Swanage Railway Reconnection To National Network - Decision Time

If the pathways are there, and they are, why not.

 

TOPS No. 98253 (TOPS Loco Diag. 98-2GV)

 

That mainline registered 33 mentioned by Dan Bennett sounds like a game plan to me, if it's a permanent acquisition.

 

In theory, there is nothing to stop the Swange equipping steam locos with TPWS (a legal requirement - exemptions are rare and restricted to shunters and possibly some on track plant) and OTMR (a Group Standard and hence it is possible to apply for exemption from the RSSB), apply for a Safety Certificate and Track Access Agreement as an Open Access Operator and apply for paths.

Indeed, from what I have seen, the part of the DMU service from Wareham that runs on Network Rail is likely to be operated by an Open Access Operator (and when I say the Swange can do this, I suspect it will be a separate Company).

I suspect the real issue will be platform occupancy at Wareham. The current layout would allow run-round in the station (but involving the loco going across the level crossing twice) - whether the re-signalled layout would is a question but I suspect acedmemic as the stock would have to block the platform road for too long. With there being sidings east of the station (and crossing), the DMU can take refuge there as could a topped and tailed train.

So it is possible, and indeed if the Swanage or a company related to it wants to "go for it", the legal structure means that they can. Remember that the whole project is a partnership between the Swange and the local authorities, known as the Purbeck Rail Partnership I believe, and it is likely to be the body forming any operating Company.

Workable paths are likely to be the issue - and this will be affected by what is provided for in the 2012 resignalling. (BTW, does anyone else expect this to be delayed so that it can't over-run and upset travel to the Olympic events at Weymouth).

Steven

 

One class 33 isn't a complete game plan. You need back-up motive power, including contingency plans for rescue/recovery of failed trains, etc which is going to entail other locos. There's also the the parallel need for registered rolling stock.

I said that there were no insurmountable reasons why not, given sufficient finance. Unfortunately, this is a significant factor, whether you like it or not. At the end of the day, there is no benefit in running into Wareham if to do so doesn't cover the bills. Besides rolling stock registration there are plenty of other costs. Looking at the available track layout on Google Earth, I'm not certain that there are run-round facilities in the sidings. Provision of this isn't going to be cheap. It's been suggested to me that installing a simple turnout on Network Rail has been costed at about £¼m when all is taken into account. I Don't know whether that's true, or not but I can believe it. Using these sidings is going to sterilise them for other uses. Car parking in the area doesn't appear to be too extensive, either. Extra provision might become a condition of operation.

I'm not pouring scorn on the scheme. I hope that it comes to fruition. It's just that I know that it is not as easy as some on here are making out!

 

Is there a risk that the "price" for funding this connection might be that the Swanage has to be prepared to allow timetabled modern ie TOC-operated trains to access their line from elsewhere on the system, if that is feasible within their Heritage operation?

 

Sorry Steve, I should have said "part of a game plan" I completely agree with you that when you think this through, there are any number of more or less expensive investments that the SR might find itself having to make on its own property, without even thinking about the restrictions imposed by the layout at Wareham. I suspect, though, that SR have thought it through and are still willing to go ahead because there are several different ways they could generate revenue from the connection.

46118, I don't think what you mention is a risk, I think it's a near certainty. Who decided to help pay for this investment and why? It was the councils, because they want quicker and easier public access to Swanage, and to get some vehicles off the A351 so they can be 'seen to be green'. I'd guess that a "low-hanging fruit" target would be to lose some school runs by providing one or even two early trains to Wareham, perhaps only stopping at Corfe Castle. I also happen to know first hand that Purbeck is literally "drowning in rubbish", and if local dump trucks could unload into wagons at some siding near Swanage, that makes it much cheaper to step up your recycling rate. BTW, why stop just at Wareham? There might be more convenient sidings available at Dorchester or Poole.

SR probably won't be the same 'laid-back but effective' operation that it appears like now to the visitor, but it might even be more fun to run real service trains, and this could be a model for other preserved lines with mainline connections if it works. Main thing is, get someone else to pay for most of it.

Final thought. This is ultimately about rolling back Beeching. But that doesn't mean making it easier to 'play at 1950s', it means having a railway service where it's needed. It's what the original protestors in the Isle of Purbeck wanted.

 

The simple solution, as have already mentioned, is to run into the down platform then shunt to down sidings. The down sidings are made up of 3 roads. As these are sidings it would be relativly cheap to construct a runround loop.

With due respect I cant see how you can describe that Purbeck is "drowning in rubbish"..... Maybe you are referring to all the stone lorries?

 

No run round facilities. These sidings (all be it one) were used to stable the layover stock for the Wareham - Southampton (if my memories serve me correctly) service trains. They are now not used. The road nearest the running lines is juiced up. Plenty of room to construct a runround.

 

Constructing a run round is not going to be cheap. This is on Network Rail and will have to be done to their standards by their approved contractors. I mentioned £¼m for a turnout. A loop is going to cost nearer £1m. BTW, Google Earth shows the sidings in use, for whatever purpose.

 

2 sets of points in a yard (to complete a run round loop) i would suggest would not cost £1m.

The sidings are not used on a regular basis

 

I just took a look at Wareham station with Google Earth and the one remaining bay platform trackbed looks overgrown and devoid of any track which makes ideas of running trains into it somewhat difficult. Presumably access to the bay platform road (as you experts call it I think!) must be included in the re-signalling work, not to mention the small matter of having some track to run on and a switch (points?) to connect it to the running line. Does anyone have any information on this?

Thanks,
Nigel

 

Reconnecting the bay would be an expensive option. What with new track, crossings and associated signalling it would be far far cheaper to use the down sidings which are already there with their associated signals too. All that would be needed is to install point work to complete a run round ...

 

What I think all this theorising is forgetting is that the aim of the resignalling is to enable a DMU service - which can refuge in the sidings as they are - to run. The Purbeck Rail Partnership's intention is to provide a through rail service connecting with the network - not extend the Swanage (Steam) Railway as it currently is.

I think previous posts have already hinted that the steam service may have to become slightly less frequent to fit in the DMUs. Certainly, on my (I admit to my shame) so far only visit to the Swanage, there was a very intensive 2 train service and without extra passing places (more cost), I struggle to see how the DMU from Wareham can run without affecting this.

The intensity of the serevice can be seen from the passenger figures and the comment on here that the standard 5 coach train sets have had to be strengthen to 6 - Swange carries almost exactly the same number of Passengers as the West Somerset but its shorter length and intesive use of train sets means it does it with two sets of 5 (or occasionally 6) coaches, whereas I believe the West Somerset has 3 x 7 or 8 coach sets running its main service.

Any operations with steam to Wareham look more like Galas and Special Events, for which top and tail (either 2 steam or steam and diesel) and guest locos would probably be most viable.

Steven

 

I have always been of the belief that if Dorset County Council and Purbeck District Council are prepared to stump up the reconnection costs they are going to expect some kind of regular service in return connecting Wareham (and beyond) to Swanage and that this service would be operated by a TOC/CIC using either modern stock or DMU stock of some description. Clearly it will be down to the Swanage Railway to provide paths to allow the service to run and it cannot be started, stopped and messed around with to fit in with a Thomas The Tank Engine weekend or Steam Gala! A regular service is just that - and something that "customers" will expect to be able to rely on. If a train is scheduled to run five days a week at a specific time it has to happen no matter what else is going on. As I understand it the Swanage Railway/CIC will be providing the service to start with on a limited basis and ramping it up in line with demand.

I thought I had read in various places about running trains into the bay platform at Wareham which is why I mentioned it. I take it from bean-counter's post that the intention will be to use the main platform for dropping off "customers" and then park the DMU/whatever out of the way in the sidings until it is time to return. At the scheduled return time it will nip back to the platform, the "customers" will jump on, and off the train will go back to Swanage. It could be the case that it goes back straight away in which case parking in the sidings won't be necessary. I'm also guessing that although the line speed from Worgret to Swanage will have to remain at 25mph, the stretch from Wareham station to Worgret will be operated at higher speeds.

I think it is terrific that a heritage railway can provide a true public transport role linking A to B in addition to providing a wonderful day out to revisit past times as a separate function. The Swanage Railway already performs a significant public transport role through the park-and-ride scheme, not to mention the evening trains and "fireworks" specials. The Weardale Railway has recently introduced a regular community rail service too - another example of a restored railway performing a true public transport role. I wish them both every success in all their endeavours. I think the only problem the Swanage Railway is likely to have when it introduces a service is that it will be too popular!

 

Concerning the the probloms having both a regualer service and the present (peak time) steam service, I beleive there is a path aviable which we use sometimes used by a light diesel can go do some shunting or a non-passenger train movement. However this 'path' being used for the Wareham service will depend on being able to use the bay platform at Swanage which normally at the moment is where the Wessex Belle is stored (although it fully signal and comissioned ready for use). Also it depend on what service frequancey the DCC want to run on the line.

It might be differcult to arange this but it going to rather intreseting at the same time!!!

 

As one of the original Swanage pioneers, to me the news about the Worgret connection is truly wonderful and, to be honest, something that most of those early folks would not even dream about. Great news for a great (and much needed) railway.

I'm sure the business plan of the "partnership" will have considered the question of fares but I reckon it will be important to set a competitive fare for the regular Wareham service, which I assume will be covered by DMUs.

It will be recalled the WSR once offered a local service, using DMUs, alongside the steam (if you were lucky!) service. For the first few years, to get folks to use a regular train service it was necessary to have a two-tier fare structure - one for DMUs and one for Steam. Of course this got a bit muddled when passengers used DMU one way and steam the other, leading to confusion and anger. The cheaper DMU fares did encourage local traffic, albeit mostly on the Minehead-Williton section, which could draw potential traffic from the larger places, like Watchet, Washford and Williton itself, making a return trip to Minehead. Locals could get further discounts by joining the WSR's Local Residents scheme (which is still operating under the STARCARD name). Of course, the WSR did not get to Taunton at that time, which made the hoped-for through traffic nigh impossible to realise. In due course, the DMU service could not compete, fares were flattened (at the higher steam level!) and the regularly timed local trains were withdrawn.

So, I will watch with interest to see how the fares on the proposed Wareham-Swanage service are pitched to ensure folks are encouraged to travel on the Branch.

Steve

 

I think that fare issue is at the back my mind, as its £9 for a Swanage - Corfe Castle return which is more on a similar distance journey on the national network. However we already do A Purbeck Resisdance pass which allows 50% of fares so maybe we try encourge regalurs to take up that opition...

 

The Weardale Railway has community service fares for the daily service and a supplement payable on heritage services at the weekend. The community service fare looks very good value, e.g. £5.50 for a day return from Stanhope to Bishop Auckland which is around 18 miles each way. I know it's off-topic but has anyone heard what kind of passenger loadings the Weardale community service is getting?

As regards the Swanage situation, perhaps there will be some through-ticketing to bring the costs down.

 

I also have some memory of a plan using the former bay platform - I was merely following the general assumption, although perhaps the £3 million does include reinstating the Bay?

The fares are one of the big issues - will people pay a premium for the steam service? That said, as the Swanage is, I believe, already the main "ride" part of theb Swanage "Park and Ride", so does DCC subsidise the fare or do any passengers object to the steam service fare?

I suspect the main purpose of the through service will be "tourist transport" - i.e. the busy summer period will offset the lower winter, mainly local, demand. This is really a market that the Swanage is already serving very well over a shorter distance, as do 3 other of the 4 most visited steam lines in the UK.

Steven