AndyY1951
Member
It's a pity that the historical character of the bridge will be lost, but this is a critical bridge and getting it replaced as quickly as possible is vital.
Hopefully, any replacement bridge will have a sacrificial beam added to prevent and reduce any potential bridge bashing. They may not look particularly pretty, but if it saves the bridge from costly damage then I'm all for it. Fingers crossed a replacement bridge can be purchased soon though - I'm sure the income from the Hotchley Hill Gypsum services will be welcome to the EMRT.I agree about the historic character, but part of it may well be retained as those lattice pilasters may be refurbished and put back on the new bridge....as was done at Quorn. I suspect that the "wasp stripes" will also get painted on!
I'm sure they will be trying to increase the headroom under the bridge by careful design - but the rail level cannot go up much further (Gradient from the MML) ....and the road level cannot go down much further (Flood risk from brook). It will be a few cm here and there to give a fair increase overall.The present bridge has headroom of 4.4m/14' 6", with the new construction can the headroom be increased without substantially adding to the project cost?
As Flying Phil has indicated road or rail levels cannot be changed, potentially however as there is approx 300mm of excess ballast depth , combined with thin depth deck construction it should be possible that the 5.03m that highways would like can be achieved. All subject to survey etc.I'm sure they will be trying to increase the headroom under the bridge by careful design - but the rail level cannot go up much further (Gradient from the MML) ....and the road level cannot go down much further (Flood risk from brook). It will be a few cm here and there to give a fair increase overall.
Hi Neen Sollars
I have not seen a cost estimate yet but I seem to remember that the cost of replacing the Quorn bridge (#341) was around £350,000 so, I suspect, the A60 bridge would be around £550,000? It is longer, but a similar construction and the access is probably slightly easier - they may use the MML bridge works compound for bridge assembly? On the plans published by the EMRT there are concrete "Collision Protection Beams" either side of the bridge decks - Approx 1m x 1.4m in cross section.
Sorry Cowley I do not know....but I expect it will have an effect and so more money will be needed. Hopefully we will get a bit more information at the GCR AGM on Saturday....Although this seems to have become an EMRT project, with lots of GCR/GCR(N)/DCRT involvement.
So when did the engineering work begin?Confirmation in the latest issue of "Main Line" no 188 that "Fundraising for the Factory Flyover section of Reunification has reached the magic seven figure sum".
I must say that I am surprised that it is such a low key announcement.......£1,000,000+ raised - despite a pandemic, in just over 18 months!!!
There is a new YT video on the GCR Official You tube channel but it still doesn't appear on the official GCR website though - which is a surprise. What I liked about the video was the graphic showing how the funding relates to the Factory Flyover construction....nearly halfway across!
There must be a lot of background work going into the A60 bridge project with the GCR/EMRT/NHR/British Gypsum/County Council/Highways England etc all being involved. If that gets rebuilt, in parallel to the factory flyover, then it is "Only" the embankments that will need to be built.....and tracks laid!
The Great Central Railway has told RailAdvent that they are in advanced discussions with the East Midlands Railway Trust and the Nottingham Heritage Railway regarding the return of trains to the line between Midland Mainline and Ruddington.
Despite a lot of reports regarding friction between some of the parties, it is likely that a deal will be struck where the GCR PLC will assist in repairs to structures and major infrastructure work to encourage freight trains to return to the line at the earliest possible date, and later on in the future, other passenger services.
Thanks for providing the historical summary - which goes a long way to explain where we are.I can understand your concerns etr221. There is in fact a lot of history involved in the present situation but, to give a brief overview, with apologies for simplifications!
BR closed the former GCR line to London in 1966, but kept the Rugby to Nottingham section open until 1969.
The Main Line Preservation Group set up in 1969 to preserve, as a main line, the Leicester to Nottingham section.
In 1973 the Loughborough to Rothley section was opened as a preserved line (GCR). Only as a single track - all that could be afforded.
The section North of Loughborough retained by BR to serve the Ruddington MoD site.
The route severed at Loughborough with a Chord Line for the North, built to join the Midland Main Line.
The GCR section progressed with running to Leicester North, Double track, Swithland Sidings and Mountsorrel Branch. Backed by a charity, the David Clarke Railway Trust (DCRT)
The MoD left Ruddington and the Heritage centre opened with running steadily increased down towards Loughborough, shared at the South end with commercial freight traffic to the British Gypsum site at East Leake. The Track bed owned by East Midland Railway Trust (EMRT), operated by Great Central (Nottingham)Ltd GCR(N).
Various studies looked at re-instating the "Missing " section to fulfil that original aim of a preserved main line between Nottingham and Leicester.
With the "Midland Main Line Electrification" due (again!) in the mid 2010s it was now or never and the new MML bridge was the first of a 7 stage Reunification project.
The GCR(N) had a very critical ORR report and commercially there was confusion with the GCR so the GCR(N) name was changed to NHR and new directors came to try and pull the North operation round...with a degree of acrimony unfortunately.
The bridge over the A60 road was declared "too corroded and weak" and closed to rail traffic in 2020 This was Stage 7 of the reunification project and due for refurbishment.
Throw into this Covid, Leicester Museum project, Heritage Lottery funding, various councils etc etc the difficulties become understandable!!
One I'm certainly looking forward to seeing! Though, I do hope the NHR & EMRT can work out their differences soon enough. The situation at Ruddington and how they are going to get around it is still going to be an interesting one - Do they look to build a west (Loughborough) facing chord and ultimately divert the mainline into Ruddington Fields, do they stick to the present situation and reverse into Ruddington, or do they look to run through the original Ruddington station (I cant see that being popular given how built up the area is now) and build something close to the Tram stop.Hi etr 221.
I think the reunification videos connected to the website do explain in more detail the various benefits of the project - both to the GCR and to the NHR as well as the East Midlands as a whole. Essentially though, reunification gives direct access for the GCR to the main line for possible charters, testing contracts and locomotive servicing. It creates an 18 mile Main Line Heritage railway which is unique. It provides two destinations from Loughborough GC. It gives a range of destinations from Ruddington. The sum is greater than the parts.....and it fulfils that driving ambition of many thousands of people to have a preserved Main Line between two major cities - Leicester and Nottingham. It must also be remembered that we are very fortunate to still have so much steam on the main line....but it sometimes hangs from a thread...