in the tunnel), would be LRT which could be diverted to street running as far as St. Johns or to just beyond the tunnel but I really wonder if there is enough business. High seas on the Pier would still be a consideration. Only in the very peak season in 2014 was there even the suggestion of a "scrum" aboard. Incidentally the figure for the annual loss quoted to me was £3 million rather than £2 million.

An alternative would be to adopt a system similar to that initiated over an old double track line between Gosport and Fareham of a reserved busway. Anecdotal comments suggest this works well enough. The interchange at Smallbrook would be retained but between trains and buses with the acquisition of a strip of land between there and Brading, where the formation width is double track as far as Sandown already.

I hasten to say that these views are solely my personal ones. I don't envy those who are to be directly involved in discussions.

Renewed thanks to G-F-G for his comments.

Paul H.

 

I wouldn't regard losing a few services a year at high tide a major issue, they often coincide with disruption or cancellation of the Catamarans anyway - I'd be much more concerned about the less regular but much more expensive flood damage caused by Monktonmead Brook.

Chris

 

Though to be fair, at least (so I understand) SWT own their own trains, which is more than can be said for the IWCR pre-1923, who were rather partial to getting their engines on the never-never from the Southern Counties Rolling Stock Company - which was all fine until they sold a couple of ancient Slaughter Gruning 2-2-2 well tanks for scrapping in the early years of the last century and then found that they didn't actually own them!

Tom

 

I don't see why as Trams are generally lower than heavy rail , even if it is a tube trian

 

Does anyone have the max headroom in the Esplanade Tunnel?

 

Some of the Mk1 and DMU coaches on the DSR do have toilets but only about 1/3 of them. In the other 2/3rds of the coaches, the space where the toilets where have been converted to store pushchairs and other luggage. Seeing as the journey is only 1/2 hour, only having 2-4 toilets per train is enough and the space is more valuable.

 

I'd hate to the cabin steward seeing what you had left me in your 'air turbulence' bag. Or do you just not eat or drink for a day before travelling? Or do you take a very big bulldog clip with you?

These options are not, of course, available to the general public, who, if we wish them to visit the Railway for several hours, will inevitably need to 'make room' for their next visit to the buffet car or café......

Kind regards and compliments of the season

Robin White

 

I regularly used to do transatlantic flights to both east and west coasts without having to visit the lavatory - just went immediately before boarding and as soon as I got off. I like a window seat, and it causes a lot of upheaval to vacate it. I even managed London to Singapore on one occasion, but I was extremely glad to disembark!

 

Sounds like a good compromise.