Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Not on my watch, SR green is just as much a part of the look

 

The GWR took over the VoR and its still open, Southern took over the L&BR and (some would say illegally) closed it, it would seem some of those who favour the latter group would like to see the railway recreated as a Southern branch line to Lynton, my personal view favours that of the original independent L&BR with a hint of Southern

 

Chris if you are referring to our conversation you should recall correctly that i said the colours of LSWR brown and cream would be more in suiting,

 

As much as the demise of the original line was to be lamented, I'm going to come to the Southern's defence .... slightly.

With the sort of investment made by the SR post-grouping (One new loco, one pretty much rebuilt), new wagons and let's not forget, significant pw work, including re-sleepering, so for recouping their heavy investment to become a secondary consideration, things must've become increasingly unremunerative over the line's last decade, with no realistic prospect of any upturn on the horizon. The Southern weren't exactly noted for closing lines generally .... hell, even the Ventnor West branch on the IoW was upgraded and that, by any measure, was a basket case from the day it opened until BR(S) pulled the plug in the 1950s.

Thinking on things, closure of much any 'grouped' line in the pre-war period was very much the exception. Had there been sufficient goods traffic, doubtless at least the pattern followed by the GW on the Corris and W&L could have been followed. The staple goods traffic on neither of those lines seemed to warrant heavy trains, yet they soldiered on. Neither, be it noted, was half as long as the L&B.

In the case of the VoR, by the time the Southern had thrown the towel in, the GW had provided two brand new locos officially, three in reality, several new carriages with more to follow - suggesting healthy traffic in the mid to late 1930s, rebuilt (or replaced, according to who you believe).three brake vans, rebuilt 10 ex-P&H wagons, extended the line to a new terminus alongside the SG station at Aberystwyth and attended to a backlog of pw repairs. You don't keep on doing that if traffic doesn't warrant it. Neither does the VoR leave it's passengers several hundred feet above where it claims it's seaward terminal to be. In that regard, the fairer comparisons have to be Ilfracombe and Ventnor (IWR), neither still with us.

One thing I think some are inclined to overlook was just how remote was Exmoor before the motorway age. From trips in the 60s, I remember coaches barely able to cope with gradients as steep as 1:4 (not a typo .... 'one in four') found on Countisbuty, Lynmouth and Porlock Hills, so I'd imagine the 'Charabancs' of the 1920s and 30s didn't find some journeys particularly easy when the line was open. Point is, it boots nothing to view the decisions of well over 80 years ago through the lens of modern perception. As timeless as is Exmoor, the same isn't true of access to the Moor. If that weren't the case, we'd not now be seeing the gradual renaissance of this iconic railway.

 

Hi, as you say re building a railway that has been closed this long, most people take one look at it and walk away, but it takes a special kind of nutcase to believe they can rebuild it and still have that faith all this time later. As it has been said, does it really matter what the colour is just as long as the railway is reopened, of course we should try to show all the different periods of its life from the start to the finish, some of it will be practical while other bit will not.

 

Whilst i will agree that the Southern did invest heavily in the line ,they might even have prolonged its life a little but as some have said had they not applied mainline thinking to a branch line their actions might have been more cost effective but at the end of the day not only did they close the line but rather quickly ripped up the track back to the 15.5 mile mark (i stand to be corrected on that figure) which was obviously a specific point to aim for

 

Very valid.
It's very true that the prism of perception has changed radically over the last 87 years.
Even though the railway more than paid its way during the summer months, it was the fallow seasons which did for it, because, even as aesthetically pleasing as it was in the 1930s, it was still, at the close of day, a means of getting from A to B, and no-one really wanted to travel to the twin towns beyond September.
Today, that is rather different.
Firstly, the L&B is no longer a means of "getting there", but is becoming a destination in its own right. Secondly, the tourist season now, with changing demographics, goes much further into the autumn, winter and spring than previously.
The Southern, despite its hard-nosed decision to close the railway, nonetheless radically changed its aesthetic, not just by the means you mention, but also with concrete fencing, signal posts, running-in boards, etc and it is this, along with the "garish" emblazoning of "SOUTHERN" on the tanks of its locomotives, which ironically seems to appeal to so many- it was our introduction to the railway that was, in publications of the time, and through a glass darkly- views from the 30s with a corporate identity as strong as anywhere between Lynton and Waterloo, and yet so separate from it- that was the paradox which created the charm. Yes, the SR could (should) have marketed it better. Yes, the GW did better with their narrow gauge lines, but why castigate a company for its decisions 87 years on?
Theres no denying that the original L&BR co. must be celebrated, and where better than at Bratton? Caffyns is another, if rather small possibility, whilst Blackmoor, and the new Lynton terminus are unknowns, and certainly not original. Parracombe is lumbered with the concrete shelter, and therefore must be SR, again.
I agree that a balance must be struck between the independent and SR periods. Just a pity that so much SR concrete paraphernalia remains...

 

Did the Southern have a financial interest in any of the local bus operators? The certainly did on the Isle of Wight, Southern Vectis, bought by the Southern in 1923 and (amazingly) still trading, post privatisation (in 1987) under the same historic title used for 99 years.

In a less than densely urbanised area, perhaps the paucity of traffic may well have mitigated against risking competition from a resuscitated railway? Might they even have been concerned with some 'stalking horse' maneuvers by, or on behalf of the GW?

I suspect there could well be a lot more to the demise of the old L&B than has made it into any of the familiar published histories.

 

Andy, I know you said LSWR brown and cream. But brown & cream is a general description that reasonably describes the GWR livery?
And in any case, I was responding to a posted message from Harold Cloutt who mentioned specifically the GWR.

 

Right now I am not sure if being 'honest" about the full cost of reopening the whole line and building all the vehicles needed is a good idea. Sometimes being upfront is not in fact helpful as it can be overwhelming. And right now is it relevant? The taks is to extend a quite a bit, but not build the whole thing.

 

None of which gives the comparison between “heritage” and “non heritage” vehicles, or what extra cost might be involved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

On the heritage / non-heritage question, externally, No 14 on the Ffesterbahn looks very similar shape-wise to its L&B life (you'd have to have it next to a full height L&B coach to see the difference, I suspect), but the internal open layout is much more user friendly today, especially over a 15+ mile 90 minute trip. I guess what I'd like to see are modern operating sets that have the original outline look, but which have open plan with corridor connections for loos and buffet. I'm not for a second decrying the originals - they're fabulous and have a vital role to play in telling the L&B story - just don't make it the only offer to the public at the 90 minute mark!

 

I suggest you have a look at the history of this particular item of rolling stock, http://www.cs.rhrp.org.uk/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=2273, I believe it’s been classified as a new build.

 

Sadly this railway is not going to be built all in one go, but the Trust has to realise that at the heart of all this is the fundraising effort. It needs to be improved. This is to big a job for just one person, it needs to have a team of fundraisers that not only know and understand the various types of fundraising but also have the contacts to make it work.

I am not a professional fundraiser but I do know my way around the system.

As we speak there are at least two other sites along the railway, that if the L&BR had the money they would double the size of the land holding that the Trust has and they would both make excellent long term assets for the Trust.

Simply put if they don't make more of an effort to raise the money they need, it ain't going anywhere.

As for the heritage carriages they start from £ 150,000+. For an all steel coach I am told it will be around the £250,000 + mark. But even cheaper if you can still find any from the former eastern europe and have them rebuild to the L&BR requirements. But then I am not looking out for any of them. So I don't have a cost for you.

 

LSWR carriages in brown and cream? Where did that notion emerge from? Salmon Buff and Chocolate, please!
Pat

 

Has someone been reading Heston’s cookbook again Pat? Not sure if that’s a starter, main or dessert?

 

See what you're saying, but I'm not sure 'honesty' comes into it, unless anyone's suggesting the whole kit'n'kaboodle will be up and running in five years, which to the best of my knowledge, they're not.

As I'm about to bang on a bit, please accept my apologies in advance.

Would it be fair to say that if there are several sets of numbers and competing statements doing the rounds, first off, of those relating to reinstatement costs and budgets and officially sanctioned portions of what is a very large and extremely complex project, it's only those emanating from the L&B Trust which have any proper official status, so far as the overall project is concerned?

Of other numbers which may rear their heads from time to time, I'd suggest it would serve everybody (at least, everybody with an interest in seeing the L&B succeed) to establish and consider both the sources of information, it's veracity and in what context any announcements were originally made.

.... or do we not think the "my mate down the pub" standard of evidence hasn't already done quite sufficient damage within the country already?

The L&B project is a rare creature of a very singular nature. It's been over eight decades since title to the old formation was cast to the four winds. Compared with this, the tortuous issues facing the Talyllyn's extension to Nant Gwernol merely serve to indicate just how much caffeine and asprin is likely to be involved in piecing the route back together. To the best of my knowledge, nothing on this scale has been tackled by any heritage railway anywhere.

For the supporters of the project, understandably impatient for each morsel of information, it's very easy to seize on something and assume that because is fits some portion of the narrative, the context of any discussion and 'facts' deployed have to align. Again, it's a big project. It's complex.

.... and that's before we consider the possibility of disinformation, placed precisely to sow discord by those not well disposed the L&B. I'm pointing no fingers, as where some truly bizarre points seem to have been being argued at times, the intent of those involved seems unquestionably honest, though I've not always felt the same about the sources of certain points of that nature being argued.

 

I find much to like in this post, Mark. Certainly it is so easy to view the old L&B through rose-tinted spectacles after 87 years. It is perhaps a pity that the Southern didn't mothball the line during winter and run it as a holiday attraction but that was probably unheard of at the time.
Much of my ire against the Southern concerns its lack of an aesthetic, considering the wonderful architecture it inherited from the LB&SCR and the LSWR particularly.
The brutalist anti-aesthetic concrete conjured from Exmouth Junction has much to answer for, but why, oh why do we have to celebrate it? Parracombe's concrete shelter should be consigned to the dumpmaster and replaced with a wooden structure such as the LSWR waiting room on Crediton station's down platform reduced in size. I think the work done at Chelfham station is superb but I have a nagging concern with the concrete running-in boards; replica L&BR stove-enamelled metal signs would be so much nicer. (But they would no doubt offend the Southern uber-traditionalists.) Why not combine periods where an aesthetic improvement can be made? As for Blackmoor and Lynton, and perhaps Pilton even, it might be as well to see how Woody Bay to Wistlandpound plays out... Wistlandpound, here's an idea. Why not deck it out in salmon-pink and chocolate as an LSWR-inspired option? The LSWR did not assume control of the L&BR but it might perhaps have done so. Why not indulge in some whimsy?