Bluebell Railway General Discussion

TBH I'm not sure, though I assume that appropriate precautions have been discussed and planned as part of the project.

Worth remembering that the main part of the shed is purely for storage, so maintenance / restoration work (and specifically hot work) would be prohibited. The adjacent maintenance road will I believe have firebreaks between it and the storage shed on one side, and the main carriage works on the other. I also assume that there will be documented procedures for allowable operations on that road. Following the fire at HK a few years ago that destroyed the LCDR horesbox, we have quite strict regulations about fire procedures, including outside fires.

Tom

 

Good - I just hope we have learnt from some of the heritage disasters we have already had, quite a number of carriages have been destroyed by fire.

I suppose one good thing about them going under cover then having sides added to the shed in the future means the timber wont dry out too quickly which can be equally as bad as leaving it out in the wet.

 

Paul

Not sure if this is really aimed at Bluebell but the current aim is to give priority to storage for items already restored and storage for items in need of restoration to prevent them deteriorating further. This is demonstrated by this appeal. Although the Railway owns the trackbed to Ardingly, it has been stated many times that this is a long term aspiration with no desire to start until the backlog of maintenance has been made up (track, other infrastructure, carriages and locos) and covered accommodation sorted - this will take a few years. I for one am certainly looking forward to less "junk" on display at Horsted which (IMO) is one of the most impressive stations in preservation

David R

 

No not principally aimed at the Bluebell although it is an offender, if not the biggest one.

One further addition to my previous posting. Heritage Railways need to stop saying "yes" to kindly meant gifts of things from documents and artifacts to locomotives and rolling stock which are not really useful or relevant to their operation but need effort and money to stow away and prevent from further deterioration. As an example, I belong to a museum and archive group, members of which were fortunately present when an attempt was made to donate items which had absolutely no relevance to the railway. It was unlikely they were even railway items. Had they been accepted, dealing with them would have taken time away from other tasks. If this is true of a couple of Samsonite boxes, how much more so of a worn out saddle tank loco. or other potential occupant of "the linear scrapyard"?

Paul H.

 

Good to hear that fire prevention is on the radar. I think the Mid-Hants learned lessons when their new carriage works burned down, including the difficulty of the fire brigade in accessing an adequate water supply.
The SVR's very big carriage shed is only for storage and inspection of operating rakes, but bristles with fire detection systems, including automatic vents in the roof so that a fire would travel upwards and out, rather than along the inside. There is a solid wall fire break splitting the building into two effectively, and also a clearway around the outside perimeter of the building to allow fire engine access.

 

I'm delighted to read in Railway Magazine that if there's any extra space after the vehicles on the original list are under cover that LSWR No.320 will be one of the next contenders. Not only was this one of the Bluebell's first two coaches, but imagine in about 10 years' time an "Autumn Tints" special (or even a train at a"branch lines" gala if ever they make a comeback) worked by a rejuvenated No. 488 pulling coaches 320 and 1520 in LSWR livery.

 

To show how sensitive (in a good way) the alarms are at KDR. A few weeks ago the diner was being pushed back into the shed. The loco (7812) was barely inside the door and the alarms went off. It was rather fun to watch our GM running along the platform to shut the alarm off.

 

I think the initial "priority" list of ten vehicles apparently got a bit garbled between C&W Committee and the e-Newsletter! Suffice to say, there should be undercover space for all the pre-nationalisation carriages. The shed is I believe in effect 4 * 5 Mark 1s long, but most pre-grouping carriages are rather shorter than a mark 1, so it should fit more than 20 vehicles. At least that's my understanding. There will still be a few interesting NPCS vehicles not under cover, including some unique pre-grouping vehicles. Time for Operation Undercover 5?

Tom

 

A selection of photos from Jon Bowers photo charter today ( Thursday) with the E4 can be found at http://paulsimpson.zenfolio.com/p487797309

 

I know I going sound like captain a__e, but 320 was rebuilt by the Southern with a new longer underframe with a extra compartment and a loo, so in theory it would be 'historically incorrect' to paint it in LSWR colours. I not sure it could even be painted in to SR Oliver Green either...

However as long it get restored at some point who cares what colour it gets painted.

BR Crimson would be nice see though, but maybe I am weird...

 

As it was rebuilt in 1935 it will be able to carry SR Olive Green.

 

The long term plan is sets as follows : -

BR Standard Mark 1 Steam Stock.
SR. Bulleid.
SR. Maunsell.
Southern Railway non-corridor stock of pre-grouping origin.
Metropolitan Railway "Ashbury" stock.
LB&SCR stock from the Stroudley and Craven eras.
SECR non-bogie stock from the LCDR and SER companies.
LSWR mixed types of vehicles as are available.
SECR "Birdcage" set.
All-Pullman train of 1920s and 1950s cars.
A train of mainly BR Mk1 specifically for catering purposes.
A train of vans.

 

What.
No Mk2 or 3 Air braked vehicles.

 

We'd love to, but it is getting increasingly difficult to find suitably-priced examples in good condition to acquire.

Tom

 

I suspect restoration of an LSWR train, and 320 in particular, are a long way off.

My understanding is that, once work on the current three 4 wheelers (2 LB&SCR, 1 LCDR) is complete, that will give a viable train of 4 wheelers -- 6 vehicles including a couple of brakes, a wheelchair-accessible saloon and a 1st -- albeit of mixed-company parentage. After that, the focus is going to move more to Maunsell and Bulleid vehicles, to build up those rakes. (Currently there are three Maunsells in service, with a fourth well advanced in overhaul, a fifth in good condition and probably a relatively straightforward overhaul, and fundraising well underway for the restaurant car. There are I think four Bulleids with one under overhaul). So I'd imagine the next decade or so will probably see the Maunsell and Bulleid rakes move towards completion (and maybe the other 100 seater get added back into the pre-group bogie set) - but that assumption leaves restoration of two more vehicles for a birdcage set some way off even being started, and a LSWR rake even further away.

It will be interesting to see whether pressure builds up to restore the LB&SCR Directors' Saloon. A purely personal opinion - it could be one of the jewels in the collection, but with catering focused on the Pullmans, and the GNR Saloon filling the niche of a special saloon, it is hard to see how it fits commercially. So I suspect it would have to be a Bluebell Trust appeal to raise the restoration costs.

Tom

 

'New' cutting images. I notice that on the official blog, we only see chocolate box photos of the railway but none of the new cutting. What does it look like now? Are there any photos? I appreciate that it will be next year before substantial new growth emerges but it seems important for an historical record that the intermediate stage is photo'd. Anyone have recently taken images?

 

There are 7 Bulleid coaches on the line, 3 open thirds, 3 semi open brake thirds and one composite.

 

I wouldn't say "recent" - end of May was my last visit, but this is what it was like then...................... and I was window hanging!

 

Not an easy area to photograph as it is out of bounds for line side photographers. You can see into the cutting from either of the bridges, but most photographers seem to concentrate on looking the other way (more chocolate box-y!).

But see this post from Jon Bowers, which has a photo from the summer:

https://www.national-preservation.com/threads/bluebell-matters.39323/page-53#post-937074

This one from John Sandys from 27 October 2014.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/15022538234/

The cutting sides immediately south of Imberhorne Lane bridge, looking towards Kingscote:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/15644110962/in/photostream/ (also John Sandys, same date)

The view at the north end of the cutting, looking towards East Grinstead

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/15643292915/ (also John Sandys, same date)

Tom

 

There are only four in service though, which was my point.

Tom