Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

In past years, when there a lot of talk about extending beyond KL as far as possible towards Parracombe, whilst I welcomed the idea personally there did seem to be one issue which IMHO had been overlooked by many of those advocating such action. The length of running line would have been (roughly) doubled, as would the running time for a return trip from WB to PE. That in turn would have halved the frequency of services which could be accommodated within the permitted working hours which, without the ability to run longer trains with greater passenger capacity, would have reduced the income from fares yet at the same time increased costs in terms of infrastructure maintenance.

 

Certainly something of a "Catch 22" situation, at the moment. Until they can run beyond and install some sort of passing/run round loop. Still what the L & B and Exmoor Associates have achieved is been beyond the beliefs of many including myself . Definitely one of those WIBN plans/ideas/dreams in the past just like Tornado and the soon to be Prince of Wales P2 2007.

 

Doubling the length of a line doesn't halve the frequency, because most of the time in a given "cycle" is spent stationary (running round etc).

For example, if you have 15 minutes one way journey, 15 minutes to run round at one end and thirty at the other (to allow for water) etc, then you can run one round trip per hour per train. If you double the length of run to 30 minutes each way, your cycle time doesn't double - it goes from 60 minutes to 90 minutes, not 120.

The shorter the run, the less impact increasing that length has on cycle times, because the "stationary" time remains largely fixed regardless: it takes you 15 minutes (or whatever) to run round whether you have gone from London to Edinburgh or just 1/2 a mile along a demonstration line.

Tom

 

I did say "roughly"

 

Just picking up on that bit: given that the raison d'être of EA is to acquire land for the L&B to run on sooner or later, sorting out the details of the transfer ought not to have taken very long unless (as suggested in the rest of post #3101) L&B ownership would have served no purpose at the time.

 

Indeed. It also needs emphasising that re-acquiring the right of way, over eight decades from disposal, means that the land involved is rarely composed of just the route. There are inevitably going to be extraneous parcels of land (which could be of no conceivable use to the railway, once restored), which need to be accurately identified for disposal, parcelled up (a process which involves the Land Registry, Local Authorities and ENPA) and sold, with the balance going to fund further acquisitions.

None of the foregoing is the sort of territory familiar (or of the slightest interest) to most involved in our collective obsession. Neither does it take account of those landowners who aren't keen on their property being lost to or bisected by the route, where the minutiae of involved and protracted negotiations are (again) hardly 'our area of speciality'. Whether we like it or not, there needs to be a damned good reason for depriving reluctant landowners of part of their property and an incumbent responsibility to ensure the fairest agreements work to the advantage of all parties, wherever humanly possible. Hence the need for the expertise within a parallel organisation, a role EA fills admirably.

Just a thought here, but if the restored L&B served no purpose beyond allowing us lot the sight of steam on Exmoor, could the upheaval involved reasonably be judged worthwhile by anyone else? (Clue: that would be a hard 'NO'). I've repeatedly asserted that our lines don't, indeed can't exist in splendid isolation, but need to be an integral and beneficial part of the communities within which they exist and that by definition means to the folk who form those communities. It's an argument I advanced ahead of the L&B Public Enquiry, but don't make the mistake of thinking that was merely for a single self-serving purpose. I've known Exmoor, admittedly only as a visitor, for over half a century and I'm all too aware of the very many real world economic problems which exist, of the dearth of employment and housing opportunities for the young, which force far too many born in the area to leave. I firmly believe a restored L&B would be highly beneficial to this picturesque corner of Devon, which is why, for my part, supporting the scheme is a 'no-brainer'.

So why is EA needed? For any still wondering, I'll answer that with another question. Does anyone else recall how long the land searches concerning the Talyllyn Railway's erstwhile mineral extension took? .... and that was for a still-in-situ railway!

 

I've long been interested in the L&B, but only got involved as a supporter last year with EA to make a small contribution towards acquiring BF station. What has most impressed me about both EA and the L&B is the quality of the efforts with the planners that has resulted in the planning permission from ENPA and the associated councils in the face of some significant and well-funded local opposition. It is a tribute to a good idea accompanied by meticulous preparation that has brought the L&B to this point, and gives me real optimism for the future.

Would we all like it to go faster? Yes of course, but then we're not the property owners who are likely to get a steam railway they don't want (at the moment: when it brings economic benefits, let's see if it changes attitudes) across their land or next door to them, and as @30854 says, this is what the EA / L&B model is seeking to overcome, and the evidence is that it is being done so successfully: all power to them!

 

You did say 'halved the number of services', though. Tom is not wrong and, added to that is the fact that actual journey time is unlikely to double. Visitors have an expectation of a journey time and when it is one mile, the train needs to go slowly to give that expectation of time spent on the moving train. Double the length and you can increase the speed slightly without destroying that expectation. Simplistically, if you run at 10 mph over one mile your journey is six minutes. Go to two miles and run at 15 mph and you get a journey time of eight minutes or 12 mph and it is ten minutes.

 

Hi, I’m glad to have found this forum. I’ve had an interest in the L&Br for a number of years and have been to Woody Bay numerous times. I’m particularly excited about the extension and have a few questions I hope people can help me with if possible!

I’ve had a brief read through some of the comments on here and am a bit confused with some things. Is the house called Fair View owned by the railway? I remember reading a document a few years back that stated the property was being purchased by the trust and it would not be used again for residential use. I last visited Parracombe a couple of years ago and saw Fair View from the bridge. The trackbed had been fenced off from the house and the front garden looked like it had been turned into a small car park as it was all gravelled over. The exterior looked quite run down and the property looked unoccupied. Is the building being used as railway offices or something similar?

 

I believe that Fairview was purchased by the railway, the trackbed separated off and the house resold (I think to a railway supporter, but could be wrong).

Keith

 

Keith is correct, as I understand it, but it has since been back on the market, less the trackbed. Not sure of the current status, but here is a recent Estate Agents' brochure for the property... https://media.onthemarket.com/properties/5043743/871184790/document-0.pdf

 

The special notice (I haven't read the whole thing) has at least 3 spelling mistakes:
: Guage
: The locomotive and carriages, and:
: Was be of interest.

Jeez. How unprofessional.

 

What special notice? where?

 

In the brochure.
It advises potential buyers that the railway may come back.

 

A

Ah! in the Estate Agent's link I provided. It also states that the railway only operates for 6 months a year, which may be a more concerning error to any potential purchaser! To be fair, they are Estate Agents, not Railway Engineers, and it does say "These particulars are a guide only and should not be relied upon for any purpose."

 

as far as im aware it was sold by online auction last summer at under 300k

 

Fairview was a property comprising a house and more importantly the 305 yards of trackbed. Purchased in 2016, the trackbed was split from the house by a solicitor, and the house was sold to an L&B supporter for future use as a holiday let. The L&B acquired the trackbed, and the new owner refurbished the whole house interior and removed the rather attractive cottage garden, leaving in the process the large car parking area adjacent to the house. The new owner then had a change of mind and sold the house last year in a sealed auction organised by the Estate Agent.

Interestingly, the money gained by the L&B selling Fair View was used to purchase Ivy Cottage in 2017, and selling that house after the trackbed was separated, finally enabled the purchase of a third piece of trackbed at Dean Plantation in 2018.

 

Did you mean to finish the sentence?

 

Yes, the ruddy computer is doing its own thing this afternoon!

 

Be thankful it's doing anything at all