Churnet Valley Railway General Discussion

You’re starting to sound like Matt Adams.

 

I find myself in agreement with Gav - I'd rather have a shorter railway consolidating it's operations (it must be said that Leek, although not far, is a really fantastic short-term aim and the existing CVR is a very pretty line as it is) and then expanding gradually in the long term than run the risk of falling into dire financial straits because it decided to go here there and everywhere all at once.

 

The tracks to Oakamoor and Cauldon were there but neither were in wonderful condition. The Cauldon track buckled in the heat of a summer about 5 years ago and the sand trains from Oakamoor meant that the sleepers were sitting in sand rather than ballast.
Buying, to secure the rights, and using the track to Ipstones gives a much more interesting journey than Froghall to Oakamoor.
I hope to see, in my lifetime, trains running from Oakamoor to Cauldon once again, via Leek but am content with what is there at the moment.

 

This week the OAP/way gang tackled a number a varied smaller tasks (ditch clearing, joint packing and fishplate changing) as well as transporting a gang of council tree fellers (and there were 3 as it happens) to tackle a tree that had shed a branch the was dangling dangerously close to our "Iron Bridge". Due to the unremitting rain photos are somewhat limited!

Luxury transportation in the monsoon for the tree fellers ...



Aerial antics


Simon, Alan and Paul clearing out years of silt after we'd craned out a fallen tree trunk which had rolled down the bank and wedged itself rather firmly in the drain.

 

Preparatory work has commenced on tree clearance around the sewage works crossing on the way to Leek. Necessary to see what the sight lines will be once trains start running.

Lots more trees dropped on the Leek side of the crossing but difficult to get a good photo.

 

Wet again? Got a good soaking felling on the canal too.

 

You are bound to get a good soaking falling in the canal.

 

Owwww my sides

 

Quite - it's easy to forget that if you extend a line, you almost invariably increase your requirement for locos and carriages, which means a step change in budgets and capacity for those departments. Raising capital for an extension is far easier than maintaining the ongoing revenue for the additional stock you need to run the extended line. (You also generally can't raise fares in proportion to the additional length, i.e. to a first approximation, a 15 mile line will cost twice as much to run as a 7.5 mile line but can't charge double the fare).

Tom

 

Indeed and a long line in Somerset has just such an issue. It can become an Achilles heel.

 

That is entirely fair, and I accept the reasoning for paring back. However, having been to Cauldon and seen the rails extending to Oakamoor in the preservation era, I can’t but be sad that these objectives have been achieved by lifting track, which is to say the least an extreme form of mothballing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

One might argue that the current operation is too long, by including the rather arbitrary excursion on northbound trains past a trailer park and through the tunnel. Without that, the railway could offer a bit more frequency on what is a nice section from Cheddleton to Froghall which offers plenty of opportunity to combine a trip with walks and the pub. If you look at the Green timetable, the last round trip is 13.25 from Cheddleton, and 14.10 off Froghall, which is very early to effectively close the railway for the day for those wanting to travel.

 

Last I checked (correct me if I'm wrong!) the CVR does not have a loop at Cheddleton station (although they'd like one, the riverbank has not played ball with their efforts to lay the additional required track), and so trains need to proceed through the tunnel to leekbrook in order for the engine to run around the train at the north end.

 

Yes, looking at Google Earth, they seem to be short of a point at the south end of the station.

 

There is an ongoing plan to reinstate the loop but it's slow going due to having to stabilise and rebuild the bank where it's been eroded by the river. Much liaising with the EA regarding acceptable solutions.

 

You should have a word with the Severn Valley Railway, it sounds like they have got it all wrong.

 

I think we should be grateful for that little landslip at Cheddleton and the inability or disinterest of the CVR to rectify it otherwise I think the line north to Leekbrook would have been ripped up years ago.

 

Interesting little problem.

 

Yes. The solution was an ‘engineered log-jam’ on our side and easing of the bend on the far side. The logs are now settling in and the bank will be reconstructed as time, money and priorities allow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I wonder if the EA would recommend that as a solution to the problems at Dawlish, it could save £millions.