Project Wareham

You may want to read Modern Railways, and look at the reports there, which include some of the key comparative data around the performance of different train types.

From the outside I hesitate to comment on the specifics of why VivaRail's products have failed to set the world alight, though I confess to always having had some scepticism about a project to take 40 year old District Line DC electric trains and fit them with various forms of power never envisaged for them when they were built. However, there is some difference between adapting an already well proven design (as was the case with the 66s) and a small startup applying innovative ideas.

As for your wider question about heritage railways' business models, I suggest that most heritage railways are always considering and tuning those models. Sadly, however, I observe that they find success in serving a leisure market rather than routine scheduled services.

 

I am at a loss to understand why on earth after two years plus, getting the class 117 & 121 units up to speed for the Wareham service and at least there appears to be a light at the end of the tunnel , would you want to suddenly ditch them and replace with recycled underground stock?
1. Would they fit in our platforms or indeed Wareham? All of the platforms had to be altered in the IOW for the 484's.
2. At this late stage, Do you think that the HMRI/OR&R (and Network Rail) would approve their operation?
3. Who would operate them and where would they be stored?
4. In the event of failure, how would they be rescued especially on the Worgret-Wareham section?

Yet another "bright and wonderful idea" that has not been thought through!

 

Yes but these are what most would call modern stock compared to anything on a heritage line. Not sure any first generation diesels remain.
Remember pre Covid some stock was being mothballed because new stock had cheaper lease rates. Although they are going/have gone to South Eastern SWR were replacing units that were only a couple of years old.

 

1 - Yes they would fit. Platforms on the IOW only had to be altered to bring them up to a more normal level, having previously been used for tube stock. Platforms haven’t needed to be adjusted for class 230s in use elsewhere on the mainland.

2 - They have been approved for use elsewhere on the network. Have the 117 and 121 even received approval for use on the mainline yet?

3 - Operated by the Swanage Railway and based at Corfe, like the bubble car and 117 are?

4 - Class 33 with translator wagon? Rescued by the other unit if they had two units?

Not really any particular obstacles here to prevent the use of 230s on the Swanage Wareham services. The only obstacle is money. Lots of money already spent on the 117 and bubble car, and it would cost a vast amount more money to buy a couple of 230s. That’s the reason it will never happen.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the class 484's in the IOW replace class 483, 1938 tube stock which in turn had replaced earlier class 485/486 stock?
So the track had to be raised through all platforms between Ryde Pier head and Shanklin in 1967.

 

Sounds about right. Additionally, the floor in Ryde tunnel was raised in 1967, to alleviate perennial flooding .... to some extent.

 

Correct, which is why the platform height had to be adjusted back to a more normal level on introduction of the 484s.

 

If you wanted an alternative to the 117/121 DMUs to run to Wareham, a 33 plus TC or BR Mk1s would make the most sense. 33s are still used across the network, as are Mk1s and a 4TC. It’s also in keeping with the general presentation of the branch.

However, I don’t think it’s been suggested that there’s a problem with the DMUs, nor is this the source of the delay this year. So what’s the need for alternative rolling stock?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

My original suggestions was that the dormant line from Worgret to Norden be used to trial a battery version of these units. Environmentally end economically could be a winner. However with Wareham receding on the horizon for probably several years hence and the branch continuing to lie fallow there is obviously not much urgency!!. Meanwhile get ye to the SR General Discussion and put forth your views on moving the Birds Nest Buffet. What are they thinking of??

 

The platforms on the island were a bit of a mix on the IOW. Some stations (such as Branding) had unaltered platforms that were higher than the doors on the tube stock - as a passenger you stepped down into the train on entering which was a novelty! The new 484's are higher than the tube stock and they have taken the (long overdue sone would say) opportunity of the major upgrade to get all the platforms at the correct height to allow full disabled access going forward .

Sent from my moto g(8) power using Tapatalk

 

This would be less money to make new platform at the junction and make people walk than all money waste trying to get trains going now. And having to move platforms up and down instead is unsensible I’m sure the managers will be getting fed up of soon

 

Any news on the Wareham foot crossing? I presume any access to the Wareham sidings is still not possible till this is closed? Or are we waiting for 2038 when the lease comes to an end for the crossing?

 

It wouldn't.

 

No official news at all

 

Looks like ongoing discussions. Ramps added to the footbridge seems to be the way forward, if the design meets the council approval.
An alternative is lifts, but seems to expensive for Network Rail?.
https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/ro...mprovements/wareham-pedestrian-level-crossing

 

I am not sure what design would meet council approval as to make the ramp shallow enough it will need to be a vast structure like most modern footbridges. From memory and as your link says the planning permission was denied for amongst other reasons that the ramps were too steep.
Have a look at images on this link in the denied planning application. Click on plans, and images 8 on are most relevant if you are already familiar with the existing bridge. Normally you can read the "neighbours comments" of which I have never seen so many, but not on this application it seems. The site has been "upgraded" recently (which like most I.T. means made less usable, so maybe as this is a 2015 application the functionality does not exist.
https://planning.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/plandisp.aspx?recno=280576

 

One rather gets the impression that the local residents, local councillors, wareham town council et al will not accept any alternative to the current pedestrian crossing as any alternative is (perceived to be) inferior in terms of gradient, distance and thus time taken to cross.

 

A lift is out as all other lifts on stations are used by passengers only, not the public, so if there is a problem there would not be anyone on site to sort.
An automatically signalled pedestrian crossing is out for the same reason.
The manned crossing is costing the council too much.
Looks like from a search, the council are proposing a new public pedestrian footbridge alongside the A351 roadbridge which "will help improve accessibility to the station when the level crossing is not in use" but not a full solution
https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/ro...highway-improvements/wareham-footway-cycleway
(edit) Project Wareham can proceed in 2023, and potentially any other Swanage bound trains in 2022, without the siding, if the level crossing is still there , as in 2017, but I think it will add flexibility

 

Council Tax Payers Money! Councils have no money of their own only that which has been provided to them by taxpayers.

 

A lift was good enough for the residents of Lymington: https://www.advertiserandtimes.co.u...res-developer-as-council-stands-firm-9193258/




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk