£350,000 for study into bridging the gap

I find it facinating that every decade or so the industry decides it needs a test track and revamps Old Dalby at considerable expense only to mothball it again when train orders dry up.
With hindsight it would have made more sense to have funded "the gap" and used the GCR as a test track on weekdays and when not required the asset would continue to be maintained as a heritage line. Also, if catenary had been put up on the northern section for test purposes it would have given the preserved electric locos somewhere to run.

 

There are issues with running an Electrified preserved railway as the idea's for 3rd railing the Bluebells Ardingly branch sometime in the future have shown, personally i think there's more chance of 60163 breaking Mallards record than the GCR going for overheads, woulden't be very good for the Heritage image when a section of your route is indentical to the WCML ](*,)

Preserved Electrics have a place to run, it's called the Mainline as 86101, 86259 & 87002 demonstrate.

Bridging the gap will always be worth the huge expense, Mainline Steam will not last forever and a length GCR offers the only opportunity to recreate steam at speed in the distant future.

 

GOODS OFFICE APPEAL UPDATE
Scores on the doors by the 9th of March...

The Great Central Railway is seeking to raise £100,000 by the end of March towards the purchase of the former Goods Office building close to Loughborough Central station. See previous news items, or go straight to the appeal page (via the link on the front page of the GCR website.) To donate now, please follow the appeal page link.

By the 9th of March, with the appeal officially live for ten days an incredible £28,000 had been raised. A very grateful thank you to everyone who has given - there are almost 200 of you. See the online roll of honour below. The total doesn't include any gift aid which can be claimed, and with cheques / online donations still coming in every day, we are confident of going a good long distance towards the target.

For more info, please click the link in my signature.

Cheers!

 

nothing to add

 

Still nothing to add

 

Don't bump things please, it's very silly.

 

](*,)



(Damn - I just did it).




[-X

 

Can I just ask a question, (I cant be arsed to read through all the comments with people bitching at eachother)...

...is this actually possible, probable or every likely to happen?! It would be immence if it happens, and therefore I would like to see the gap bridged, but is it actually feasable within a realistic time frame? (I am 21...how old will I be buy the time this is done..?)

And stop bitching at eachother...come on, peace and love guys...peace and love! =D>

 

Yes it's possible!, but it needs enough people to think likewise and donate money, such people made Tornado happen in 18 years, it's not a project where any visible progress will be seen for a while due to the huge costs so it needs patience too, i think 10 years is realistic with enough ambition.

 

It can be done, whether it will be done and when depends on getting money from outside bodies. That £350,000 has been given to prove the feasibility of the project as a whole, suggests there is a belief that it is a project worth persuing. We'll just have to wait and see.

Chris

 

Is it sensible to wait for a few years until everything is ready to start and then say 'we need £0.5million (or more)' to get the project going? Perhaps now is the time to start a Tornado style 'price of a pint per week' covenanter appeal, with the money ring fenced for the bridge the gap project? At least then you'd (hopefully) have a reasonable amount of money set aside to start the work, or to be used as match funding if grants were available. Just a thought...


Keith

 

Bumping would be silly mate. I just edited out what I had really writen. Seems somehow better if I remain silent these days. Wouldn't want to offend any one any more or single-handedly cause catastrophic failure of every scheme proposed.

 

No, there wouldn't be a business case. The present quarry outputs along a conveyor to sidings on the MML, so it already has rail provision. Also, the quarry is going to be exhausted in 20 years or so from now. Assuming the gap is to be bridged on a similar timescale, there is no need.