Great Central Railway News and Updates

[Flying Phil]

Loughborough Shed is full of boilerless locomotives. 78019 is having it's boiler back from Tyseley "imminently". 30777 "Sir Lamiel" is having its boiler worked on outside the shed, as is LNER class 04, 63601. Black 5, 45491's boiler was due to have a hydraulic test and steam test "very soon". It's frames are complete. RSH 7684 bottom end is virtually complete with its boiler being worked on off-site. 70013's frames are virtually re-assembled with its boiler at Tyseley having a new copper tubeplate made and fitted. 7027 is now having parts added to its frames, as pictured, and the boiler is said to be in very good condition. Finally 34039 "Boscastle" now has its tender tank on the re wheeled frames. It's boiler (off-site) is being steadily re-stayed, having had extensive new metal formed and welded into place.....and a Merry Christmas to all!

 

[38Cto15E]

There is a long running 5mph TSR on the GCR near to Swithland Reservoir because of a small farm track bridge.
Is this going to be a large expensive job to fix the bridge as it no doubts curtails any private hire 75mph jobs.
There was a similar one near to Q&W which was replaced very quickly but no doubt was expensive.

 

[LowLevel]

There is a long running 5mph TSR on the GCR near to Swithland Reservoir because of a small farm track bridge.
Is this going to be a large expensive job to fix the bridge as it no doubts curtails any private hire 75mph jobs.
There was a similar one near to Q&W which was replaced very quickly but no doubt was expensive.

All of the remaining GCR steel bridge decks will need repair or replacement over the next few years as they're basically life expired but some are more tired than others. This one is more problematic as there is no road access but it will hopefully be attended to in the first half of 2022.

Maintaining or replacing bridges is a hugely important part of the infrastructure and is very expensive, having been largely overlooked by many heritage railways in the first years of their existence they're having to pay the price now.

 

[Flying Phil]

As LowLevel says, there is no road access to that bridge (No 348) so it may be worked on from the railway itself. Another complication is that there is a main fibre optic route also over that bridge I believe.

 

[38Cto15E]

Thanks for the info LowLevel, I can also see the reunification opening a few cans of worms regarding this problem, especially if the bridges have to hold 2000 ton trains.
Yes FP, I can remember when the railway had the fibre optics installed when funds were tighter than even now, do you think that overall the railway regret having the cable or was there no real alternative?

 

[Flying Phil]

Re the fibre optic cable - I don't think there was any other choice at the time. Not only did it give some desperately needed cash, it also provided another good reason for preserving the full length of track bed. It should be remembered that the formation had been regarded as a good route for the A6 by-pass and, to the North of Belgrave and Birstall station, a proposed tip site in the cutting. I think some of the GCR telecoms are also in the ducting for the fibre.

 

[Tempest3K]

This won't be the first time a fibre optic cable has had to be (temporarily or permanently) shifted to allow repairs/replacements - will all come down to the agreement made at the time. The telecoms industry is used to working around issues like these with their partners.

 

[Flying Phil]

There was a good number of people at the GCR for the Winter Gala. Two visiting locomotives and a busy, varied timetable provided a great experience. The Van train and Windcutter rake were both in operation behind a number of different engines.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

Great Photo above, glad the event went well.

 

[Dave S 56F]

£30,000 raised out of £100,000+ for the cost also for the A60 Nottingham Road bridge to be replaced with new concrete block spans hopefully in late 2022. steel decking spans and girders and the ornate criss cross steel parapets life expired who knows where the contractors were based who made the steel plates and girders for the bridges (possibly in foundry,s in Sheffield a subcontractor for the early G.C.R. bridges which can be seen in some areas it went through over lanes and roads) there's a few of these steel bridges at Stavley and Killamarsh still intact And from Quainton r.d. to Leicester some intact.
One notable bridge was the birdcage girder bridge at Rugby it crossed the river Avon and the west coast mainline on a double girder bridge on high Blue brick pillars. P.S. the £30,000 for the A60 bridge was announced on Nottingham heritage railway Facebook page on the A60 Road bridge appeal £10,000 gifted by the heritage G.C.R. Loughborough railway and £20,000 raised from members and anonymous donors by the looks of it on N.H.R. Facebook still though £80,000 needed.
Dave. 56F

 

[Flying Phil]

Re the A 60 bridge.........What must be remembered is that fundraising only started about two weeks ago and already £20,000 has been donated with an additional £10,000 as match funding!
The separate fund for the "factory flyover" has reached over £1.1M in just over a year. Obviously many many people believe in getting the "Gap" closed - and are backing this with serious amounts of money.

 

[JKF]

Just having a mainline link will be a massive benefit for the railway, not just for bringing in heritage stock but allowing the line to be used as a test track (with 60mph limit) or for training. Would there also be an opportunity for income from stock storage like the mid Norfolk is doing?

 

[43096]

Just having a mainline link will be a massive benefit for the railway, not just for bringing in heritage stock but allowing the line to be used as a test track (with 60mph limit) or for training. Would there also be an opportunity for income from stock storage like the mid Norfolk is doing?

That’s what the whole bridging the gap project is really about. All the messaging about creating an 18 mile railway and joining up the GC again was just that: messaging. It’s really about the GCR wanting to get access to the GCRN’s mainline connection.

 

[Flying Phil]

I am really surprised that 43096 believes that there will be no services along the 18 mile railway. As has always been said and written in many places over many years, there are several benefits for Both parts of the GC. The sum of the parts will be greater when combined.

 

[43096]

I am really surprised that 43096 believes that there will be no services along the 18 mile railway. As has always been said and written in many places over many years, there are several benefits for Both parts of the GC. The sum of the parts will be greater when combined.

I didn’t say no services: you’re putting words in my mouth.

 

[Cowley]

Let’s not get into too much of a back and forth here please…
I’ll state my position on this below as someone that’s interested but doesn’t have any skin in the game as it were…

I personally love both of the lines and I’ve had some great days out on both of them.
I’ve always wondered how this is all going to work though bearing in mind that even though the original GCR (Loughborough) has been going the longest and is rightfully up there amongst the ‘Premier’ preserved railways the GCR(N) has also managed to achieve incredible success since it got going a couple of decades later?

As someone from the outside looking in I just want to see the full potential realised, but that’s only going to work if there’s a plan going forward that everyone’s fully onboard with and I’m not sure if that’s where everyone is at the moment?

What’s the communication like between the two lines currently?
Is there a feeling that the people doing the work at ground level are not having a say when it comes to the bigger picture?

Things like that need to be sorted out now before they get to the point of causing major problems I’d have thought.
The nearest thing to this that’s gone before is the situation with the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railway (1964), and although different there are some similarities.
That was all a complete nightmare and it created a lot of animosity so it would be good if this didn’t end up with all of the various factions falling out…

What are the aims of both railways here? I don’t feel like that’s been made particularly clear.

 

[Flying Phil]

Wise words from Cowley, as ever.
I would suggest that all four of the major participants (GCR,GCR(N),EMRT and DCRT) are in fact talking and working together very well. They just get on with fundraising, planning and building. There has been a major change of personnel at director level within the GCR(N) and the new team are very closely aligned with the publicised aims of Re-unification. These aims are to be found on the various websites.
I do agree that involving all concerned is a vital part of the process but it is a huge project with many facets, not all of which are apparent or able to be discussed due to confidentiality etc.
We would all like to know more and see things happen faster ....but sometimes we just have to "Wait and see".
What is fantastic is to see how the dream (Of a preserved Main Line between Leicester and Nottingham) is steadily becoming a reality.

 

[Magdalia]

I suggest that railway history points to the way forward here.

In pre-grouping days many companies had running powers over another company's lines. Here there should be a running powers agreement where GCR get running powers to the Network Rail connection, in exchange GCR(N) get running powers into Loughborough Central.

This then gives the opportunity to run through trains between Nottingham and Leicester, with locomotive changes at Loughborough Central. Until a few years before closure most Great Central express passenger trains changed engines at Leicester Central, and both railways should relish the opportunity to recreate that at Loughborough Central. Hopefully one of the railways will do a set of Southern green mark Is to replicate the Bournemouth-York!

 

[Speed43125]

Maintaining or replacing bridges is a hugely important part of the infrastructure and is very expensive, having been largely overlooked by many heritage railways in the first years of their existence they're having to pay the price now.

Was there deferred maintenance in those days? Or what sort of overlooking happened back then? Could you elaborate please?

 

[Flying Phil]

I note from the GCR website
"Please note that there will be no passenger trains on 26th and 27th March 2022 due to engineering works (pre-booked dining services are due to run as planned), but normal services are due to resume the following weekend on 2nd April 2022.

I believe this engineering work is to replace the small bridge just to the North of Swithland reservoir that has caused the 5MPH temporary speed restriction. Although small, access is very difficult and hence the line closure as described.

So this bridge will get replaced before the main running season, so that is good news.

 

[Trainfan344]

Presume this means Dining services are running Loughborough to Quorn and back a few times?

 

[Flying Phil]

Presume this means Dining services are running Loughborough to Quorn and back a few times?

I don't think this will be the case. From Rail Mail:-
" There will be limited running over the weekend of 26th and 27th March with dining trains only, breakfast, lunch and evening diner. There are no normal passenger services and only visitors with pre-booked tickets will be able to board their respective dining service. The track is due to be lifted as soon as the Elizabethan on the 27th passes over the bridge."
I suspect there is a lot of prep work which will needed before the track lift....and there is that Fibre Optic telecoms cable across the bridge to be considered.

 

[Flying Phil]

Inside Loughborough shed, work has started to upgrade the building. New metal Purlins(?) are being installed into the roof ready for reroofing. New roller shutter doors and renewal of all the services are due to take place.

 

[AndyY1951]

Do we know whether this work is viewed as permanent, ie the refurbished shed will then remain in this location after reunification, or temporary, to make the shed fit to use for a few more years until moved/replaced?

Andy

 

[Flying Phil]

Hi Andy
I think that the shed will remain in place for several more years. Re-unification is getting ever closer but the shed work could not wait any longer. Whilst it would have been great to have it moved, possibly onto the adjacent site, in the end, for several reasons, it was not to be. Now that the shed is surrounded by housing, the planning constraints appear to be much restrictive.
Mind you, part of the Brush site may be attractive in the (much) longer term?.....

 

[AndyY1951]

I agree that part of the Brush site could offer a very attractive option, although the difference in height would have to be accommodated. Maybe a smaller 'running shed' on the site of the current shed, and a restoration/overhaul facility on the Brush site?

Andy

 

[Cowley]

I agree that part of the Brush site could offer a very attractive option, although the difference in height would have to be accommodated. Maybe a smaller 'running shed' on the site of the current shed, and a restoration/overhaul facility on the Brush site?

Andy

That’s a tantalising prospect. Are there plans to turn some of the Brush site into housing do you know?

 

[JKF]

That’s a tantalising prospect. Are there plans to turn some of the Brush site into housing do you know?

Given the proximity to a major railway station, it’s hard to conceive that it won’t be used for housing. An opportunity for the GCR to try and grab some Section 106 money at least

 

[Flying Phil]

It was good to have a train ride yesterday, together with a GCR breakfast in the griddle car. It was not too busy and people were able to spread out along the train. The Diesel rail car with 3 coaches, had lots of space.
I took this picture of repaired bridge 348 where the speed restriction is still in place - I assume until the ballast settles and is re-packed?
There are also the fibre optic cable(s) along the top of the lattice girder parapet, in view.

 

[LowLevel]

Bridges 340 and 343 either side of Quorn Station have apparently now been found to be in a condition requiring the imposition of a 5 mph temporary speed restriction - this is a fairly lengthy restriction and is likely to put 6 or 7 minutes delay into trains in both directions.