Meon Valley Railway Restoration

On the face of it easier than the Bluebell's task? Er, no. Actually, more difficult for all the reasons James set out. The railway has been abandoned for 60 years, do you seriously believe you can turn up with ballast, rails and sleepers and just "crack on"? Not unless you're intending to lay something a lot lighter than standard gauge (15" or 10.25"), which by the way would change this really rather silly idea into something potentially believable.

The real question though is why do these schemes keep being suggested? What is that the MHR and other established concerns do not offer? I guess many want their "Railway Adventure" and I can completely relate to that, but there is ought to be plenty of opportunity for that in existing railways (in a different way and different scale perhaps), but perhaps they are hardening in their advancing years and the some of the spirit has been lost? I know that sometimes the modern preserved railway feels less like a club and more like a business. Is that the problem perhaps?

 

I think if Tom Rolt could see how commercial railway preservation has become he'd be disgusted.

 

Probably would. He had a romantic view of such things which sooner or later would come up against reality rather painfully. One has to balance romance with commerce and with few exceptions (the Isle of Wight Steam Railway, spare their blushes, is one) heritage railways lean rather too much towards romance for their own good.

H

 

Simon, I agree with 99% of your posting. The only thing I would add is that a dash of simplification ought both to please the purist and the accountant. I say "ought" for similar suggestions elsewhere produced a reaction which gave the impression I was advocating compulsory castration! Railway preservation activities have to be paid for some way or another.

Paul H

 

21B, have you ever visited the Meon Valley line? if not I challenge you to go and walk the section between Wickham and Droxford, and then tell me that re building that section would be harder than digging out thousands of tons of rubbish and spoil. The track was lifted 40 years ago, but the formation is amazingly well preserved.

Also how is getting the permission of one landlowner to use the line harder than having to raise the money and purchase land from 30 different landowners?

 

Preserved railways attract all sorts and some are interested in starting something new, whilst others are interested in keeping existing things running. Think of the Ffestiniog diversion which was built by mainly by new comers to the railway.

Out of interest, what was the last preserved railway to successfully establish itself on a site which had been cleared of all track and support structures? For that matter what was the last preserved railway to successfully reopen at a location where the majority of track etc was in place?

 

Nat Pres. appears to have too many contributors who express concern, mostly it must be said on sound socio / economic grounds, those proposing to attempt the 'impossible'.

How many of the young men who scraped together enough money to purchase a 'Barry Wreck', considered in any great detail how they would raise the money for their future refurbishment or long time maintenance, let alone find somewhere to run their loco ? The economics of demand and supply where clearly not the reasons they undertook these projects. They almost certainly had a strong desire to preserve something they felt was far to unique, to both themselves and to our National Heritage, to be allowed to go under the torch - and all bar a few succeeded.

People have a wonderful innate ability to make the 'impossible' the possible. Its one of the reasons the human race is unique.

Wish the MVR all the best with their project, even if you suspect that the problems they face may well prove insurmountable.

 

The Bure Valley? Ex-standard gauge line reinstated probably 10 - 15 years ago as a mixed use 15" gauge railway / cycle path with entirely new infrstructure, including stations etc and, I believe, with considerable input from the local authority. Would at least be a useful comparison if the MVR went down the narrow gauge route. Though worth remembering that they have a considerable tourist attraction at one end (boat trips on The Broads) that means many passengers are doing a "combined trip" - rail + boat + rail return, which no doubt positively affects the passenger numbers.

Tom

 

I'm not sure that is strictly true -we just have a tendency to forget those that never got off the ground.

The roll call of failed preservation attempts - both of locos (still awaiting restoration or bought by someone else when one or more appeals failed) and lines is quite long.

 

Welsh Highland Railway springs to mind. A huge project which received a lot of support from government/lottery funding sources in addition to every method of private & public fundraising you could possibly think of. The project was run by an organisation (Ffestiniog) with long experience in both the commercial/fundraising sides and in attracting and motivating large numbers of volunteers.

Epping-Ongar Railway arrived in 2012 as if from nowhere with a big splash (Heritage Railway of the Year etc.) after many years of, apparently, getting nowhere. The big change for them came when the line was sold to an individual who was prepared to invest a lot of money in the infrastructure, locos etc. As far as I know they haven't received much in the way of government/lottery grants etc or public appeals for funding. They also, of course, greatly depend on their volunteers and seem to have been successful in attracting a good number of new people.

 

Yes I have.

You don't have the challenge of digging out lots of spoil, but the infrastructure has most certainly not been maintained in accordance with the standard needed to run heavy trains on the formation. All I am saying is that without a proper survey you can't assume that it is straightforward, unless perhaps you lay something a lot lighter than standard gauge.

As the landowner is HCC, I would have thought that the answer to that question was self-evident. One landowner, but many people forming the decision = much grief. I don't think for one second that this proposal can work as a standard gauge line, but I do think that a very very nice miniature railway could come from the idea. So much more achievable, and so much easier to "sell" to the council and all the other people who want to use the footpath.

Epping-Ongar, Wensleydale, Dartmoor (the latter effectively shut at present) and all the other recent standard gauge railways have taken over lines where the rails were still down. I reckon you'd have to go back to the 1980s and the likes of the MHR and GWR to find lines being relaid from abandoned and lifted/partially lifted railways. I know that the GWR is still extending, but their presence is established. In fact I am hard pushed to thing of any preserved standard gauge line that has ever been laid on a railway that had been abandoned for more than about 10 years, and usually less. (S&D Midsomer Norton is an exception to this perhaps, but I think that in general the lines rescued have been recently abandoned, or mothballed for a long period - CVR for example) What are your thoughts? For me it is this that says the MVR isn't a viable proposition....too long lifted and without a railway for preserved standard gauge to be brought back.

 

You're forgetting the Swanage. Started from pretty much nowt and now reconnected to the national network. History is littered with plans that succeed and plans that fail. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but we don;t have the advantage of this here and who is to say where the MVR project will be in 20 years time?

 

Agreed but we have the benefit of hindsight. There are ex Barry locos on their third overhaul whilst others are still to turn a wheel in anger but at the time of their purchase nobody could say with any certainty which projects would be successful and which would struggle to succeed. If we had all taken the attitude that "it's bound to fail" then nothing would have been achieved. The MVR project may yet prove to be one that fails but that's no reason for those promoting it not to try. Eventually they may have the last laugh.

 

From which it is possible to draw a number of conclusions as to those factors, the absence or presence, of which can lead lines to fail or succeed. Being "wanted" or not by the relevant local council(s) can be a major factor. If the Meon valley haven't approached the council then further discussion is all pretty moot.

 

Not necessarily. Times, circumstances and attitudes change. What may be a pertinent argument for or against a scheme now may not be the case in the future.

 

Yes things do change, but I would argue that the fundamentals don't. The fact that the track bed is owned by the council means that in this case the views of the council are at present paramount. If they say no then, unless you can get a station owner to grant access, the scheme isn't going to get access to the trackbed.

This is before we look at where are the locos, track and rolling stocking coming from.

 

Since the council owns the land Councillors' (and therefore their voters) support may be an important element. Failure to get early support from local people could therefore kill it off at birth, a factor in the failure of another Hampshire scheme (Longmoor) in the 1960s. Hampshire County Councillors also have the MHR, and many of its supporters, in the county therefore any perceived threat to the success of the MHR might also play a part in their thinking. I imagine they would need persuading that a scheme would be of long-term benefit to their county as a whole.

In the longer term a council as landlord, or any dependency on them for funding, is a politically risky business. Support may disappear any time after the next election or round of spending cuts - get a long lease or, better still, buy the land if that is an option.

 

See my sig

 

I wonder if two preserved railways in Hampshire and only a few miles apart from each other could survive long term. Would there be enough customers to going round and would both railways be able to recruit enough volunteers to run both railways.

 

The Bluebell and the Lavender lines seem to coexist quite happily, as do the MNR and the NNR as well as the KWVR and Embsay.