North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Yes but the water has to come from somewhere and Levisham is rather isolated. I doubt that the water pressure is great. You will end up robbing it from the few dwellings.
If I remember correctly from an old Moors Line the water main runs under the level crossing. What size it is who knows but it may not be big enough to trickle fill a tank between trains. There is a spare parachute water tank (ex Bradford Foster Square if I remember correctly) at Grosmont intended for Levisham. Water supply was the problem.

 

If 80135 takes water at Grosmont in the down direction it should be good to get to Pickering if there is no untoward event but it will be close. There was a prime example of this a couple of years ago with 80136 when the Ashpan sprinkler was left on and had emptied the tank before summit.
Water is available at Goathland and more use could be made of this. However, in the up direction, the column is not well situated with regard to a Std tank and required stopping place, having regard to the short platform and catch points. It would be a similar problem at Levisham in the up direction (except catch points) if a column was provided there so would only ever be good for an emergency.

 

I don't think that 80135 has ever worked through from Whitby to Pickering, certainly not regularly. It only worked a handful of Whitby - Glaisdale shuttles in May 2003 and a Christmas shoppers special to Middlesborough in December of that year. All were operated by WCR as the NYMR didn't get its operators licence until 2007.

If consideration was given to a watering facility at Whitby it would have to be to a ground level attachment on the loco. The ORR have now stopped the use of overhead water cranes on the network and those at Appleby and Scarborough have been superseded by low level hydrant fillers. I wonder how long before they turn their working at height attention to heritage railways.

Peter

 

I hope that yesterday afternoon I took water at Goathland for the last time. The crane at the down end has been a nightmare to use these last few weeks especially as it is so stiff to pull across to the tank and even worse to pull back as you end up standing on the crossing cattle grid to get a purchase at it. Hopefully it will now revert to its normal emergancy use only.

Peter

 

Is it the ORR or Network Rail?

 

It's the ORR - they have a real bee in their bonnet about anyone climbing on top of tenders among various other issues.

Peter

 

Saw an arrangement with a 'J' pipe fitted to a hose dropped into the top of a tank from platform level- I can't remember where it was now, I seem to think possibly Northampton and Lamport but could be wrong.......

Not sure what the arrangements were for opening the tank filler (didn't see that bit) but the crew were able to lift the pipe in place then fill it.

Watering from ground level if there's the opportunity is a sensible and easy win- not sure why you wouldn't if there was the opportunity.

 

Forgive my lack of knowledge, but which direction is up and down on the nymr?

 

Up is to Pickering (and York, the NER HQ), down is to Whitby.

Peter

 

Hadn't realised Appleby had been forced to change the method of operation, although I know water is taken there less often than the past.
With apologies for thread drift, what's the arrangement at Hellifield?

 

Falls from heights are still a major cause of life changing accidents nationally hence the Work at Height Regulations. Had these been around when steam locomotives were being designed the water filling arrangements would be rather different.

 

As per my post a couple of days ago I contacted North Yorkshire County Council asking if a temporary footbridge could be installed to maintain access to Grosmont MPD, the Rail Trail and both church and coffee shop.

I've now received a response (fairly swift by public body standards) saying that yes, they are "working towards that" but they haven't indicated a timescale.

The fact they intend a solution is obviously a positive although it does rather suggest that the problems with the existing structure aren't going to be a quick fix.

 

Well they would have to say that they are working to repair or replace as they have a legal obligation to keep the path open and usable.

 

True, but what they say is the intention to provide a temporary replacement. They say nothing about repairing or replacing the old one as such.

Grosmont Parish Council (who have neither the authority or the funding for such projects) have been lobbying the county council for many months because of the very clear deterioration in the old structure. Given that the closure two days ago was without the usual period of notice for footpath closures it does rather suggest major defects.

Around 35 years ago there was a heated dispute between the council and the NYMR about which organisation was responsible for the footbridge with both denying responsibility. The council did eventually accept the structure belonged to them but, like the adjacent Bridge 42, maintenance has been noticeably absent until a major renewal has become inevitable.