Midland and South Western Junction Railway

Hmm, I would disagree. The converse of that argument is that there are a significant proportion of gricers who think every new preservation attempt has to be A Good Thing simply because it is a railway. Just because we're interested in railways doesn't mean we all want more new ones. Why not make the most of what we already have, without diluting the ever-diminishing pool of kit ever further?

Perhaps with Paul you have to read between the lines a bit sometimes, but people have grey things between their ears for that kind of activity. I think it's unfair to say it's not constructive criticism, just because it's not necessarily what some people want to hear.

Indeed. And then the outrage from the indignant keyboard warriors pours forth, because real life has rather inconveniently got in the way of their idealised, rose-tinted dreams...

 

Oh come on, I'm not that bad am I!?

 

I can't help feeling that many of these 'dreamers' have lost sight of the fundamental purpose of the "preservation movement'. To me the word 'preservation' suggests "keeping something as it was" for the enjoyment and education of future generations, a time capsule if you like. Some of our heritage railways portray this admirably - the SDR as the Great Western country branchline, the Mid Hants as a Southern cross-country route, the GCR as a BR main line and so on. At the other end of the spectrum are set ups such as Whitrope with a Pacer on a few hundred yards of track, in the middle of nowhere, which was once part of a secondary main line closed 20 odd years before Pacers were invented. Sorry if it offends the handful of guys who have obviously worked hard to achieve what they have but what is it meant to represent in preservation terms?
I don't believe Michael Draper was wrong all those years ago, he just underestimated how long it would take to reach 'saturation' . The resources available to the 'movement' are finite and several railways are suffering from falling passenger numbers and aging volunteers as running costs continually rise. Spreading those resources over a larger number of "new generation lines" can only exacerbate the problem. Personally, I don't understand why the promoters of these lines are unwilling to devote their obvious enthusiasm to an already established scheme. Maybe it's simply a "big fish/little pond" thing. Ray.

 

That wasn't specifically aimed at you, Chris, no. Unlike many of the reopening enthusiasts you see online (usually the armchair-dwelling kind),you seem to (a) have a sense of humour and (b) the ability to keep your enthusiasm in perspective.

But there are plenty out there who have neither, to whom any proposal to reopen any railway is (adopts Paul Whitehouse voice) brilli-aaaant and to whom reality is evidently a completely alien concept.

 

To be honest I have asked myself many times what the purpose of the Whitrope operation is. That, to me, is the classic example of reopening a bit of railway for absolutely no other reason or purpose than... it's a bit of railway. Ditto the embryonic project near (the wonderfully-named) Wetwang in Yorkshire and various other recent schemes.

Purely and simply because they want their own train set to play with, they don't want to play with somebody else's. Which to me says everything about the mentality of such people - it's not about doing the greater good for railway preservation, their motives are far more self-serving.

Same reason why people continue to chuck money at buying yet more Class 37s and the like. Can you imagine how much good the same amount of money that buying a scrap 37 would do if it was put towards, say, the unique Class 15 and Co-Bo?

The botom line for many, unfortunately, is that they have their own agenda and want their own toys to play with. The bigge picture simply isn't seen beyond their blinkers.

 

At the end of the day, any new project, be it a new build steam loco, a new heritage line or even an appeal to buy the umpteenth class 37 will succeed or fail depending on two inter-related factors:- how much money can be raised and how much the promoters of the project can sell their vision - i.e., attract volunteers with the necessary skills. Given the number of existing heritage lines, new build locos, locos needing restoration, etc already in existence and needing money and support, for a new scheme to succeed, it will have to appeal to a numner of people willing to devote serious time and serious money to the project in question. I must admit, both the M&SWJ and the Meon Valley are routes which I would love to see reopened, but do seem to have the odds stacked against them. Nat Pres members are not infallible, but if the sum total of comments are aggregated and analysed, a scheme which fails to command widespread support on this forum will probably struggle. However, I'd be delighted to be proved wrong with both these two projects.

The one new heritage line project which ought to act as a yardstick is the S&D at Midsomer Norton. Thanks to Ivo Peters' wonderful pictures, most enthusiasts are aware of the old S&D, with its lovely scenery, fierce gradients and so on. Lots of us who never saw it or travelled on it when it was open have developed a sort spot for it. I'm planning a day outing to that part of Somerset next month, and am keen to have a look at Midsomer Norton, even if the station may well not even be open. I would guess that there are plenty of other enthusiasts who have a feeling of goodwill towards this project. Nonetheless, the obstacles it will face if it is to run through to Masbury are immense. OK, the MSW&J and Meon Valley lines do have less challenges as far as the trackbed is concerned, but is there that same sense of goodwill that can be converted into a commitment of time and money to make it succeed?

 

The Midsomer/S&D project is close to my heart (and geographically close too), and is the one that will more then likely receive my enthusiasm. Either that or the Avon Valley Railway and it's plans toward Bath.

With regards to new builds, I still don't understand why people are obsessed with these when there are so many locomotives that needs preserving but aren't getting the attention and finance they deserve. A few quick examples would be: the Adams Radial and B4 at Bluebell and the Avon Valley's 4F

 

Absolutely - couldn't agree more. At nearly all the major heritage railways there are lines of derelict locos and rolling stock, some of which have actually operated in preservation, which are crying out for help. It would be wonderful if the same level of enthusiasm and funding went into these but I don't suppose a rotting carriage or Barry wreck has the same 'wow' factor. Unfortunately many of these derelicts belong to individuals whose enthusiasm and finances have dried up and they just sit there and decay until the host railway has a 'clear out'. I fear that some rare items have already gone past the point of no return. Ray.

 

As DisusedBranch put it, "To be honest I have asked myself many times what the purpose of the Whitrope operation is. That, to me, is the classic example of reopening a bit of railway for absolutely no other reason or purpose than... it's a bit of railway. Ditto the embryonic project near (the wonderfully-named) Wetwang in Yorkshire and various other recent schemes." I guess its down to the fact that they want to. But, as has been pointed out here, "just wanting to" isn't really enough. I have to say, however, that my initial impressions of two of these "upstart" schemes are that they seem to be rather better planned, resourced and generally more realistic in their goals than some mentioned or floated here. These two are the Aln Valley Railway near Alnwick and the Yorkshire Wolds Railway at Sledmere & Fimber (although there was indeed a station on that line at Wetwang - I would like to live there, I like the Yorkshire Wolds and the name is great!). Now I must stress that I have never visited either location in recent years but their progress is well documented on their respective websites and, in the case of the Aln Valley, there is considerable local support - they also have the possibility of linking up with the ECML at Alnmouth. I notice also that both these schemes seem to be picking up other railways' "cast-offs" and restoring them. Both the Aln Valley and the Yorkshire Wolds have purchased surplus Mk 1s from the GWSR for example (OK in the YWR case its a Mk 1BG but its a start). Both locations are also in tourist areas so there could be scope for both to succeed, as long as they build decent toilets as well as a loco shed. What we put up with 30 years ago as visitors with spending money we won't put up with today, as has already been said on this thread.

 

And what exactly is wrong with that? Are you trying to tell me that the people who started the NYMR/KWVR/MHR etc were doing it for any other reason than to have their own bit of railway? Besides which perhaps they live in that area and are not prepared to travel further to play with someone else's toys. I think you're neglecting the effects of increasing travel costs

The heritage railway scene is basically a hobby derived sector . The whole point of volunteering is for self serving motives - i.e. overall we like doing it, despite the dirt and effort involved. Even those who donate cash usually do so for specific reasons or to specific railways they like. Would you be prepared to donate to a central pot for use anywhere in the heritage railway scene? (perhaps basedon the heritage lottery model) If so, and you feel others also would, perhaps you should start up a fund.

It seems that having one's own agenda (ie one's own way of spending one's money or time) is a crime.

 

Ray,

As a volunteer and a member at Whitrope I would like to ask you what we should have on site? Lytham St Annes and a rake of coaches? A nice 4MT? A pair of Claytons and a rake of boxes?

Although not ideal the Prototype railbus RB004 does its job, for now. Possibly in the future once the track is of suitable length and there is a shed facility we may have a 37 on site that one of our members already owns. Currently we have two Mk2 coaches on site, a Fowler that is under going restoration and a small Ruston Shunter.

Have you ever been to site to see the work being done in what is a very hostile environment? Constraints are placed upon us by the Forestry Commission, and land ownership of private dwellings. There are plans being drawn up for a new build signal box, however where the old box stood is now on private land not owned by the Association so it will have to be built further towards the tunnel where the level crossing will be.

There was also never a platform at Whitrope, and never a car park either. But there is now. All work is carried out by volunteers who travel from as far as Devon, Lincolnshire as well as locally. The association has the support of the Forestry Commission, Scottish Borders Council, has regular donations from Network Rail (signals from Stirling and Dunblane, and has a committed membership base. But as things are done by volunteers things take time, in winter nothing much gets done on site due to the harsh climate but plenty gets done behind the scenes. We also have members who publish books about the railway, and yes they are available from places like Amazon.

So there you go, its not a private train set for old boys to play with. It is hoped that this can become a great tourist attraction, but it will take time to germinate and grow.

So my last question to you is how long did it take other Heritage Railways to get where they are now?

My answer would be they are still working at it!

And if you would like to see something running on site that is faithful to the area and period then we will welcome your most generous donation and we hope to see you on site to help with the rebuild on a regular basis.

 

Its a

It's a real shame to read your reply.

Pity one of our members at Whitrope already owns a class 37, which is a runner and currently works on another preserved railway.

The chaps at Whitrope have a 25 year plan which the Forestry Commission are aware of and fully support. Lots of members own money has gone into this project and not just for the benefit of themselves but for the public. Building a Heritage line is not as easy as it was back in the years.

I welcome your entitled to your views but I suggest you visit the site and chat to the members to see what is planned. We will also welcome your donation towards a class 15 if you wish to see one built.

 

Tony, I am well aware how difficult it is to set up a heritage railway ( I started in 1968 when things were much more difficult than they are now) and I never questioned your hard work or determination.
What is I do question is what you, and other 'new schemes', are trying to achieve - a couple of Mk 2's, a diesel shunter and a pacer do not portray the former Waverly route in any way. The other point I was making was why the promoters of such schemes are unwilling to join an existing project where their undoubted enthusiasm would be most welcome. Ray.

 

Let's get back to the specific proposal from Spud. The Ludgershall-Andover branch line has one huge thing going for it: the line is in place and in usable condition. Maintaining and probably overhauling the track and tackbed is not a small task, but so much easier than reinstating track on a disused and derelict trackbed. This fact alone puts it into a different league from the Meon Valley or even the Waverley Line schemes.

What we have is an existing, but under-used, line in search of a fresh purpose.

Do we know what the army's medium-term plans for the branch are? If they need it to be retained for the foreseeable future but don't generate much traffic, then the question is what other uses can be made of it during those times when they are not using it? On the other hand, if the army have finished with it, then is it worth saving and for what use? If the line's longer term future is in doubt, then now is the right time to start thinking about additional or alternative uses.

It seems to me that neither Ludgershall nor Andover are particularly attractive tourist destinations, and even with all the existing infrastructure a new venture would struggle to attract enough visitors and enough supporting volunteers if it just relied on running old trains, especially in the early days when those "old trains" are not very old and rather ugly. There needs to be another reason for people to use the line. This is where Spud's second idea, which no one else has mentioned yet, could make all the difference - a new Army Museum, either dedicated to transport like the old one in Beverley, or more general. If such a thing were to be created beside the line at Ludgershall, then the branch would have a purpose and a theme. Does anyone know if such a scheme is likely? I guess it could be part of the Imperial War Museum. However, Ludgershall is not exactly an impoverished area, and if a new military museum were planned, I think it more likely that it would go to an area where the reduction of MoD spending in the district was having a bigger impact on unemployment, etc.

 

Ray, thanks for the reply

However I would like to know what we should be using for now so as you say 'To portray the former Waverley Route'?

Until further progress is made, then our volunteers who 'Own' the coaches, pacer and shunters are happy enough for their use at Whitrope.

As you will be well aware of, until we have a substantial run and facilities to maintain and keep stock in we will find it hard to attract the type of stock we need to 'Portray' the Old Waverley Route. I would like to see what you would propose in this matter....

We also have certain environmental constraints placed upon us given our location, and by the Forestry Commission who own the land that surrounds us. We will never go north through the tunnel as that needs over £3 million pounds spent on it as it suffered a serious slip many years ago.

While we could join forces with other railways, that then wouldn't be 'The Waverley Route', we do however have a good working relationship with the Aln Valley and some of our members also work on other heritage Railways such as the Bo'ness & Kiniell where the 37 is, the Nene Valley where our Railbus owner has other stock.

Unlike the article in heritage Railways mag this month we expect to be at Riccarton in around 5 to 6 years given funding, grants and such like. Architect designs are already in the planning stage for a heritage centre, signal box, duel road shed at Whitrope and funding has been promised for a gated crossing in a period style by a local development.

 

What happens to all of your efforts if the Scottish Government or Network Rail decide that they want to reopen the line ?
Is it worth all of the effort you're putting in ?

Bob.

 

Tony, as you have asked a direct question I will try to give a direct answer. You cannot ever portray the former Waverley Route, it was a secondary main line linking major cites, unfortunately a few hundred yards of single track (or even a few miles eventually) cannot possibly recreate it - it is gone for good unless, as Bob says, the Scottish Gov or Network Rail decide to step in. As regards stock there is precious little 'genuine' stock left and what remains is 'spoken for'. So really, and I'm genuinely sorry if this sounds rude, but why are you bothering? I didn't intend to single out your organization I simply used it as an example of one of the new ' few hundred yards of tack in the middle of nowhere' schemes. There are several others that I could have used to illustrate my point. Regards Ray.

 

A lot depends on how one defines the quality of a heritage railway, I think. For me its a decent run of line with great scenery, that runs from somewhere to somewhere else (rather than nowhere to nowhere), steam engines that are in general typical of those from its BR days and, ideally, some pre-nationalisation coaches as well as the staple Mk 1s with signalling and lineside detailing that is of correct appearance. For me the answer is the NYMR, but the SVR, Bluebell, GCR, IoWSR all have their merits. Others, such as the GWSR, MHR, Swanage and ELR rank lower because of their lack of older coaching stock. The lines that are springing up still are going to find it harder and harder to match the allround quality of the older ones because it is getting increasingly difficult to find the rolling stock and other materials, and there is greater competition for what is left. I think the richer lines will continue to get richer and the poorer ones will find it very difficult to break out of their mould.

 

I would imagine they will be getting a cheque from the Scottish Government to buy out the line; stranger things have happened.

 

Whats happened to the M&SWJR thread, it seems to have been hijacked .