Isle of Wight Steam Railway

These daily coronavirus programmes have degenerated into party politicals which need to be zapped in their present form. Proposals for reviving railways as public transport are backward looking sentimentalism which the British are suckers for,

 

Putting Ventnor back on the railway map, whilst it may have some problems( industrial site at Wroxall station site, water main in the tunnel to re route) and a new bridge & embankment and access road to the camp site, at Shanklin, it makes sence, except that there will have to be a reliable way to get customers up the hill from Ventnor town centre to the station, but some local dedicated bus service might be a way round that.
But Small brook to Newport is problematical , because how do you share a railway with a heritage railway? I can't see how it can be done, unless the idea is that the IOWSR, provides the traction, and operates the service, using an hired in DMU with steam during the season between 10 and 5, with a couple of DMU services outside of it, which of course is a total non starter.

 

Well, you run the bus to Shanklin and save a deal of money.

There were several attempts to provide a funicular up to Ventnor station, the last being in the Southern Railway era. Some of the necessary land was actually acquired. Then someone started a bus service to the station which prompted the Southern Railway, who were not fools, to let the powers to build the funicular expire.

I have always regarded this as the point when the contraction of the system became inevitable.

 

I suppose it all depends on how much you need to guarantee connections at the other end with the ferries , If traffic is heavy between Ventnor and Shanklin then clearly a direct train will be a faster option, it all comes down to cost in the end, and at what point does providing a reliable service you can guarantee to get you to your destination on time at a socially acceptable cost .
How much would it actually cost to extend the new works to include re opening the closed section to Ventnor I wonder?

 

Given the looming depression then a programme of government funded infrastructure works may well be needed to get the economy moving again. The extra cash cost of this programme may be small when compared with the cost of supporting millions of unemployed and will have the benefit of leaving a useful legacy.

 

..... though it would be far better spent on improving the energy efficiency of domestic dwellings, which account for a large percentage of CO2 emissions nationally, yet AFAICS (and probably because national govt expect local govt to do something ... and vice versa) doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar. If megabucks of public money are to be spent, let's for Bob's sake, spend it where we'll see permanent financial and environmental benefits, rather than on pointless vainglorious political willy waving to impress clueless idiots.

[\End of Rant]

 

I didn't comment on whether or not this was the correct use of any public works money that might become available..................

 

Sorry ..... it's just that this particular chestnut's been spat out of the fire so many times that one begins to suspect the current proposal's not unduly ...... meritorious.

 

As you will gather Howard, I do more than "suspect"!

 

Would they be proposing to extend the 3rd rail electrification?

 

On a line NR does not own? If, and its going to be a big if, any of the closed lines reopen, i doubt electrification will be on the cards, just a basic railway with limited facilities possibly Shanklin to Ventnor might be juiced up, but that will be the only one.

 

What would work at Ventnor, given the difficulties of doing much with the Wight Road system - cost including disruption and getting agreement to any scheme - would
be not only to have a station with at least two platform faces passively provided for but to make it the interchange for several buse routes ideally for it to be main Ventor bus station with full bus/train connections at least once an hour at an obvious clock face time - ideally on the hour or the half hour.

Is there a good estimate of the running time from the pier head to Ventnor with the extra distance and two extra stations? The fixed time at the Ryde end would be
to connect at the pier head with the ferries to Portsmouth.

 

I like the bus interchange idea - but it still isn't anywhere near the town, so the 'problem' of a sub-optimal station site is just added to the buses.

Fair question about the increased time, the question would be whether it pushed you into needing a third train in operation, as this would bump costs up.

 

Sorty, but that's simply unrealistic ..... The proportion of overall time consumed by such interchanges isn't vaguely justifiable in terms of mileages on the island. If such a scheme were workable, why not save one whole bunch of taxpayers' money by providing a railhead at the existing Shanklin Station? Answer: because you'd still have the unavoidable time penalty of modal interchange.

If you look at any map of the Island's population density, only Newport and Cowes really stand out as isolated from the existing Island Line, with the Ventnor conurbation, along the coastal shelf towards St. Lawrence, being too diffuse to benefit from one single station.

Regarding the Ryde - Newport - Cowes line, this was actually (and yes, wrongly, IMO) slated for closure, at the same time as the Newport - Sandown line (i.e. long before Beeching), with a 10 year stay of execution grudgingly conceded, due to the indifferent state of the roads.

BTW: This conversation properly belongs on the 'Island Line' thread, in General Railway Chat. We should all try to keep this 'ere thread for IWSR matters.

 

Perhaps in a foolhardy effort on my part to turn the subject away from this great crisis dominating all our lives, even if but a moment, I was intrigued to read in the latest issue of Steam Railway Magazine that the IoWSR are in talks over possibly acquiring Robert Stephenson Work No. 2309 Haydock an 0-6-0 tank engine from the National Trust. This being due to them having their collection under review, looking at relinquishing some of their collection to more appropriate new homes I assume. Though as to be expected discussion have been put on hold for the moment due to current events.

Certainly seeing at the loco is meant to be identical to one that worked on the island before (the first to carry the name 'Freshwater'), I personally could see the engine fitting in very well on the IoWSR, assuming of course the railway intended to restore the engine to steam at some stage and not just have it on static display.

It would help them get one step closer to hosting primarily appropriate motive power for their railways operations at least, apart from the Ivatt Tanks of course, that help bear the load for their older shed-mates.

 

Why does its representation of the original "Freshwater" depend on it being returned to steam?

 

Well it doesn't in all honesty, that's just me and my preference to have every steam engine in working order, but if the railway wanted it merely for display purposes that's fair enough.

Be curious though if such an engine would be useful for the railway operational wise, perhaps in the long term would be an ideal loco to pair up with the Oldbury coach set?

 

Do any picture exist of the original engine, as I understand Haydock has had some modifications, from the original Stephenson design, the tanks , are straight topped, instead of curved , And should the IOWSR acquire it, will it end up with two Freshwater's , both 0-6-0 T , that might get confusing, when someone gets told, go light up Freshwater ,

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate here but, as an industrial loco which spent its entire working life in Lancashire, would a more appropriate home not be somewhere like Ribble Steam Railway?
Ray.

 

If its a chance to acquire an engine of a type that was used in the early days of the IOW , then there is also merit in that, just as much as there would be if the IOWSR announced a plan to build a replica BP 2-4-0 T