North Norfolk Railway hopes to run to Cromer from 2015

It's far from dead on a Sunday for 6 months of the year, that is the main street of a busy seaside resort!!

 

I believe much of the oposition to a full crossing in Sherringham came from traders who were concerned at any loss in trade a crossing might cause. From reports I have heard whilst there is disrution to trafic more revenus is gained from the suporters and observers than might be lost. Whilst the crossing is on a principle route into the town the road to the beach is one way. All trafic has to return by a parallel road which is two way and crosses the railway via a bridge. Currently barriers of the type used for roadworks are used to stop the traffic. Arguably a proper crossing may actually cause less disruption.

 

No that's not right unless the one way section is very recent. look at google maps in street view. It is before the NNR has been joined to the main line but you can see cars turning out of Railway Approach onto Station Road towards the roundabout, whilst the parked cars are facing the opposite direction.
It is surprising the amount of trafic that goes down there, considering that it is in effect a dead end by the sea wall.

Nick

 

Nick - I was there a few weeks ago. Station Road from the roundabout to Station Approach is as you say two way as is Station Approach. Station Road from the junction with Station Approach towards the beach becomes one way until it meets the parallel road which comes across the bridge and passes the other end of Station approach. I walked down it to do some shopping and it was one way.

 

Yes quite correct. Although not one way on the crossing, the bulk of the traffic will be heading away from the roundabout towards the sea if you like.

Nick

 

Nick - daft thing is having checked streetmap thar Beeston Rd looks a better way to the sea and actually joins with Beach Rd. I know it sounds daft but is the roundabout in the wrong place. The road which runs paralel ish and joins with Station rd is Church St

Dave

 

Going on my recollections of Sheringham, looking at both the map and aerial images I'm inclined to agree the roundabout certainly seem to be in the wrong place. The only fly in the ointment may be Common Lane and Beeston Road presently form a staggered junction onto Cromer Road. I'm unsure how that would pan out on the ground.

 

From a volunteer on the NNR I'll shed a little light on the Holt-Cromer service, unless you've read anything anywhere else.
-the service will only run on 5 summer Sundays
-the service will be top and tailed, there will be 3 mainline steam engine's , 76084, 8572 & 44767 with the M&GN own class 31
-with regards to the Norwich to Sheringham service it will terminate at Cromer, this will only apply when the Cromer-Holt service is running on the Sunday.
- Proper level crossing equipment will have to be put in place (I hope so, otherwise the volunteers have got their work-cut to stop the traffic in sheringham)
- the Cromer-Holt service will run only every 2 hours, meaning the Greater Anglia service will be able to run as far as Sheringham
- No run Round will be put in place at Cromer.

sources that might be of interest

From the M&GN Society website
25th July 2013
"As part of an ongoing investment in our Brush Type Two, which was delivered new to Norwich shed in 1960 and used to work round the world goods trains on the former M&GN lines, a new set of batteries costing several thousand pounds have been purchased.

The investment in the locomotive, which has already included the purchasing of £10,000 worth of spares is part of a wider and longer term plan to gradually increase the reliability and standard of the locomotive. The eventual aim is for D5631 to be mainline registered and restored to as-built condition."

From 76084 LTD website
"NNR EXPLORES RUNNING TO CROMER
North Norfolk Railway managing director Hugh Harkett today confirmed that the railway is exploring the possibilities of running to Cromer.
“We’ve been discussing it with franchise holder Greater Anglia (part of Abellio) and with the Department for Transport,” said Mr Harkett. “The plan is for a Sunday service in summer, with the NNR running five steam-hauled trains from Cromer to Holt, and Greater Anglia running from Cromer to Norwich. Trains would have to be ‘top and tailed’, as Cromer has no run-round facility.”
Ian Storey’s “Black Five” no.44767 George Stephenson is currently on the NNR, and is equipped with Train Protection & Warning System (TPWS). The NNR will probably need two other TPWS locomotives. The 76084 Locomotive Company, owner of newly-restored Standard 4 no.76084 which is resident on the Poppy Line for the next two years, has announced a fundraising campaign to fit TPWS to that engine; and the M&GN Society has expressed interest in fitting its B12 no.8572.
Mr Harkett pointed out that fitting TPWS already allows the North York Moors Railway to run into Whitby, and the same arrangement (“Mainline Lite”, as it were) should apply to Cromer, together with any other train modifications that may be required by the Office of Rail Regulation.
“Greater Anglia is very supportive,” said Mr Harkett. “We are now waiting for comments from the Department for Transport and the ORR.”
ENDS"

all information that I have obtained is either from the volunteers newsletter, M&GN Society or 76084 LTD website and I do not claim as my own.

 

I know 44767 is fitted with TPWS/AWS because I and several other NYMR volunteers spent some good time fitting it but 76084, 8572 and the 31 will all need it at significant cost. They'll also need NRM/GSM-R even if there is a derogation from having OTMR. It seems a huge expenditure for the sake of 5 days, especially if, as you say, 'proper level crossing equipment' is needed as well, although I wonder if the five day limit is because such equipment is not provided?

 

Does seem like a lot of costs for 5 days, perhaps testing the water with a view to more in future ?.

 

It's still a big investment to test the water. Besides the cash cost, there's also the need to train and pass out crew on the big railway rulebook, plus all the training with the associated equipment. OK, for five days, you might get away with training a minimal number of crew but it is still to be added to the resource requirements. When the NYMR 'tested the water ' and started to run to Whitby, it tested the water by using WCRC to provide locos and footplate crews so only had to provide coaching stock. (Not sure who provided the guards.)
Having questioned the logic, I do wish them well and hope it is a success and becomes a regular operation. The more heritage railways that can do this successfully and viably, the better it is for the movement, as a whole.

 

There's a lot of work needed to prepare and register the coaches too, and the vexed question of whether trains will exceed 30mph - if they do, then central door locking needs to be fitted or all doors have to be stewarded.

 

When the NYMR ran test series of trains, WCRC supplied train crew and, crucially, Safety Case and Insurance etc. They booked the train paths and were the contracting party with Network Rail. NYMR supplied coaching stock and arranged locomotive provision. The NYMR also undertook Locomotive and Rolling Stock FTR exams. Coaching Stock had to be fitted with lower-shelf bracket buckeye couplings, and now have to have door bolts. Locomotives need TPWS and NRN, shortly to change to GSM-R. Mark 1 stock is banned from the national network by law, but exemptions can be applied for. As with a number of parts of the process, these are subject to consultation processes, meaning that they must be prepared and submitted several months before the services are planned to start - around now for next summer would be good! Likewise, OTMR can be subject to an application for exemption from the Group Standard; steam locomotives need about 80 such exemptions.

The bit which amazes me is that the TOC is offering to suspend or reduce its service to enable the NNR trains to run. There are a lot of potential implications for passengers and service commitments which I shall be very interested to see work out.

Steven

 

I couldn't get my head around what was being said in Ross's post. On one line he says "Norwich to Sheringham service it will terminate at Cromer" and on another he says " the Cromer-Holt service will run only every 2 hours, meaning the Greater Anglia service will be able to run as far as Sheringham." That has confused my simple mind!

 

I think it is now time to wait for an official statement from the NNR as until the method of working etc is agreed on it is fairly pointless to debate or even criticise as we don't have all the facts. Mainline running as we all know is a complicated and expensive activity to be involved with and the NNR will be working with the appropriate people to get this done.
As to who crews the mainline runs the NNR is lucky enough to have a number of volunteers on the operations side who currently drive for DRS and Greater Anglia who have the route knowledge as well as others who work for other TOCs so it wouldn't be totally impractical to use those on their own safety case.

Either way I can't wait, I've only been across the crossing on a p-way trolley the morning we linked the NNR up to NR so I'm looking forward to being able to travel across the crossing on something a bit more conventional even if it is a 156 at a diesel gala.

 

You may think that it is time to wait for an official statement and you are entitled to your opinion. However, that is no reason why people should not discuss the subject in any way. Discussions on this Forum are no different to discussions in the pub or even the mess room at the NNR. Those that have an opinion are entitled to it and it does no harm. I'm sure that you wouldn't desire to stifle debate on the subject in the depths of Norfolk. Some of the posts may be utter drivel but some will have valid and informed content. Friend Bean Counter has been intimately involved in the NYMR's similar operation both from inception and with its operation and, no doubt, can offer good sound and practical words of wisdom well worth listening to. My words may not fall into that category but I am involved at an operational level so have a little understanding of what is involved.

Anyhow, as I've already said, I hope that it all comes off and works to the advantage of the NNR.

Edit: Not sure that DRS or East Anglia have a safety case for steam, though, so that may not be an option.

 

For a first post, I didn't know it would get any reply's. there are many interesting points that have been brought up, really nice to hear other thoughts on the subject. I hadn't a clue that the NYMR had gone through so much to get on the mainline network. General question, what was the time scale to getting mainline locomotives and coaching stock, staff trained ready for the Whitby line?

Sorry for confusing anyone with the Greater Anglia Sunday service. Greater Anglia run 2 timetables on a Sunday the Winter one which run only very 2 hours from Norwich to Sheringham calling at every station Salhouse, Wroxham, Worstead, North Walsham, Gunton, Roughton Road, Cromer, West Runton & Sheringham. Then there's the summer timetable. The summer timetable has the winter timetable in it so a service very 2 hours calling at every station but in between that service there is another service that only stops at Wroxham, North Walsham, Comer & Sheringham, so when the summer timetable comes inn there's a train service from Norwich more or less every hour. Now if the NNR get to Comer Greater Anglia would have to fore-fit part of a service meaning a path for the NNR, as I type this, I'm thinking to myself it's going to be very complicated operation. So the NNR will have a path to & from Cromer every hour then, if Greater Anglia service give-up part of that route.

To hear a statement from the NNR would clear-up a few things, Think I'll stick to what I know best, dispatching trains from the platform.

 

Just as an aside to this rather interesting thread, this assertion isn't quite correct, Steve. You can make an off-the-wall comment over a beer or in the messroom to a couple of people within earshot and seconds later it's forgotten.

However, internet forums (and indeed any social media) are the equivalent of that opinion being potentially heard by the entire planet. Not only that but, as it's in print, every comment one makes is on the record and attributable. Even if a comment is quickly deleted - therefore effectively retracted - we've all read in the papers about tweets and photos that have been posted for a few seconds and then deleted, which have still 'gone viral' or got public figures into trouble!

I don't think that debate should be stifled, absolutely not. However I do think that regarding online media like messroom or pub banter is a dangerous - dare I say (and I mean no offence here, Steve) scarily misguided - game. That view results in people forgetting to take care with what they write. Social media is legendary for rumour to be believed and turned into 'fact' in short order, which means the effluent can and does hit the fan, often for people who haven't been party to the 'drivel', but whose carefull-laid plans (and, in some cases, lives) have been royally buggered up by online tittle tattle and hearsay. So yes, a great deal of harm can be done!

We all need to remember that, far from makimng a comment to a couple of mates, anyone on the planet can conceivably read one's opinions (or, as we've seen many times, wishful thinking presented as 'facts'!) here... and therefore to be correspondingly careful with what we allow our fingers to tap out.

 

I a

I agree wholeheartedly that anyone on the Internet has to be very careful of what he says and, in that context, do wonder at what some of the posters on here (and elsewhere ) have said. However, that shouldn't stop discussion. As for it not being comparable with pub discussion, I accept that the audience is much smaller and not permanent, but even words said in the Tap room can come back to haunt you if said in the presence of the wrong people.

Anyhow, let's get back on topic!

 

Slightly off topic, but can a portable GSM-R handset (ie a walkie-talkie type) not be used rather than a full 'fixed' installation ?