Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Only through a quirk of history, that the IOW systems loading gauge was restricted , which meant that new stock would never fit without some work, so everything was hand me downs, withdrawn elsewhere, and replaced by more modern stock .

 

It shows though that there were alternatives to Mk.1s as a "default setting". Foxfield and Tanfield are showing that there is still (just) enough time.

 

How ever, for many lines MK1's that were ready to run almost from purchase, was more of a must buy than pre grouping coaches that were available but would not have been any use as most by then were in departmental use and stripped of much of their interiors when you need bums on seats to pay for it in the first place.

 

It doesn't really. Not all railways were created equal. But I suspect I'm never going to convince you that doing it the "IoW way" is simply not possible for a lot of other railways.

 

The linear scrapyard has a lot to answer for over the last 20 years.

 

Bingo!

 

But seriously though, on the GWSR at least our linear scrapyard contained a few pre-nationalisation coaches; to tidy the yard up we got rid of them. Not sure how that helped the cause of pre-Mk1 coaches on our railway...

 

On vintage carriages: generally we have one vintage set running on days that we have a two train service - which is weekends and peak season mid weeks. We may have had a few weekends of a one train service last year, but this year I think we are back to two trains all weekends, so there should always be a vintage set running.

My understanding is that the vintage carriages tend to cost more to run per carriage-mile because they require more frequent maintenance exams, particularly brake maintenance - significant for a line that sees sustained braking, given the prevailing gradients.. So for a given mileage, there will be more exams during the year, so more cost. The C&W is also slightly short staffed at the moment for carrying out maintenance - there is a vacancy for a paid carriage fitter for anyone who wishes to take up that role, and I believe there is also starting to be some success in getting volunteer groups to do maintenance on the carriage fleet. Compartment stock also has lots of doors, which are expensive in maintenance terms: the Mets recently had new door locks, but there are as I recall 50 doors in the set, and limited opportunity to do them carriage by carriage. In that light, I note that the Howlden Trust - owners of the GNR saloon - have just had to spend £15,000 on new draw hooks, without which the carriage would have been stopped sooner or later. None of this stuff is cheap.

I do feel a bit - and this is not intended as a criticism - that the C&W projects have been slightly scattered, with the result that we have lots of "half sets": three Maunsells, four * four wheelers; half a pre-grouping bogie set etc. Hopefully with what is currently in the works that will work itself out in the next few years, at least in some areas.

I would also come back to the way priorities shift over time. Over the last decade or so, we have put many millions into the track and carriage storage facilities in particular. In the short term, had that gone into locos and rolling stock, the position in both might look a lot more enthusiast friendly - assuming of course that the capacity to use the money could have been found in those areas. You could imagine a "now" in which we had ten locos, a birdcage set, a six coach four wheel set and a four coach Maunsell and four coach Bulleid set all now running. But it wouldn't have been a sustainable strategy, whereas the infrastructure investment is essentially buying long term capacity to continue running the railway. (Since it has been mentioned on this thread, one of the - at 300 miles distance - standout features apparent on the NYMR is just how much they have invested in their track over the last number of years). My gut feeling is that at current rate of progress, there is probably another 3 - 4 winters to invest on the SP - HK section, then focus will need to move to the HK - KC section, but maybe at a lower rate. So hopefully then there can be some capacity investment in C&W and locos - which at least are now increasingly stored undercover, though there is still a way to go on that. But ultimately, the railway has to cut its cloth to suit its coat, and I'd challenge anyone to say that investing in the track and carriage storage was the wrong use of funds over the last decade.

Tom

 

Hmm. It is a long timesince I was last at the GWSR but I well recall Winchcombe being stuffed full of decrepit Mk.1s. Did those go as well?

 

Nope, we restored them!

 

Apologies for snipping so much from your excellent post.

Money spent on the infrastructure is never wasted.
The covered storage will reduce the rate of deterioration of restored vehicles, and this should mean longer intervals between body overhauls and repaints. Which in turn should make more time available for restoring more vehicles.
The improvements in the track should reduce wear and tear on both locomotives and rolling stock, again helping to stretch the time between mechanical overhauls.

 

So the more interesting stuff went but the boring ones remained.

 

The viable stuff, owned by the railway, remained. The unviable and the private removed. Can't see how you could fault that given your past postings.

 

As usual, Paul you are twisting reality in knots to suit your case. Both Tanfield and Foxfield have created trains, it is true, but neither railway is a major carrier of passengers and can thus cope with the limited numbers of coaches they have restored. They are very much the exception rather than the rule. The only lines (other than the IoW, which was still using them to the end) that were really able to build a sizeable fleet of complete pre-BR coaches were the Bluebell (because it was formed early on whilst such carriages were in day to day use and the SVR because it acquired the Swindon and Derby test trains. Everyone else acquired odd survivors that had escaped the mass withdrawal of the early 60s (eg the Quadarts at the NNR) or examples that survived with little alteration in departmental service . Everyone else had to go for Mk 1s or heavily modified departmentals and the very fact that the Mk 1s were more or less ready to use "off the shelf" gave them an unassailable advantage, and the sheer number of survivors will ensure their predominance because there are enough to support a cottage industry to keep them running.

Despite that, they are only representative of part of railway history and we really should all be looking at trying to fill the void of what is left unrepresented.

 

Some of these places have been going for forty years or more.

 

Moving on (please ...) - a couple of photos on the website of Pullman car 36 which has arrived on the railway. It has an interesting history, having served at various times on the "Southern Belle" (the steam hauled predecessor to the electric "Brighton Belle"); then later on the "Golden Arrow"; then on the "Devon Belle"; and finished its BR career on the "Bournemouth Belle". So a history on all three sections of the old Southern, and arguably at one time or another a part of the set on all four of the most prestigious Southern trains. https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/whats_new.html

There is also an update on the track laying work at Three Arch Bridge: https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/inf_news.html

C class 592 is being repainted for display at SteamWorks!, where it will be the footplate-accessible loco until it's turn comes for overhaul.

There is also likely to be an update soon on the Camelot Society CCT S2531, with some impressive "before and after" photos.

Tom

 

Some updates ... firstly, infrastructure news, this time on Operation Undercover 4:

https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/inf_news.html

Then, from the e-newsletter an update on the track relaying at Three Arch Bridge. For the photos referenced, you'll have to go to the e-newsletter itself, though I suspect they will appear in due course on the infrastructure news page:

Infrastructure Update: Spanning the Arch

Track relaying in the cutting at Three Arch Bridge is making steady progress, despite the attentions of Storm Brendan. The formation in the cutting has long been suffering from underlying water caused in part by springs in the cutting walls.

A drainage ditch is being dug on the west side to augment the existing drain on the east side. Cross channels help to make sure the new formation is well drained. As usual, a sandwich of Terram/polythene/Terram is being put down to ensure the water is directed into the drain rather than collecting under the ballast.

By 15 Jan., 2020, the 12th track panel—of the planned 26—had been laid and a further area cleared.

PHOTO 1—Taken from the east side of the cutting, track panel 11 is complete, and the sleepers for panel 12 are down with the rail about to be located, clipped, and plated. The sleepers laid across the eastern drainage ditch in the foreground had the concrete sleepers stacked on them before laying. The cleared area beyond track panel 12 can be seen.

PHOTO 2—The new western ditch can be seen going under Three Arch Bridge. The cable across the track is from the lineside phone that will have to be repositioned because it was previously on the line of the ditch.

PHOTO 3—Late in the day, the Terram/polythene/Terram sandwich is lapped into the western drain to ensure any surface water finds an exit. As can be seen, there is already a good amount of water in the ditch and from the ripples in the extreme bottom right of the picture, the rather surprising rate of flow is indicated.

All of this water would previously have had to find its way under the formation to the eastern drain. Nine inch porous pipe—a "French drain"—is being laid, which will be covered with gravel. Note that six inch porous pipe will be used on the northern part of the re-lay, where the flow rate is much less.

By Bruce Healey
​

Tom

 

Next, an update on the Camelot Society Van S2531S, with "before and after" photos. This is of the more or less last iteration of the standard Southern Railway van design, built by BR in 1955 with Plywood sides - the railway also has an example of the original SE&CR design that started the family in 1919.

Camelot Locomotive Society CCT Van Update: Brake Test Passed

I'm pleased to report that member Richard Maxwell has, with assistance, completed the mechanical/running gear overhaul on the CCT.

It passed its brake test just before Christmas. The next stages are a steam heat test to ensure that the through steam heat pipe is okay and there are no leaks.

Although the C&W Department has some free-standing steam heat test equipment on site, a working steam loco would work just as well! Also needing to be done is a test run to make sure that everything done at the overhaul is okay, so the final 'fitness to run' certificate can be made out.

With the Railway currently closed for service trains, and engineering works going on, these two tests will probably be done in the Spring, as 'Camelot' is currently winterised.

The Society would like to thank all those who have worked on the CCT over the last three years, to bring S2531 back from a down-at-heel 'eye-sore' in the down siding at Kingscote to a useful virtually new vehicle that everyone can be proud of. It is hoped to arrange a 'hand-over' and cheque presentation to the 7864 project team later this year.

By Julian Heinemann

​

Tom

 

Finally ... Volunteer "Find our more" days will run again this year on the following dates:

2020: The second Sunday of every month from February until November (except 3rd Sunday in August):
9 February
8 March
12 April
10 May
14 June
12 July
16 August
13 September
11 October
8 November

For more info and contact details, see here: https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/vol/vbbb01.htm

Tom