Steaming back into Ryde?

they would ban them next, insist that every bit of track is closed and turned into a cycle way , zero emitions, no polution, and no reason to visit the island.

 

Really? The prime reason Cambridge was lumbered with it's (mis)guided busway is precisely because it was experimental/innovative, which released money to fund it which was unavailable for 'traditional' transport solutions. It would have been cheaper to reinstate the railway, significant chunks of which still had rails in place (and probably wouldn't now be in need of significant repairs already) .

 

The reality is that since World War One the only brand new items of railway equipment despatched to the IOW have been the two i/c powered tramcars and their trailers for the Pier Tramway sent over at various times inter war. Unless some suitable "pre-used" equipment can be identified the much needed renewal of track and stock is unlikely. As far as I am aware the "buses only" (i.e. not a guided busway as such) route along the former Gosport to Fareham line has been satisfactory but this is along a double track formation. In the IOW only Brading to Sandown and Smallbrook to St. Johns have a double track formation. There is undeveloped land from Smallbrook to Brading though. I have not included Esplanade to St. Johns on account of the tunnel.

The population of the IOW is around 144,000 of which a substantial proportion is accounted for by Newport, Cowes, other smaller settlements and large chunks of Ryde all of which are served served in no part by the railway. The quoted cost of renewal is quoted as £40 million. There are tough decisions to come for somebody!

PH

 

one slight problem with your thinking, lets assume island line does close, whats the bigest site of former railway land ? St Johns Rd, ideal brown field site for redevelopement,
you may find that an extension into Ryde may not be possible at all as there could be no station there to run into.

 

Does the 144,000 include the visitor/tourist population in the tourist season? If not, the figure could be inflated by a large %age between April and October.

Because the IOW economy relies on tourism, the council and island cannot rely on olde worlde windy country lanes to support their economic future. The decision, in the sixties, to sell off most of the railway was a monumental error of judgement for which they are paying dearly.

The council need some 'blue sky thinking' and much investment which they are unlikely to get..

 

I presume you are referring to IOWSR. They can connect at Smallbrook with train or bus, whichever passes alongside. If trains cease and are replaced by nothing at all, then whatever happens at St. John's will be subject to the intense negotiations I referred to before. Access to the IOWSR at Wootton by bus is straightforward enough.

PH

 

Hmm, not exactly on a main road is it? Exactly how far is Smalbrook Jct. from Smalbrook Lane?

 

But how many cassual visitors would want to endure a bus journey, and then, theres no way any connection could be guarenteed for instance how would any visitor feel if the bus was delayed by heavy traffic and they missed the train, and had to wait for the next? they might decide to return to ryde and the railway misses out on the visitors spending power, given a choice between getting on a train at pier head, that i know will get me to Smallbrook at a given time and having the problem of a trip on congested roads i know what woud win out for me.

 

Enough for access to be "interesting" - and probably require land purchase and planning permissions for a car park.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...ata=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0xd2bd26cc9d71b957

Steven

 

Does anyone have figures on how many people use the 3rd rail line to access the steam line, and what percentage of the steam lines traffic that is?

 

That's what prompted my question. Effectively the station is in the middle of a field. I suppose if the Island Line became a busway then a connection would still be available but otherwise it's hardly an ideal spot for a railhead.

 

Trouble is that I don't think you would like the result of such "blue sky thinking" very much!

The population figure quoted (which I believe but cannot guarantee to be correct) is the resident one). Like other holiday islands that could be named (e.g. Jersey without a railway since 1936) this swells greatly during the summer. Alas, in recent years, the "traditional" seaside resorts served by the Ryde to Ventnor (now Shanklin) line have had a sad decline notwithstanding that the railway along this coast remains.

However parts of the Island tourist trade remain very healthy. Godshill village for example, is a flourishing tourist attraction which it wasn't when the railway last ran in 1952. People can only get there by road. The centre of gravity for Island tourism has changed and no amount of militant gricerdom will "make" people use a train to take them to somewhere they want to go less than they did. Even more so if it sets them down rather a long walk from where they want to be.

As for the local authority showing a "monumental error of judgement", possibly with the exception of Newport and, even there, "monumental" is an exaggeration, this is not so.

PH

 

For the avoidance of doubt there is no pedestrian access whatsoever to Smallbrook junction. Whether one interchanges there from a train or a bus would seem to matter little. Whether the IOWSR should seek to extend to St. Johns without the closure of the Island Line or this should be a contingent dependent on such closure divides opinion.

PH

 

​

the island's local council is strapped for cash, correct? so where would they find the money to turn an what would be abandoned track bed into a bus way? the roads locally are in need of improovement, so its highly unlikily that there would be any spare , no, i think that the line, should it be closed and the track lifted, would be just another disused track bed, but with St Johns station site and the site of the engineering works flattened and sold for housing, the IOWSR might be able to get near station lane, but no where near enough to be worth while, that must have a knock on effect to visitor numbers to the IOWSR what were the visitor figs prior to reopening to small brook? because i think that without the small brook interchange you would see your passinger takings fall to a level simular level.

 

Lets say, for the sake of argument, that Center Parcs or Disney World proposed a development on the IOW: The only reservations they have is the lack of modern transport facilities to their proposed location.

Do the IOW council have the mental compass or ability to rise to the occasion and raise the funding necessary to drag the IOW int the 21st century?

 

Southen Vectis Service 9 takes foot passengers from Esplanade directly to a stop hard by Wootton station. Sometimes I use this route to return as the times can be a bit more convenient than Island Line's. No-one would wish to lose the rail connection but equally I understand the road links are a far more important source of business. Reality is often dull!

PH

 

Has that ever stopped centre parcs developing sites elsewhere?

 

I wrote a thesis on the increased use of diesel engines back in the late seventies (with the help of Ricardo Shoreham and AE Lymington) and the "issue" and analysis of diesel emissions compared to petrol engines was well known back then. I still have many of the emissions output data and graphs from test cell workings where large ngines up to marine size were put through aggressive test programmes of continuous acceleration/decelaration, load and torque stress sometimes lasting months and often leading to the total destruction of the engine itself. Pre turbocharged diesels always had a bad reputation because of smoke, yet the smoke itself was not especially harmful as the heavy particulates and hydrocarbons fell to earth quickly. Far more worrying were the nitrous oxides produced by both diesel and petrol engines. Unfortunately we now live in an age where scientific study has been barged aside by single issue politics and of course anything that combusts is now just labelled as "bad". Modern turbocharged diesels are far less polluting that those of the recent past but of course rather than perform relative comparative analysis we now have to put up with the absolutism of unqualified single-issue zealots able to get their message across via social media. So please don't say "Now that the harmful effects of diesel fumes are finally being recognised........." because that is the ignorant (and innacurate) language of the googling eco warrior, not the engineer.

 

Does anyone have any opinion as to whether the Island Line would be suitable for battery powered trains? Given that it's only 8.5 miles long, with charging points at each end would this be viable? Could the existing rolling stock be converted, possibly by adding a battery car or fitting banks of batteries under seats? Thing is, it *might* be easier to get 'outside' money for this - since Network Rail is already experimenting with the technology this would make a potentially good proof-of-concept and if successful would presumably reduce future maintenance costs, with the 3rd rail and related equipment being made redundant, putting the line on more viable footing.
Or this this idea a non-starter because N/R would want a proof of concept involving stock which wouldn't fit the Island loading gauge?