Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I have decided to share my strategy.

I have been a member for about five years but live in Scotland with no realistic opportunity to be involved as a volunteer. I do volunteer more local to home.

I read Chris Duffell's statement and think that it offers the best route forward.

A couple of months back I contemplated signing up for life membership but then the current discord arose. I decided to renew for a year.

If those in charge, or who think that they are in charge, don't sort out a unified approach to the issues preventing extension of the L&B by next year I won't be renewing again.

I realise that my sub is neither here nor there but I cannot think of another way to register my frustration with the current impass.

 

Hi, sadly you will not be the only one that will being thinking like this. The increase of coverage on social media has made a number of members ask if a membership is still worth it, since as one ex-member has already said to me. I can get more information from Facebook than I ever did from the magazine or the Trust.

 

I don’t know, because I lack the local knowledge to propose one. From where we are, my hunch is that building out from Woody Bay is the best option, but it’s far from a straightforward one.

I see a number of challenges, and notice each faction carefully ignoring the difficult bits when putting forward their ideas, and instead focusing on the positives. That includes the consultation version of option C and ideas based around the Yeo Valley.

Respecting the frustration stated by @RailWest, I just observe that a lot of rocks being thrown, many of them from within glass houses. I see much less construction going on.

However, I will note again that sorting this out requires an outbreak of peace, and people working together. Boiling this down to a zero sum game of one side wins, another loses, will not build that change.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

But is the information he sees on Facebook and other social media accurate? As with all things in life you have to decide who you will believe.

 

One of the problems is that we only know about 'discord' through Social Media. Is there really discord? or is it just a few vocal members?

 

Good question. The risk of course of not communicating (the charge against the board) is that it creates a vacuum which has to be filled. For every online poster in reasoned debate I’d guess there were another 10 thinking the same, but not posting. Does mean discord? Not sure, and I am not sure that’s what we are here really. I see a healthy debate about the direction mixed with some understandable frustration that nothing very much has happening to lengthen the line in the last 5yrs.

 

A lot of people seem to think the frustration is about not lengthening the line in 5 years when for many it's more like at least 14 years, that's when there were plans to go down to cricket field Lane originally, that idea was scrapped for want of bigger plans yet here we are all these years later being told that's what they want to do

 

So now that you have done your searches are you going to tell me if you are a member of the L&BR or even if you are a shareholder in EA, although i can check that one out for myself. Why do you find it odd that i should be so at odds with the L&BR board of trustee's? Im also a member of the railway and if i dont think something is correct i have every right ,just like every other member to speak out about. Do you suggest that whatever i hear that i dont think correct i should just keep quiet about it which in itself would make me just as bad, lets take one little issue, you say in a previous post how wonderful the restored carriages are, well yes they are and are paid for by supporters but they are sat outside at WB in all the weather that the north devon climate can throw at them, it has been mentioned that no17 might be out of service for most of the summer due to the amount of work it needs, i have raised the issue time and again about covered storage ,even suggesting and sending details a type of agricultural covering that could be installed but nothing has happened, is this because they cant be bothered or cannot afford to do something, who knows but also a few years ago the company secretary jumped the gun with the voting papers for the AGM and had everything printed before the closing date for applications and it was all posted to members, then an application was received within the legitimate time frame meaning a little chaos followed, all the voting papers had to be reprinted and posted to the members, quite a few if whom had already posted their original voting slips back, this cost the railway somewhere in the region of £6k (shown in the accounts and as far as im aware no reprimand was given to the person(s) at fault) that money could have been put to better use, for instance to provide the cover i had mentioned for the carriages that you so fondly talk about

 

there was an assessment done on behalf of the YVT a couple of years ago on the possibilities of coming out of Barnstaple and coming up through the Yeo Valley which was presented at one of last years EA meetings

 

Excellent. Where would a casual reader of, say, this thread find such information and be able to interpret it in the light of other suggested restoration schemes?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I rarely reply to everything I read on here to avoid getting swept up in various political arguments.
Simply to answer the comment we ' can't be bothered' to do anything with the carriages.
This is misleading, untrue, and insulting to everyone working hard on them.
I'm guessing aimed at myself about the idea of a shed you sent me. I agree excellent idea as I have said directly to you several times.
Big difference to what we are allowed to do to what we would like to do.
I've put a lot of work into options and ideas. Our guy's are working hard on the coaches and several things are in the pipe line to help keep the carriages in good condition.
No point me telling everyone until its all completed. Was hoping then would be a good website or journal article on what we are and what's next.

Please remember comments like this which are unfounded and untrue do not reflex the hard working volunteers doing at great job, and isn't helpful at all.
Please let's be kinder and stick to the truth and as ever always happy to talk and show people what we are doing as we do regularly.
It's not all bad in reality, lots to do though


Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk

 

Allowed by whom please? And what is their reason for refusal?

 

A building large enough for our carriages requires planning permission from ENP. Then all this entails with designs / planning / space.
Also consider all the things various heritage railways have thought about or allowed for in various new sheds on various railways.
All agree we need covered sheds, reality is harder to achieve but we are taking positive steps on several fronts with the carriages as they are quite rightly a great asset.

Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk

 

Some years ago, IIRC, The Trust invested in some carriage covers to protect them over winter, but I don't think they were used more than once or twice. What was the problem with those, and do we still have them? Would they or something similar be better than nothing in the interim?

 

I accept that of course any sort of carriage shed will need planning approval from the relevant local authority. However as a Trust member I have yet to hear about, or see any signs of, the Trust preparing to submit any relevant planning application to the ENPA (or even the NDC) .

Now, this may be because they have yet to identify a suitable site and/or have the necessary funds available, but then we come back to the 'gripe' about the internal communications (or lack thereof) with the Trust. It is obvious to those of us with a reasonable experience in and/or knowledge of heritage railway operations that (a) carriages are essential for the core business of carrying passengers, (b) they cost a lot of money and (c) they deteriorate if not protected. Yet at face value - based on what (if anything) the Board tells us members about it - it would appear that nothing is being done about that.

 

It was longer ago than I remembered - this is from 2015! https://www.lynton-rail.org.uk/story/carriages-mothballed-until-february

 

Planning would be my guess. I doubt the idea of the suggested agricultural covering would get further than the planners in tray.

 

I'm sure I've read this somewhere, but experience in the vintage vehicle world elsewhere would make me make a confident guess - and IIRC this is what happened anyway - that putting wooden carriages into covers caused more problems than it solved - moisture capture and even 'sweat'. I.e., they really are/were better off in the open than under the covers? So in answer to your final question, essentially no.

Nice idea, and works on fibreglass yachts, but was the cause of some wincing when it was announced. Quietly abandoned after a year or two - maybe even after the first year? People with wooden framed vintage vehicles and similar tend to go for the freestanding or even inflatable solutions that don't involve the fabric actually touching the vehicle IME - especially when trying to preserve in good order. It would be a reasonable course - assuming nothing better available - if trying to conserve a hulk awaiting restoration.

 

I know how hard the paint shop boys work on keeping these carriages in good condition and the work others do on them, it is not a criticism of their hard work but these carriages started arriving in 2013 and still nothing has been done to get them under decent cover, the trust soon managed to get the new tea room sorted out so they can get things done if they try

 

Well, after a bit of hassle getting the account confirmed I've finally been able to join this conversation hehe

No hiding who I am, Dave Ely, wood butcher and shaving heap maker, turning old stuff into more old stuff, plus new into old and old into new.

Hello everyone and blessings to all