Meon Valley Railway Restoration

Exactly the problem. Wimpey, for example are a pale shadow of their former self. Money and effort expended in railway projects that fail is money and effort completely wasted. One of the few organisations that realised that something needed to be done was the Ivatt trust. Not only were they sensible in their choice of prototype but also they were ultra sensible in realising that they needed orderly action to secure the long term future of their machines by placing them in the hands of the IOW Steam Railway. We need fewer individual groups not more and certainly some sort of mechanical Darwinism as to which will, or will not, survive, is most unsatisfactory.

PH

 

No disrespect to the Ivatt Trust but if everyone had taken as long to get their act together as they have, there would have been precious few locos running up to now. Thank goodness there have been many, no doubt in your opinion reckless, groups and individuals who have taken a different approach and provided us with a rich variety of locos etc. to enjoy over the years.

 

Maybe Lord MacAlpine is wealthy enough to have a steam railway in his garden without worrying too much about paying passengers, but precious few other people are. In other words, the line has to appeal to passengers, whereas this scheme just leaves me feeling a bit "so what?"

I'm a LSWR fan, and I happen to believe that that railway has done badly in preservation terms relative to some others. I also live quite close. So on the surface, I should be enthused by this project. Yet I find myself struggling to find any enthusiasm: not least because, pretty as it may have been, the Meon Valley is hardly a line to stir the heartstrings. It wouldn't even be on my personal top 5 list of closed LSWR routes to revive; much less nationally. You can argue the point about whether the MHR or the MVR would make the better journey, but in the cold light of day, 30 years ago the MHR got built and the MVR didn't; and it is very hard to imagine now that a future MVR represents such a massive enhancement (for example, in scenery) over the MHR that it is worth reviving at this late stage.

Elsewhere, it has been suggested that maybe narrow gauge (being cheaper) is the way to go, with somewhat fanciful comparisons with the Lynton & Barnstaple. But the L&B at least starts from the position that it is one of the great romantic "lost" railways, so comes with a built-in big fanbase to kick things off. Add in the fact that the current revivalists have an active desire to restore it, at least within modern constraints, to a close representation of its original self, and it becomes a project with great enthusiast appeal that also has great public appeal by being based in spectacular scenery in a very touristy part of the country. Whereas a narrow gauge reconstruction on an old standard guage line - that's not really my idea of preservation, especially as the route itself (and any remaining artefacts, such as some buildings) is at least conserved for all to see as a footpath. Running a narrow gaugae train along it, or an inappropriate standard gauge one for that matter, hardly adds to the opportunities for interpretation or conservation. An inappropriate loco chugging a couple of inappropriate coaches up a line with little or no attempt to replicate the historic fabric in some pleasant, but hardly spectacular, scenery? Why?

Tom

 

Forgive me but how long has your group been in existence and how much longer will it take to achieve its aims? The Ivatt Trust had the humility to realise that in order to see their machines in service they would have to take drastic action which they did. Theirs is an example to be emulated not criticised and I hasten to add I have no connection with them.

PH

 

Formed in early 1973, aims achieved in late 1997 and on the second time round now. I was not being critical of the Ivatt Trust but whilst their approach may be right for them, it does not follow that it's right for everyone. Different approaches work for different groups and what works for one would not necessarily have worked for another.

 

There are endless possibilities, Manor Farm (now that's shot to fame from the BBC series) for one springs to mind along with many many more attractions in the locality, I was going to suggest Chawton House etc, but the MHR in conjunction with the vintage bus group already does that!

However the vintage buses could be used as a 'shuttle' between the two, and the public get a scenic ride through some more of the countryside in a vintage jalopy to boot - but all this is a long way down the line and things as they stand are pretty much a pipe dream........................................................

Alluding to Jamesquared's latest posting poo pooing the idea,(nothing personal I just couldn't be ar*ed to disseminate your posting!) and to reiterate what others have said, given that both lines would more or less be on top of each other (Ropley to West Meon is but a stones throw) the only way for it to have any chance of success is to construct a narrow gauge line from the outset giving the line a damn good USP, and therefore a damn good chance of success. And in turn both lines could coexist quite happily and no doubt benefit each other.instead of trying to fight for a share of the same market!

To go down the standard gauge route would, I feel, be doomed to certain failure because, as has been mentioned, having a clapped out shunter (for example) in the beginning, ambling along a few yards of track with a battered brake van or a MkII coach, regardless of the scenery is not what Joe Public want, they want STEAM not diesels!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also utilising the trackbed with a narrow gauge line means the the walking/rambling/cycling fraternities would not lose out on an amenity that they enjoy using, to reinstate a standard gauge line would more than likely raise the hackles of those affected, not just locally but nationally and thereby generating strong opposition to the scheme which would only hamper things for those trying to realise a dream!

I know Jamessquared fails to see the point of doing this at all and that in doing so is not "proper" preservation - why should it be? If the group are that determined,why not create something unique and "original", from what has (until now) not been wanted, to the area that would give the public something "different", seeing a Garrett (or whatever) steaming along the valley would certainly tempt me into paying a visit or even getting involved!.............................

 

it's time and money that wouldn't necessarily have been directed to another project (or indeed have been diverted from another project) often this is new time and money and the new project only adds interest to the "scene" ....witness the Great Little Trains of Wales who recognised early on that the more variety, the more visitors they could all share.

 

I'm sure a narrow gauge railway on the Meon valley trackbed would be viable and a popular attraction . Seems to work well at Launceston , Alston and Pontiscill.

 

I love you too!

It's a discussion forum, and I have my opinion, which is that as a standard gauge line it is a non-starter, but as a narrow gauge line, I'm left thinking "so what". Your mileage may differ, and you're perfectly entitled to that opinion.

Tom

 

I think people may feel a little better about this project if we found out about the people behind it. Have they been involved in railways/restoration before?

 

Tom, I think (spare your blushes) you are a touch too logical for this particular thread! As someone who has struggled with recalcitrant drainage on a narrow gauge line I would just observe that rainwater run off is not influenced by track gauge. The starry eyed fraternity never think about such things as fencing or drainage.

PH

 

You mean narrow gauge fences aren't only about 18 inches tall? I need to get out more...

Tom

 

I wonder who is going to pay for all this to happen? Standard gauge or narrow gauge it's not going to be cheap to reinstate six miles of track/signalling and rebuild stations. Then there is all the transport costs to bring in track work and ballast and finally there is the issue with bring in rolling stock?

 

Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwww you softy!

Could not agree more, however the "group" seem hell bent on this course of action, narrow gauge IS the only viable action if it is to succeed, I don't think the MHR would be to chuffed (ahem!) with a competitor that close to their doorstep, with both fighting for a slice of the custom, and could if they wanted make life rather difficult.....................................

And in reply to Paul Hitch, there's nothing wrong with Tom's logical approach, after all at the moment this "project" is nothing but a pipe dream/flight of fancy and yet to get off the ground, there has been no mention of what motive power/coaching stock they plan to run,let alone where they will get it from....................................................... so misty eyed visions and logic at the moment both have their place. I for one am not of the misty eyed variety, nor am I of the logic camp, probably one foot on each camp so I can see the point from both sides, how I wish to express myself is down to me at the time!!! And what about those starry eyed pioneers of yesteryear, without them we wouldn't be where we are today, but without a reality check (logic) every now and then things in some cases could have turned out a lot differently..................................

Also I damn sure that various members of "the group" are following this thread.and from the consensus on here most people seem to want them to succeed and see it as something different as an offering, not as a standard gauge, but as a narrow gauge concern for it to have any chance of succeeding, if they heed what people are saying and change tack all well and good, but if they don't.........................................................

 

I think there is a "movement" at least in the sense that the established railways do tend to help each other out if they can. Behind the scenes there is much collaboration between Ropley and Sheffield Park for example that is not well known outside a relatively small circle (oh, well I suppose that's just changed). Technical help, spares exchanges etc, and of course the loan of locomotives, though for some reason they seem to have been mostly heading East of late .

We have not passed the time when new projects can be made to happen. It gets harder though and requires a clarity of direction and purpose not yet evident from the MVR.

 

I'd just like to point out (for the record!) that I have nothing to do with the MVR project and only posted their website link for the purpose of the ongoing discussion


Keith

 

Except a certain Maunsell tender

But yes, I agree. On fora like this is it seems that there are periodic bouts of petty point scoring and bashing of railways that, to their more rabid supporters can be seen as "rivals", while in the background there is a constant interchange of ideas, help and components to the mutual benefit of all! Another example I'd cite would be between the IoWSR and the Bluebell C&W, allowing, for example, joint orders for moquette to be made in economic quantities which would be beyond the needs of either railway individually, but collectively help keep the price down. There are many such examples of such practice, without even considering how, for example, many railways helped out the SVR and GWSR with infrastructure support in their respective hours of need.

Fortunately, most railways are blessed with managers and directors who are rather more pragmatic than the wilder reaches of the Internet might have you believe!

Tom

 

You didn't send us the big bit that pulls it around though!

You're absolutely right. Without the ingrained pragmatism there wouldn't be many (perhaps not any) steam railways.

 

And a Bulleid open third, I believe....