Peak Rail General Discussion

I'm pretty sure that Spa Valley trains are not permitted to be running between Birchden and Eridge at the same time as a Southern service, but I believe that's to do with the way Forge Farm level crossing operates. However trains can be in Eridge station at the same time. However its worth noting that Eridge also has a bay platform where a loco can be held , and to facilitate swaps. There is aso a long term plan to re-lay track to convert the bay into a loop, but the stumbling block is steps and a path across the trackbed to the car park.

 

Our trains are timetabled to normally avoid or pass Southern at Eridge. Both operators can have 'issues' however and in that event we pass where and whenever we meet or overtake. I was DEMU driver last Wednesday and the morning both were to time but in the afternoon Southern had buses due to points and bridge strikes, we waited on the last Spa Departure to connect with a Southern service.
Our T&T works well as apart from the first and last service we have a loco in the Bay at all times for customers to look at/photograph. We are not big enough to afford to steam two locos every timetable day and I suspect the Peak is the same.
Brian

 

Thanks for explaining, I visited the Tunbridge Wells end of your line a couple of weeks ago but unfortunately didn't have time for a ride.

Dave

 

Dear Mods, plse can you find a more suitable home for the 'ways of operating a railway' stuff above so we can focus on Action Group matters? Thanks

 

Theres a long history to the current Matlock arrangements and the General Discussion thread better explains it (thanks to PR's signalling guru!). It isn't ideal long term but it makes sense 'for now'. It was a big achievement getting in to Matlock after many setbacks, especially with the threat of losing the trackbed because of the various quarry redevelopment proposals. But progress since then has been modest.

There's no problem with NR and PR trains being in the station at the same time, indeed the connections between services are one of the advantages of a shared station, subject to timetabling limitations.

Longer term I don't think it's a sustainable method of opearting and the station visitor facilities could do with being enhanced. The stain itself is attractive and in a decent location, and car parking is good.

We come back round to the need for shareholder and member input to a plan, so we can confidently provide the necessary financial and physical support. A good relationship with NR could lead to an imaginative solution with a different track layout or operating arrangement of benefit to all parties. Too many other distractions at PR at the moment to focus on Matlock!

 

If you trawl back through to the first few pages on this forum you’ll find a detailed answer I wrote up on the operation of Matlock,reasons etce etc etc

As for the spa valley railway, a few years ago at a talk for the IRSE in Kidderminster both the Spa valley and ourselves did a talk on how we both operate,the differences were noted ,I seem to recall a member of the IRSE and ex HMRI suggesting someone should take A relook at their operation and include the bits of Prs system as we don’t have issues running long side other timetabled Nr services.

The operation at Matlock whilst not the best solution was the simplest to utilise and effect and it’s first mention was by BR management back as far as 1987 in very early discussions, I have a piece of paper in the files to that effect, it would have had two seperate runrounds for NR and for PR side by side had NR not changed the plans which in the end had some 42 versions to get to what’s there now, Arthur redrew the plans by hand every time

Before anyone says why didn’t we have an in platform run round, all il say is token system alterations,very busy branch line service and more chance platting smoke

 

Sorry Dominic, but is there any technical reason why the train set could not be propelled back to Riverside, run round and propelled back to Matlock? i.e. would the existing signalling permit this or is it simply the extra time involved that causes this not to be done?

 

Propelling

propelling would be an issue, the method agreed with Nr was to leave behind the incoming engine on the first train, then once the passenger train has left Matlock the loco drops down to riverside,again once the passenger train has returned the loco drops on and it all begins again, hence riverside, the last train off the day goes back top and tailed.

Propelling whilst very much done In the old days has to be agreed with Nr, that’s the issue, if the persons you’re dealing with on the other end are not happy with the proposed method,you can quote standards and precedence all you want,it’s not your railway you’re operating over,it’s leased and you will simply end up in years of discussions tying up getting nowhere, I know several lines where theres a simple answer to the interface but trying to get that agreed to is the hard part, even though it would meet standards and was done that way previously.

It’s all about agreements, money and such, common sense doesn’t always gaurantee a solution.

 

Ever since the track layout at Whitby was rationalised, any train with a loco that required to run round had to propel the stock out of the platform, into the sidings, run round thn propel the stock back to the platform. All this was over a well used foot crossing with no gate control. When NYMR trains started running to Whitby, this ritual happened five time/day. Now there is platform 2 with its own loop so the sidings are rarely used. However, trains can no longer be propelled into the sidings and, if a train arrives in platform 2 and needs to go into the sidings, the loco has to run round and haul the train the few hundred yards. It then has to run round to drag the set back, again, before a final run round in the platform to be ready for departure. The loco now does more light engine mileage than the stock does in this operation..

 

Thanks Dom, for clarifying this. As Steve has pointed out, propelling was done at Whitby before the track layout alterations, so obviously the NYMR management had negotiated this procedure with NR. Given the other issues confronting PR management at the present time, I suspect it will be some time before we will see a more efficient procedure at Matlock.

 

The NYMR didn't negotiate this with Network Rail; it was the standard procedure for any loco hauled train requiring to use Bog Hall sidings and had been ever since the line was rationalised. Probably before that, too, as there never was a loop in the station.

 

If it’s was done previously back in BR days you will probably the instruction has been carried across through from BR by local agreement, else there’s a black hole in operating instructions not agreed to by both sides at the time, eg if there was an incident etcetera, who’d get asked the question “who gave you permission to do that”I’d be very surprised if NR were not on the same page as the NYMR paperwork wise, I’ve seen some of it and it goes into a few hundred pages of detail in all for the whole project.

the NYMR were very much involved in the alterations at Whitby as were a lot of my colleagues in signalling to put all the extra ground frames And equipment in at Whitby, the token alterations at Grosmont and im told the NYMR also keep an on call person for the token system just in case it goes down as it affects the branch quite obviously delay wise.

Propelling as many would agree shouldn’t be an issue,it’s been done before safely, can be risk assessed and is neither really new or novel if done with the stock that used to do this such as the 2HAP however try talking with someone at NR about doing it on a section of line where it’s not been done before,where no previous agreement exists and you’re wanting to run regular passenger runs with something that isn’t the 2Hap and youl be in discussions for a long time with NR, the easy bit ironically would likely be getting the proper stock such as the 2HAP stock up and running and certificated safety wise ,the hard part would be the operating agreement over NR

Or as I come to see things, heritage lines do simple solutions, National lines don’t do simple ☹️

 

S an t dept

Andrew and. Myself spent some time yesterday fitting the locking room window frames on the front of the box at rowsley, after some careful planning out by Andrew the frames went together quite quickly and we now know how to put the rear ones together when that hppens next

Andrew also managed some paint work on the bargeboard ends of the box and David has been busy undertaking paintwork on church lane crossing gates and lamps, Peter and Deborah have been busy working on the exchanges and lastly I managed to do some repainting on several ground frames as well as rowsley s ground signals

 

Little bit of side news

Dear Friends and Donors,
I am very pleased to inform you that the Trust has been awarded a Heritage Lottery Grant of £10,000 towards a project called Tracking our Heritage. This will involve volunteers engaging with the local communities in uncovering local heritage based around the section of the former Midland Mainline railway between Matlock and Rowsley. We aim to produce a history of the line drawn from the experiences of former employees and commuters as well as local residents who remember the line before it was closed in 1968. We also wish to speak to volunteers who have helped restore the current line since it reopened as a Heritage Railway on 1975. When completed a booklet and portable exhibition will be produced.
We are to hold show and tell events where visitors can bring memorabilia, share stories and exchange memories.
These are planned for
Saturday 28th April between 11am & 3pm at Darley Dale Station, and
Saturday 9th June between 11am & 3pm at the Imperial Rooms, Matlock
We shall be pleased to see to see you at these events.
May I finally thank any of you who play the National Lottery for providing the funds for this award.
Yours sincerely
Roy Mackinlay
Trustee/Treasurer

Roy also notes that the story has also been notified to the local,newspapers and so forth too for spreading the word more to the public, il append a photograph or two once I get these of the award.

 

Andrew Rodney and myself spent the day fitting the rear locking room windows to rowsley cabin and the missing purlins for the cladding as well as getting the wood to make the window surrounds ready, the ground frames and shunt signals have been repainted too plus I’ve redone the stove black on riversides stove too

Down on site a large group of railway contractors were training in the art of the permanent way, I’m told the group come all the way from the Nottinghamshire region.

The class 25 progresses, the radiator fan housing and radiator motor have been refitted, pipework continues and cabwork and wiring work come next

One of the boilers was being detubed which at least when you’re inside the smokebox gets you out of the rain, I also had a quick chat with the LMSCA gang ,the palvan Harv has restored has now been lettered up.

Thanks to Nigel Corlett for the photograph of the Heritage Lottery presentation grant .

 

Does anyone know if Jackie has left I heard rumours she had gone

 

Interesting rumours

 

The palvan and the 20tonner on the turntable road at the weekend.

Also the Heritage Shunters Trust were busy on various jobs including rebuilding parts of one of their brake vans, when I called in.

 

If you had wandered down the yard Dom you would have seen the Medical Examination Car freshly arrived from the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester

Dave

 

Body looks in good condition, and fairly complete from being restored