FR/WHR and WHHR relations

In the "dispute" this often seems to be at the heart of the matter. One says you did not build, the other side says only because you did not make the necessary provisions for us to do the building. In the meantime we provided financial and volunteer assistance on other parts. Party A and supporters staunchly believe the former, Party B and supporters staunchly believe the latter. I have no idea but expect that like in many such disputes there is probably a grain of truth on both sides.

Does any reasonably impartial observer have an incling of the true picture?

 

I have just been catching up on my e-mail and on one of the (many) whr discussion sites, someone is stating that in May2005, Michael Whitehouse sent a letter to WHHR telling them not to bother starting the rest of the PYM to PC as they would finish it themselves.
IF (and as I have not had sight of this letter, its a big if) this is true, why are they blaming the WHHR for not completing the job when they themselves ordered the WHHR no to ????

 

There is a very interesting, informative, and calm(!) discussion of this situation on the WHR e-group. I'd suggest anyone interested sign up and read the last few days messages, its a little 'complicated'.

Chris

 

It's time to look forward and wipe the slate clean.
We spent six years fighting an Austrian private, now they`re building Aston Martins for us, move on....

The likelihood is that the Farm will opperate an FR retail franchise where FR/WHR goods and services are offered alongside home grown products.
It should not be forgotten that this will work both ways, the result of WHHR heritage trains operating from Harbour.

 

I am looking at the situation from a neutral perspective, it seems that one must always be on one side or the other, but it is imperative to be impartial with clear vision and a common purpose.
With respect Christopher, you seem to be unaware of what problems lie ahead for the WHR/FR to proceed into Harbour station. Maybe time for a reality check and reflect on what is practically achievable and necessary to stabilise the WHR financially over the next 5 years. Facilities at the Farm are achievable for substantially less than required to run into Harbour and will be coupled with much improved customer amenities at Beddgelert. Completion of Harbour Station will come when the expense can be justified and not before.

 

My mistake Peter. Its just when you were talking about the WHHR's position regarding the alterations required you said "We are very aware of the significant investment needed to complete the WHR through to Harbour...", which seemed to suggest you were talking as someone involved in the WHHR.

Anyway. With regards to these 'problems' that lie ahead, could you elaborate?

Chris

 

Stations at Porthmadog

What should be remembered here is that both Harbour and Tremadog Road are far from ideal for terminating WHR trains. A far better alternative exists - a new station at Llyn Bach alongside the main car park which could be used by both WHR and FR trains and avoid the absurdly-expensive Cob widening and complex shunt moves needed at Harbour.

 

All of this rubbish is down to one thing and one thing alone. Woolley agreements. If a more professional approach had been taken, then legal help would have been brought in to ensure that there would be no ambiguities.

This would also apply to the making good of the river bank at Britannia Bridge. The agreement there seems to have been done with a 'nod and a wink'.

I am no lover of lawyers but at times they are really needed.

"What should be remembered here is that both Harbour and Tremadog Road are far from ideal for terminating WHR trains. A far better alternative exists - a new station at Llyn Bach alongside the main car park which could be used by both WHR and FR trains and avoid the absurdly-expensive Cob widening and complex shunt moves needed at Harbour."

I would think the best spot for a 'Portmadoc New' would be right alongside the new bypass where road access will be provided for anyway.

 

Ha! I wondered when this would surface. It was the letter of a pragmatist surely. I remember him saying as much to me in conversation. The point is that WHLR didn't have the resources, particularly the cash, to finish the job, why force it to continue when it couldn't finish?
If WHLR did have the cash you can be sure of one of two things would have happened. Either WHLR would be shouting that it had a 'lot' of money in its bank raised for the project that was unspent because the FR wouldn't let it spend it, or that the FR would have said 'you have several £100,000 to spend on our railway, of course you can spend it, please carry on.' If the capability had been there there is no way that the FR would have refused it.

Peter Johnson

BTW - you were not on the mailing list for the letter so if you did 'receive it recently' as you claimed when opening this thread it was from a third party and not directly.

 

Unless I'm much mistaken it was not you he was referring to, but me. I had assumed that members would make the connection without having to waste time on research but clearly I was wrong.

Peter Johnson

 

And your point is?????????

 

Hi all,

I'll try and stay neutral in my response. I've now read the letter posted on the Unofficial site guide and I thought I would give a bit of feedback.

Firstly although the WHHR and Britannia Bridge is mentioned and I'm not in a position to evaluate these fairly as I only have limited information on both. A large part of cost over runs was attributed to aspects relating to changes needed in design or existing parts of the original formation not being as expected. Whilst critisism can be made it should be noted that for the £28 million quoted for the rebuilding so far that in railway terms although expensive in heritage in the Network rail side of operation is relatively inexpensive. Also as projects go there is a limit as to things that you can expect and unplanned ones as there is always an element of risk in finding things aren't quite as investigated. The formation issues fit this category.

I agree with others on here that developing the existing operating section would be best in the meantime such as the station building at Beddgelert, improved facilities at Dinas so that all stock can be stored under cover and reducing journey times so it can appeal to more people. Getting shuttles running on to Pont Croesor would be realistic for next year and would allow the general public to see a further section of the route. We also have the prospect of a red garratt next year and the continuation of the Lyd project.

Remember it took the FR many more years to reach Blaneau than its taken on the WHR so far. Let's at least be happy with everything that has been so far. As the old phrase goes. Good things come to those who wait.

Regards

Duncan

 

Damn right. We built the whole of Phase 4 between Rhyd Ddu and Harbour in three years. That railway is the same length as the entire FR. That's not bad, but in our regular working weeks, the Rest of the World Gang (one of the two main tracklaying gangs) achieved a level of performance that, if maintained, would have resulted in the entire 12 and a bit miles being completed in three months...

 

Hi,

On the few times I've been down with the Rest of the World Gang I've heard about this in the 25 weeks discussion. I joined after the majority of the track was down so more the jim crowing, staggers and point moving side of things. If I'm right in thinking was it a mile that was achieved in that particular week. (I know there's a bit of rivalry between the teams on the record-might be the daily record) But either way it a fantastic achievement by all involved to have achieved this in the time frame that it has been so far.

Regards

Duncan

 

Ones like this, you mean : http://ronfisher.fotopic.net/p62093552.html

 

No, the ones like this Ron...

Don't forget to use the scroll bar, 'cos my view's bigger than yours!

 

the view from Number 2 point at blodge is better!

 

Well of course, if I lived there and could take pictures every day, I'd have a big one too!

 

Size is not everything! I have to admit I actually prefer the colours in your picture

 

Thank you kind Sir!