WHR General Discussion.

What loco is that? it looks like a baguley?

 

Ignoring all questions of politics, ownership etc (please).......

Is there any reason why the LYd2 diesels on the WHHR would not be suitable for the PW work envisaged. Indeed could a pair of them running nose to nose "20-style" also give thunderbird cover?

http://cms.whr.co.uk/stock/diesel/eryri.xhtml

 

WHHR FR Talks resume

An official joint statement issued last night:

On Saturday 3rd October 2009 a meeting took place between representatives of Welsh Highland Railway Limited based in Porthmadog and representatives of Festiniog Railway Company, operators of the restored Welsh Highland Railway between Caernarfon and Porthmadog.

There was an exchange of views. Each side now has a better understanding of the other's position. The discussions have been positive and constructive.

Both organisations are looking forward to further meetings in the near future and to working together.

Welsh Highland Railway Limited
Festiniog Railway Company

 

I'm told that:

A. they are too big to fit some of the bridges and I think one of the tunnels (not sure on the tunnels bit)
B. that they will destroy the track because they will waddle around

I have simplified it to my level, I am sure that the engineers on the forum will explain better

 

Yawn!
After all this time I am surprised that there is anyone left on the ground to give a damn.

 

You're welcome.

 

This is wonderfully fantastic news, just what we have all been waiting for, i just can't believe it. You must tell us more.

 

Well there seem to be a fair few on here for a start, I think you'll find.

 

Doesn`t look like the Trunk Road Agency are gonna tip up the money the FR were hoping they would...

WAG's response to the WHRCL's claim for the Britannia Bridge works:

In February 2007, a section of the retaining wall which retains the Glaslyn river at Britannia Bridge, Porthmadog collapsed. The Trunk Road Agency was responsible for the repair to the wall but only to the extent necessary to protect the highway.
At around the same time, WHR were proposing to undertake works to Britannia Bridge as part of a larger scheme of works in Porthmadog. Following discussion, it was agreed that it was sensible and indeed more cost effective for WHR to include the repair to the training wall within the scope of their works. This also appeared to be a sensible solution as the permanent repair to the training wall, which Gwynedd Council would have undertaken, was likely to have been inconsistent with WHR's works to the Britannia Bridge.
As The Trunk Road Agency was obliged to undertake repair works to the extent necessary to protect the highway, it was intended that its contribution to the cost of WHR's works would be limited to the cost of the repairs that it would have had to carry out.
However, WHR have to date submitted invoices to The Trunk Road Agency in the sum of £335,429.74 which on any basis is far greater than the cost of the repairs that the Trunk Road Agency would have carried out. £210,429.74 of it relates to design and construction costs and £125,000 relates to a claim made by WHR's contractor in relation to delay costs, which WHR say was caused by the Trunk Road Agency. The Agency has to date paid the sum of £73,779.38. WHR are currently demanding payment of the balance of £261,650.36. The Agency's contribution must reflect the costs that it would have incurred had the above arrangement not been made. It cannot accept responsibility for works beyond this or claims made against WHR by its contractor.
The Agency has offered to pay a sum which it considers would have been the reasonable costs of permanent repair to the retaining wall. Its offer has unfortunately not been accepted and the parties are continuing to try and resolve matters."

 

As far as im aware this is the same press release that was sent out and discussed some time ago, its just taken Barrie a while to put it up on his website. Going by the summary of the most recent WHRS AGM it seems there is optimism for a favourable outcome... i guess time will tell.

Chris

 

Thank you Triassic for this very informative article, this tells us a lot about the way the WHR/FR work. I think the Trunk Road Agency were fools to have got involved in the first place, is this the same agency who have tarred over the WHR rail crossing in Porthmadog, be interesting to know ?

 

Is it neccesary to keep bringing up the same subjects again and again? This press release is old news, and so is the flangeway tar - they were discussed months ago. Anyway, if people have forgotten here's a quick summary of what i remember...

The WHR are attempting to recover the full costs of having to include training wall repairs into the bridge work carried out - this isnt the first time that a railway has had trouble with a road agency not paying up the full costs and its unlikely to be the last. Going by what was said at the AGM there's optimism about a positive outcome.

Regarding the crossings, the railway asked contractors to put tar in the flangeways on legal advice - the crossing orders werent finalised and besides no more stock moves are needed at present. When the tar comes out, the crossings should be finished with all the lights and signs, giving those who dont look down at the road no excuse.

Chris

 

To be fair it tells us nothing about the way the FR/WHR work. Unless, of course, someone had an axe to grind and was looking for a negative perspective.

This is a contractual wrangle and should not really be in the public domain. I assume the Welsh Office thought it necessary to issue this press release in answer to the earlier FR/WHR one.

 

Hi there. Well i don't agree with you. Firstly, Triassic has every right to bring this subject to light, secondly, if there seems something anormal in the bill for the design and construction costs, then the general public has a right to know, after all it's them who pay the bill.

 

The point is that it has already been brought to light and discussed, back around post #142 of this very thread when it was being covered both in the local press and an article on the BBC website. As far as im aware, there is nothing new to discuss, not that there was much to say at the time.

Chris

 

In my opinion it's a question of content, explication, preference and detail. In this regard i find Triassics posting far more enlightning and defined.

 

Are you being a divi on purpose?

When I said public domain I meant the whole question of the contractual debate not whether a poster on here should highlight a press release.

You don't know whether there is anything abnormal in any of the contractual matters because, like us all, you don't know all the facts - do you?

 

Guys can we move on now please.