Is a physical rail connection important?

Up to a point but not vital. What is more important is a moderately graded access to the tourist railway concerned, preferably with the surface in good order. Plenty of visitors are elderly and/or with mobility problems.

PH

 

There seems to be a school of thought on here that a mainline connection will only be used for incoming charters. A mainline does have other use's for SVR's for example has enabled things such as testing (the 175's from Alsthom) Driver and crew training on things like the Network Rail AutoBallester, testing of Network rails new 73's. Things like these tend to be out of out of hours and unobserved by the public and quite a few Enthusiasts, they don't make the headlines but do put a bit of cash in the pot, sorry to ramble on but just making the point a mainline connection is a bloody useful thing to have and it can be used for more than 'the odd charter every so often' that some people seem to think that's the only use.

 

I don't doubt you are correct about the facility being useful but how often? Daily, weekly. monthly or less frequently? Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating that it, or similar facilities elsewhere are taken out but exclusively with various proposals to spend umpteen millions to provide such connections. That sort of thinking reeks of W.I.B.N. to me.

PH

 

Ultimately... what will earn a railway more revenue, (a) a mainline connection (with its various uses) or (b) facilities (whatever they may be) which make visitors (whoever they may be) go "That was a really enjoyable time", tell their friends and come back again?

Not that the two are necessarily mutually exclusive but, given the sums of money involved, I suspect the latter is higher up the priority list.

Using a slightly different example, I haven't been to the SVR for a few years now, but the last few times I went I would far rather have been able to buy a decent cup of coffee in pleasant surroundings than have a ride along a ridiculously expensive trackbed* to Ironbridge. I love the SVR, I love the ride to Kidderminster, I love getting off the train at Highley and walking through some lovely countryside to Arley and I love the Railwayman's Arms on Bridgnorth station. However, to me - speaking as a punter rather than a railway enthusiast - the whole thing has always been rather let down by the undrinkable, machine-produced liquid masquerading as 'coffee' purchased in a tatty Portakabin at Bridgnorth station.

* Which has its own, well-known issues with subsidence.

 

If you can't put a number to it on this years accounts and find that number is positive, everything is WIBN for you.

As a main line connection important?

To the average Joe with Joette and kids: no!
To those running the railway: Can be!
To those who volunteer: Could well be!
To those who already organised one: Absolutely!

 

Yes the atmosphere in the tatty portacabin is poor hence the plans to develop Bridgnorth in a style sympathetic to the old station buildings. Fund raising via a share issue is launched on the st November

 

"Useful" is a far more accurate word that "important". I doubt very much if any mainline connection is ever as "useful" to a steam railway each and every day as a water tower or an inspection pit or as "important" for that matter. A mainline connection has to be something of genuine utility rather than an item to boast about. Spending several million principally to obtain one is, IMHO, just plain daft. The apotheosis of W.I.B.N!

PH

 

Indeed

The Mid Norfork are current benefiting from being used by one of the FOCs as a location to undertake maintenance / servicing on the Railhead treatment train covering lines out of Norwich

 

The original question used the word "important". I'll stick with that rather than change the word to something you can be even more scathing about...

 

"Useful" is actually an easier hurdle to clear than "important".

PH

 

Don't think it matters how often it's used, it's a case of will it justify the cost? For example the recent Pacific Power event has justified the expense of its maintence this year.

 

I can agree that point.

PH

 

Really? Heritage railways have no real practical use at all. to the General public they are just another place to go and spend money, and if they all vanished tomorrow they would not be missed by 95 % of the population(estimate - ymmv). Yet to those who volunteer, particularly those who started them and lived for them, they are extremely important.

 

So they cannot be important, except to a small number. Not worth spending millions of pounds in order to achieve.

PH

 

And clearance work on the site of the new refreshments building is already well under way!

 

Millions of pounds would seem to disagree! (Yes, I know that LPlus' comments were polemic)

 

You are taking things out of context - which makes your observations totally irrelevant. For example I don't have kids so schools are not particularly 'useful' to me personally.

When people talk about a physical connection between a Heritage railway and the national network and how 'useful' it is they are not referring to its importance to the likes of commuters, HGV drivers, call centre operativeness, cleaners, bakers, etc - they are referring to the Heritage railway concerned. As has been noted several Heritage railways have indeed found that facility to be useful for them - what the wider public think is irrelevant when deciding whether they should be installed.

 

in the case of Swanage, justifying the cost doesn't enter into it. Rebuilding the entire line and operating a service was the original raisin d'etre of the project.

 

I could start another thread with the title "does size matter?" which raises an interesting question about the length of a preserved line as evidenced by the posting about the GWR; would many non-enthusiasts want to go all the way from Honeybourne to Cheltenham Racecourse?

I don't know what the average length of a preserved line in the UK is, probably less than 3 miles. You have to biggies like SVR / WSR but generally they are much less. So when considering (often very protracted) possible extensions to link to NR the benefits in terms of total line length (and time) vs accessibility need to be weighed up, I imagine many children get pretty bored after an hour each way.

I was at Sharpthorne yesterday waiting for the stars of the Bluebell GOS and was thinking "would a station here actually enhance the experience of travelling on the line?" that stretch without the station stop and going at line speed through the tunnel is one of the highlights of the railway IMO (alongside the climb up to Holden Summit)

 

The cost has to be justified to whatever person or organisation meets it. The first flush of enthusiasm is one thing. Sustained increase in business is the important issue.

PH