MHR Restorations and Overhauls

It's been discussed before, but are there any plans to get more undercover storage at MHR? I visited Bodmin and Wenford railway over Christmas. They have more undercover storage than we have, including a new shed for operational locos. They are also borrowing Wadebridge back in the Spring before it goes out of ticket. I would have thought that a shed at Ropley for operational locos should be a priority, plus one for rolling stock at Alresford.
Your thoughts

 

Where would you put it then?

 

And that is the problem. There is nowhere that a carrage shed can be built without major very expensive ground works. The only space is in the Butts Juction triangle of land and then you have the problem of vandals. The only other option would be to build in the headshunt but then you would lose very valuable siding space.

Engine storage shed? The only possible option would be to build up the land where the turntable was and build a semi roundhouse but then how do you connect up the roads, again very expensive ground works needed and the purchase of parts of the field next door, to extend the ground along the shed to lay access roads

 

I believe there is a wish, desire, dream to have covered accom down at Alresford....... the major stumbling block being lack of the folding stuff.......

 

Agreed, I think it is a case of the railway is aware of the need and its in 5 year development plan to provide covered space for locos etc.

In relation to Bittern being outside, its no different to Britannia spending the year outside at Ropley or in fact Nunney Castle which I believe lives outside in Bristol.

 

i have always thought that something like a semi round house, set in the corner of where the manor was, would be an attraction, and possible home to some of the out of service engines,and those not needed for service, but it would need a lot of money, that the railway does not have, and would no doubt wish to spend on more urgent priorities, covered accommodation for coaches especially is needed, even just to save on the bodywork repairs and repaints, that are needed

 

One issue with a roundhouse-type shed is that they aren't especially efficient on space, or looked at another way, the unit cost per length of storage road is relatively high.

How much space is there at the country end of Alresford, on the assumption that an extension that way will never occur?

Tom

 

A lot less than you think!

I said earlier, I believe the long term plan/desire, is to have covered accom there for carriages & the like, nothing fancy, but as always the major stumbling block is lack of the folding stuff......

As for an engine shed......... just where would it go?, given the Rly isn't exactly blessed with spare tracts of land on which to build!

 

I believe the plan to provide covered storage at Ropley consists of digging out the bank inside (away from the running line) of the head shut to provide another if not two additional roads the other side of the bridge behind the boilershop. This could then have a roof and walls installed to provide secure, safe and dry storage for out of ticket/traffic locos.

The issue with this location being I cannot see how public access could be provided to this location for viewing.

 

I know , the only 2 options, are as Huricane says, the other side of the bridge, or to build up the road way and add further roads to the excisting shed, but that would mean only 4 engines could be kept under cover unless you extend it right up to station road, but it would mean buying a large part of a field that the owner may not wish to sell. for the short term, all that could be done would be to tarp engines over,

 

What Hurricane has said, I believe is going to happen, though no idea when!........ and will be cover for those box shaped lumps that run on petroleum distillate..... no bad thing - out of sight, out of mind.....

 

Oi Oi !!!
Those box shaped lumps keep the railway running when it's too dry to trust a kettle amongst the fields, and when it's too slippy to trust them to get up the banks reliably

Happy New Year.

 

I'm guessing it (the additional siding / cover) would be achieved by adding the new track after the bridge.
I understand why those working on the railway want to see the locos and carriages undercover, from a protection and deterioration perspective, but doesn't hiding everything in (potentially ugly) buildings remove some of the appeal to the general public.
It can be quite nice to see a line of locos, and I bet most of the public won't be aware that many of them aren't running if they are whole.

 

Would it be possible to build some form of tunnel under the bridge that way you could link it up to the viewing gallery above the boiler shop and create a discovery trail of sorts

 

Unfortunately they won't appear whole for long, things will fade and there will be some bits that really oughtn't be out side, and soon enough instead of when passing by a remark of "Oh that one mustn't be running today" it'll be "That one must be broken." The bluebell's proposed carriage shed is reasonably pleasing to look at, and anyway, as long as it isn't immediately within sight of the station it doesn't matter too much, eg. Kidderminster carriage shed or Highley engine house.

 

In an ideal world, i would have loved to have seen a museum built at Alresford, or Ropley that could have held engines, including some from York the M7 and the Q1, ones that had a posibility of a return to steam in the future, that way once 850 was out of ticket, another NRM engine could be assessed and funds raised

 

OTOH few things look worse to the general public than a line of rusty and even part disassembled wrecks, even some of them have got blue tarpaulins blowing off them. The MHR headshunt eyesore actually has put me off visiting the railway because I had such a negative emotional reaction to it. Irrational I agree, but nevertheless true... Presumably its a bit better now

 

Only one extra road is worth building, any more and the additional length for the switches takes too much length. The existing head shunt would need to be slewed away from the running line to give clearance for any walls/roof supports. On the plus side, lowering the two roads to level, or even the second road falling from the bridge, would deepen the cutting and help hide the structure from view. Even if the roof were dark green I'm not sure what the people on the other side of the valley would say about the visual aspects. There's also the problem of buying a strip of productive field for the cutting and any planting required to hide the structure, and disposing of the chalk excavated from the cutting.

Public access would not be possible through the bridge as the headshunt is too close to the abutment. A separate access would be needed off the road, together with further security etc.