Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Yes, 949 is very close to being finished AFAIK - definitely further ahead than 328. But I didn’t do a complete tour of the C&W, just poked my head in, and 949 wasn’t visible - think it is in the paint shop, or was last time I saw it.

Tom

 

Yes, Howard, very much so. It is fully glazed, the doors are all on, and the carriage itself is in the first topcoats. The doors themselves are a little further behind, in undercoat, but the carriage is essentially complete. The most recent "Brighton Matters" states that 949 still needs some attention on E Road, the Stroudley-Rusbridge alarm box requires final fitting in the guards compartment, plus of course, it is awaiting its slot in the paintshop, which presumably will be after the Hastings brake has had its turn.
Edit- reading Tom's post, it would appear to have jumped the Hastings brake to the paintshop!

 

Interesting press release from yesterday: the railway has been awarded a one-off grant of £692,500 from Mid Sussex DC to help create and enable access to a "suitable natural green space" at Hill Place Farm. From what I can see, that is essentially some of the developer's contribution to the new estate that has sprung up adjacent to the line south of the viaduct, but is being paid directly in advance by the council, rather than the railway waiting for the developer to pay.

See here: https://www.bluebell-railway.com/bluebell-railway-press-releases/

I'm not totally certain about the "tunnel beneath the railway", presumably that is part of the scheme (I think the area of the SANG straddles the railway, so this is about joining up the two halves).

Some of the money will also be used for solar panels, I think on the new carriage shed / OP4 at Horsted Keynes.

Tom

 

There is an existing under bridge in the area , so it might be for works to repair/ upgrade it. While travelling on the Beer Festival weekend I noticed an area West of the line which has been landscaped including paths and seating, which can only be accessed using the under bridge.

 

There are plans and maps included in the document at https://www.midsussex.gov.uk/media/...l-place-farm-construction-management-plan.pdf.
There is an existing underbridge (cattle creep?) shown and a new one is also indicated further North-East.
As often happens with documents posted on websites, the definition of plans is so poor that the text cannot be read due to pixelation. My cynical side wonders if this is due to incompetence or some ulterior motive to hide details.

 

Colour me befuddled by this sentence: "Natural England has advised the council that one of the best ways to protect Ashdown Forest from increasing visitor numbers is to provide alternative areas for people to visit".

Reason for befuddlement? From the onset of the original covid lockdown onwards, viewers of local TV stations in Sussex will have heard representatives of bodies controlling the Ashdown Forest and High Weald bemoaning cuts in government funding and using same to justify proposals to introduce charges at parking areas within said areas.

Are we to now believe the aim is to restrict visitor numbers? Genuinely ..... ?

 

TBH I translated that as "the best way to look after it is to tell them to bog off and go visit somewhere else".

 

The latest issue of The Bluebell Times is now available to view for October

In this issue:

• Advanced details of next year’s BRPS AGM
• Introductions to the new Safety and Assurance Director and Museum Curator
• How No. 65’s trip to the mainline was planned from a beach in Antigua
• Latest work at Horsted Keynes as renovations gather pace
• 5 Minutes with BRPS Trustee Laurie Anderson
• And much much more.

The Bluebell Times is published monthly on the second Friday of every month. The next issue is due out on Friday, November 11th.

https://www.bluebell-railway.com/bluebell-times/

Tom

 

Just an idle thought concerning the Ardingly extension, could a power delivery system like the Docklands Light Railway's covered leccy pickup work?

 

Wouldn't have thought so, the DLR system is bottom contact.

 

Aye, but could not the beams and collector shoes be adapted to make the bottom contact possible, I know that would upset the purists but they could just take piccies from the other side lol.

 

I suspect it'd be rather more involved than it may first appear.

 

That would be a change from something gravity based to an upward sprung system. That's non-trivial, and probably at least as challenging on authenticity as the debates over precisely how Flying Scotsman appears.

 

You could always if you can find a suitable vehicle use battery power, with an 2 car emu similar to the 2 HAP/ MLV used on the MHR, with a recharging set up set up at Horstead keynes

 

Given that Network Rail cannot (at present) get any 3rd rail extension project past the ORR, the chances of any heritage railway getting a TWAO allowing it don't seem too good, to me. And, as I have mentioned before, the old LROs were pretty specific on prohibiting electrification (unless self-contained, ie battery).
Still, nothing ventured, ... ... ...
Pat

 

Apart from that - could we afford the juice these days?

Tom

 

True, but then the DLR have them so a precedent, and design, has already been set.
Mind you, I think our @martin1656 has the most workable solution

 

Pop round Ardingly Showground at the right times with a few buckets and shovels and there's a month's worth of fuel right there.

 

Does that apply to shielded arrangements such as that on the DLR? That network has been extended in fairly recent years, presumably with the ORR's blessing.

I suspect that it would be possible in principle for Ardingly, but that the cost would be out of all proportion to the benefit. And if the Bluebell ever gets to Haywards Heath it would be incompatible with the ordinary third rail there. Battery power (or steam, of course) makes more sense.