GWSR General Discussion and Operations

I didn't know we had any! Most people just enjoy the scenery.

Glad you enjoyed your visit.

 

Well, that is the kind of thing they can get to later without a huge financial penalty for putting it off (unlike, say, a canopy roof; which, once it's up, you're more or less stuck with, unless you spend a fortune you have much better uses for). But having said that, here's hoping someone does get to it at some point, because you're right, it would look really nice.

Noel

 

If you look at photos taken of the GWSR after closure in the late 1970s you will see quite a lot of mileposts in situ but many of them were, even then, not in good condition. Some were replaced over the years if I remember correctly but, as others have said, it's not been top of the list for the Railway. That said, some new mileposts have been installed and, given a fair wind and continuing financial support, I'm sure we will see a complete set of mileposts in due course. Maybe a sponsorship fund would help? Before that though, completion of Broadway station and a carriage shed at Winchcombe will get my money.

 

The mileposts used to be looked after by a member of Pway, some areas of the line kept the traditional wooden ones black on white on old broad gauge rail posts, other areas have a more modern steel top with with black on yellow. The removed tops are to be replaced with ones similar to those in that section, must chase up why they haven't been replaced.

The ones from Laverton to Broadway are a stylised version using house numbers! These were required to be in place before the track was passed fit for opening, I believe it is a requirement.

There is an opportunity for someone to come and take over the maintenance of the every increasing number!

 

That's the second comment I've heard about our mileposts this year, funnily enough the other was from an older lady who I wouldn't say is an enthusiast, just very observant!

 

Well, I finally visited the GWSR yesterday as a visitor with a group of friends. We rode behind 4270 on the 11am departure to Cheltenham and then hopped off at Broadway for the stunning new build station and to have lunch. We also had a bit of a nose about the loco viewing area and took a bit of a look at the 2ft gauge as all bar one of us is a volunteer at Statfold Barn. (Sadly it wasn't running, but oh well).

All in all I can see why this line is considered the Friendly Line, as all staff was polite and chatty. Several staff tried to recruit us! Which is an excellent sign and I truly am sorely tempted, but alas I am the better part of 2 hours drive away!

I spent a lot of my visit playing with my new toy of a video camera, so I will probably put something of a video up once I've checked the footage and reviewed it.

 

Quite correct Al, I believe it is what many would call attention to detail. Where things such as mentioned here are overlooked, or simply avoided, it reminds me of a saying I sometimes heard as a child about some houses - i.e. "kippers and curtains".

 

No apology needed! As has been said, it's the sort of thing that's relatively easy to sort out, just need someone to do it, it would be good if someone could.

 

For those who don't haunt the GWSR blogs, there's a new update on the installation of the Crash Protection Barrier on the bridge at Broadway.

Looking at the images of the construction details in the previous post, that thing's internal structure looks like that of a battleship! The plate it's built of looks like it's about 1" thick! 'I pity the fool' who decides to chance it with a high load! I can't wait!!

Noel

 

new update

Yes, if you can't stop idiots driving into bridges then making sure their vehicle comes off much, much worse than the bridge is the best alternative!

 

Another progress report on the crash protection beams has just been posted here:

http://bridgestobroadway.blogspot.com/2018/09/more-on-north-abutment-support-beam.html

 

7820 Dinmore Manor on the GWSR's last day of the season, filmed on 31st October 2018.

 

You will be aware that it has always been the long-term aspiration of GWSR to reinstate as much as possible of the rail corridor between Stratford-upon-Avon and Cheltenham.
There are now two planning applications pending before Stratford-Upon-Avon District Council which, if approved, could adversely affect any reinstatement of the railway between Long Marston and Stratford.
The two planning applications are: 18/01892/OUT (Outline application for 3,100 new homes) & 18/1883/FUL (Proposed construction of South Western Relief Road to Stratford-upon-Avon). Copies are available to view on-line on the Stratford planning portal. (https://apps.stratford.gov.uk/eplanning/). However, these do not tell the whole story.

Besides the houses planned on the former Long Marston aerodrome a further development is already under way on part of the former Long Marston army base nearby. Both are adjacent to the former Stratford-Honeybourne railway. Considerable section 106 monies will be generated. While these were thought to be available for the reinstatement of the rail link the major impact is that they will now be applied to the construction of part of a new road instead. This is a considerable volte face and could represent a big blow to the reinstatement of the Honeybourne line.

If you wish to register your objection to these proposals, you can do so by email to planning.applications@stratford-dc.gov.uk
The last date for registering objections is 15th November 2018.

 

It's not as big a volt face as first thought. The housing was supposed to generate the traffic to justify the funding for the railway, the problem is the council doesn't want a Stratford Upon Avon South station and the money for the town link is unlikely to be available either. The trench and link ran to something like 75m for a line which doesn't seem to be generating the traffic to the current terminus.

It's sad but somewhat understandable.

 

Is this just about money, or would these plans present a physical obstacle?

 

My understanding - and this is not spelled out on any official website - is that the council has decided to use the section 106 funding for the road instead of the railway, as previously indicated by the developer of the houses.

This article for example: https://stratfordobserver.co.uk/news/claims-cost-of-south-western-relief-road-to-overrun-by-70million/
gives you an idea of the cost of the 'relief road'. It doesn't actually relieve or resolve anything, as it will stop short pending more money for a final bit of it.
In this article the rail option, admittedly 5 years ago, was costed at £70m:
https://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/when-shall-these-towns-meet-again?p=2

The issue for those that love railways is that a big grant towards reopening the upper part of the Honeybourne line is proposed by the council to be switched to a new road instead. This is not detailed on either of the planning applications filed.

If you care about this then you are invited to study the material and make you opinion known to the planners.

 

I have looked at both plans. The site housing plan shows the development with a clear line down the side of the Railway. The Road Development has a Bridge over the Greenways, the name of the route given to the foot and cycle path and disused Railway not only built to Railway standards to allow the replacement of the line but also for electricifation. "Much a to do about nothing" me thinks.
I believe the Railway is a protected route.
Note the Road application is 18/01883/FUL and not as above.

 

I don't think potential track bed blockage is the issue if what @Breva has said is correct, but that the most likely opportunity to reinstate Honeybourne to Stratford rail link we've seen since it was closed has been taken off the cards. I've long said that the only way us going to Honeybourne might make a little sense is if NWR linked Honeybourne to Stratford.