Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

You have got it in one and of course there still is the issue of the money required.

https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/news/return-parracombe-appeal-november-update

this needs to be inplace before we can start building

 

It is not uncommon for planning authorities to schedule an additional meeting when needed. I have checked the website and this shows a meeting on 7th February - there is no meeting shown for January.

 

There was a proposed plan quite while while ago now which envisaged a second 'changeover' engine at PE. Up train arrives, 2nd engine goes onto WB end and takes train away, original train engine goes into the siding. Simple, but....it would need two engines in steam and two crews, so expensive on resources.

That idea then changed into having a diesel kept at PE which would help to shunt the stock about so that the train engine could get back onto the WB end. The diesel would be shut down in-between trains and left in the siding unattended. It could be driven by one of the incoming steam engine crew or by a diesel driver travelling 'on the cushions'. However, whatever permutations of movements were considered, at some point in the process either all the passengers had to be detrained (whether they wanted to or not) so that the stock could be gravitated/propelled empty and/or the loaded stock would be stood on the running line at some stage with no engine attached at either end.

Although there are ways in which the latest proposed layout for PE can be worked, unless they decide to use a 2nd steam engine then I simply can not see how a 'stand by' diesel kept in the siding can be used without one of the problems highlighted in red above. Answers on an e-postcard welcome !

 

I have already answered this once, but here we go
again:

1. stop train on approach.
2. Detach steam and run into siding
3. Start diesel (at buffer stop in platform).
4. Couple diesel to train
5. Draw train to platform
6. Detach diesel and shutdown (it being back on the stops)
7. Steam from siding to train and ready to depart.

very easy. Time will mostly be governed by the need to get air up on the diesel (if air is part of the system as it often is) but this could be dealt with by a shore line or something similar. Actually the best machine would be a battery electric given the duty cycle.

 

But...

Step 1 means a loaded passenger train left standing on a steep downhill gradient with no engine attached at either end. I doubt the ORR would like that...
Step 2 means that the single-line section is already occupied before the train leaves WB - it would need to be locked away in the siding.

 

We have covered this before.

 

Where please?

 

Earlier in this thread.

I don’t have all the details, but I think this is not a difficult operating problem. There are mitigations available.

 

I don't recall it either.

If you don't want to have a loaded passenger train unattached to an engine on a steep downgrade, it seems to me that the movements would look something like this.

1. First movement of the day is a diesel to PE and locked into the siding
2. Steam loco leads first train into PE.
3. Passenger detrain, Guard's brake applied.
4. Steam loco uncouples
5. Diesel comes out of siding couples up and draws (empty) coaches forward and then propels them into siding
6. Steam loco pulls back beyond Fairview to be clear of length of diesel+coaches+overlap.
7. Diesel draws the (empty) stock out of the siding and propells the train back into the station; Guard applies brake.
8. Diesel uncouples, runs forward and reverses into siding and shuts down.
9. Steam loco backs down onto (empty) coaching stock, couples up.
10. Passengers board.
11. Steam loco plus (full) train departs for WB.

Repeat until last train, when diesel will follow service train as each block section is cleared.

This does seem a pretty labour intensive approach, to say the least.

 

I would agree, and no doubt not every passenger may be happy to be forced to disembark, especially if it is foul weather.

As regards items 1 and final sentence, why not have the diesel pilot the steam on the first Up and last Down train? Otherwise someone will have to transfer the train staff by road between WB and PE, which will be the only block section at that stage (and of course KL will have been closed).

 

Started about here (maybe a bit earlier) and went on sporadically - not the easiest to follow due to some broken quotes.

https://www.national-preservation.c...-and-development.641556/page-281#post-2766029

AIUI, the issue with the section seemingly being blocked by the shunt release is mitigated by marking the end of section with a suitable warning not to proceed without a token; and making the line from there to the end of the platform permissive working.

If you fully signalled it, you’d have starter and advance starter outbound; and outer and inner homes inbound, with the advance starter making the start of the section. If I understand the working suggested correctly, you have essentially an equivalent system, but made by a combination of warning boards and written procedures. (I may have misunderstood it).

Tom

 

21B is not wrong. If there is an adequate brake van at the downhill end there should be no problem with (1). There is absolutely no reason why a diesel (or steam) loco could not be left at the end of the line as in (2). It is known as platform permissive working and is quite common. It does not need signalling or anything other than an adequately worded sign defining the start/end of the token section and the points to be released by the token.
An adequate risk assessment will show this to be the case.

Just noted James has beaten me to it.

 

Thanks. People do seem to want to over complicate this situation. Mind you that mirrors the org structure at the L and B which seems very complex to me.

 

Post 5634 covered it.

 

Any temporary terminus at PE (if it comes to pass) will be at the end of a 'One Train Working' section from WB, just as KL is currently. With only one train in operation south of WB then any form of worked 'fixed signals' would be unnecessary - and would merely need an extra resource in terms of someone to man them at KL. Provided that the points are secured for running movements by the section train staff, any shunting movements can be controlled by hand-signals.

 

I am not suggesting signals! Nor was Steve! The necessary equipment is a Stop board and a well written rule book based on a decent risk assessment.

If the intention is to operate a one engine in steam staff then I would suggest that staff and ticket is better. The flexibility will be welcome.

 

The group structure is very easy to follow, it is just people who foul it up and don't listen when this was being set up.

As I understand it, it is as follows:-

You have a Trust which should just own the Land/Trackbed* and stations and any required real estate, its main role is to also be the groups main fund raiser and policy maker for the whole project.

The CIC is there to run the railway on behalf of the Trust, as a Charitable Trust can't run a railway as it is considered to be a commercial enterprise.

Also the CIC is the main contractor for the rebuilding of the line according to the plan set out by the Trust in it development plan which has been proposed and agreed to by the membership of the Trust's at the AGM.

At some stage there then needs to be set up a locomotive and rolling stock Trust which then needs to take on the liability, restoration, and fundraising costs of all the current and new rolling stock which is currently owned by the L&BR Trust, the 762 Club and any other donated item of rolling stock.

The 762 club was formed only build Lyn and nothing else.

The reason for the thinking about a second Trust is that in light of the Llangollen issues some of us feel the need to protect the rolling stock that we have and also that we want to acquire or build at some point.

Exmoor Associates are purely an advance trackbed buying group. Which now owns both Snapper Halt and Bratton Fleming Stations and various sections of trackbed between the two sites.

Blackmoor PLC has to be a commercially based organisation since it will be running a pub/restaurant.

I nearly forgot Manning Wardle & Co a dormant company owned by the L&BR Trust.

* the only section which is not owned by the Trust at present and that is Chelfham station and this came about because so many members years ago had brought shares in the old L&BR Estates Co that became the CIC

I don't think I have forgotten anyone, but if I have, I apologize in advance for my mistakes.

Colin Rainsbury

 

And how will all that successfully deliver and operate a railway company?

 

A charitable trust can operate a railway if doing so is within its charitable aims. K&ESR, Welshpool & Llanfair and IoW are 3 which spring to mind.

 

You have the CIC to do that for you, that is its sole purpose, to operate the railway and all the adjoined commercial outlets, on behalf of the L&BR Trust. There are no two heritage railways alike in the UK, they all have different legal set ups, but on the whole most will have an operating company (for legal reasons and most will also have a CEO who is employed by the operating company and not the Trust) and an owning Trust/Charity which is managed on behalf of the membership, who in turn own the charitable body, well that is the way we have it set up in Devon at present and it works for us.

I think you will find that they all have some form of operating company and an ownership body which in most cases are linked.