Holt extension

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/mainlin...heringham-could-be-extended-to-holt-1-4977753

Interesting commentary (but doesn't necessarily mean an extension to the current line).

 

Please help me out here as I may of got the wrong end of the stick.
In photo you see the current NNR line marked in green and the route I thought the NOR was going is marked in orange but from reading some of the comments on here, it's seem like the NOR is going the route marked purple. Which is right or am I totally wrong on all counts. HELP

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

No the purple route is just the A148 through Kelling. Your original statement regarding the Orange route is correct.

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

Right thanks for that. So the previous comments I've read further back are wrong. There seems to be some argument about the new roundabout being in the wrong place but it's not as far as aware near this?

Sent from Platform 9 3/4

 

How much higher is the fare for the extended trip to Corwen? Has the extra journey time meant the timetable needs two locos steaming and 2 sets in use to maintain a similar interval service or does the new timetable use the same resource as before? Are the cafe and other facilities that are said to have lost takings manned by paid or voluntary staff?

You may be right that the business case doesn't stack up, and I am sure that someone (I probably know who! ) would point out that usually a, say, 25% increase in length of journey won't be able to result in a 25% increase in the fare charged, BUT:

1. Many costs are fixed and don't actually depend on mileage run (e.g. the coal used to steam the loco, the cost of having an MPD, C & W and other departments) even though coal used to run, wear and tear on stock etc. is. Hence, the extra fare can still produce a profit despite the distance increasing by a greater proportion than the fare.
2. At the same time, needing to run more '2 train days' to maintain a decent interval service could involve a step change in costs, or just as easily make better use of existing resources if a second set is now giving a return on (say) 70 days instead of 35.
3. The longer journey may attract people to travel further in order to use the Railway, by there being a more worthwhile 'day out' when they get there - and Llangollen takes a bit of getting to for most of the population.
4. The actual profit from souvenir or catering sales can be quite small (especially when using paid staff), but likewise, loss of 20% of business may not enable 20% of staff and overhead costs to be reduced. Such costs are often less for on-train catering (trolley, buffet car) and a longer journey boosts sales for such facilities, making them the most efficient way of serving passengers needs (one or two members of staff, number of covers, whatever the train is, reduced wastage and how many passengers really want full meals or even hot food?)

It is impossible to form a judgement and I am sure it will also be said that a journey can become too long to attract people but I tend to believe it is all a matter of how a line 'sells' itself, and making it a worthwhile day (or highlighting things to do linked by the train) can ensure that a longer journey makes a visit more attractive.

Steven

 

The NOR isn't 'going' any route. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever. It's a classic WIBN idea, kicking around for what must be 20-30 years, dreamed up by the kind of enthusiast that would like to see the UK railway network return to the 1920s, with no realistic thought given to the cost, practicalities or likely realistic revenue levels generated by such a project. Pure fantasy.

 

Even if it is possible to fit a single line between the road and the houses on the proposed route in to Holt, I can't see the residents of those houses being too keen on having a train running past their back gardens.

 

Reminds me of the letters page in Railway Mag and TI in the 60's when the Severn Valley Railway was proposed.

 

Only if you aren't reading the posts.
The SVR had an available trackbed without obstacles. It did not have a busyish A road across the trackbed on the level, nor houses encroaching onto the trackbed. The stations were still there (apart from Kidderminster, where there was space). Etc, etc.
The fact that some railways could be restored does not mean any bit of railway can be restored.

 

I always had a dream that I would win the Euromillions, buy Melton Constable Hall and restore it to live in and the extant (and now empty) carriage works at Melton constable works and build a replica M&GN 50 with the surviving boiler, and extend to Holt from the other direction, sod the difficulty. All this really is WIBN but that said I am sad, and frankly a bit annoyed that the council have allowed a roundabout to encroach on the proposed route. An extension to Holt town was JAF (just about feasible) and indeed people have spent money buying land and drawing up plans to try and achieve that. I couldn't see how it could go further without remodelling roads, which seemed unlikely without my Euromillions win but to put the kybosh on a true Holt station seems a bit stupid. Oh well! NNR and MNR plandampf over the Bittern and Wherry lines would make up for it

 

The comments about the roundabout do stack up. The roundabout is located right in the middle of the Orange line on your map.

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

Would it be wiser for the NOR group just to concentrate on extending the MNR to Fakenham?

 

Oh. Was under the impression that the roundabout was in the purple line on my map.

Sent from Platform 9 3/4

 

Just looked on Google Earth, didnt realise there was a large housing development being built just across the road, on the opposite side of the road and slightly west from the entrance to the NNR Holt car park (between Cromer Road and the A148).

Looks like they are building very close to the proposed route of the NOR Holt extension (if not on it).

I personally think any hope of an extension from the NNR Holt station into the town centre should be abandoned.