Heritage Railways - Making a Success of a Main Line Connection

[D Williams]

Bodmin and Wenford Railway has a Ground-frame-controlled connection from an Exchange Siding onto the Up line at Bodmin Parkway. There's no crossover to the down line. See my avatar for the occasion when Tornado came to visit, after hauling a railtour to the Duchy.

The connection is not frequently used, but very handy for delivery of loan vehicles; or when the preserved line is hired-out for training of drivers or machine (e.g. tamper) operators.

It's hardly been used since the Fitzgerald freight service ended in 1991. There was one occasion when it was used for tamper training but no hire was involved. About once a year a visiting diesel or steam loco may use it. The only reason it was retained during the Cornwall Resignalling Scheme was to provide a layby berth for tampers coming off the main line as since Lostwithiel was rationalised these are far and few between. Whether it's ever been used for this purpose I know not. I suspect that when the connection wears out it will be removed.

 

[DanNCL]

I don't think the Weardale Railway (Bishop Auckland) has been mentioned yet.

The Weardale connection was very successful at one point with a daily coal working using it. Once that ended the connection fell out of regular use, only seeing the occasional stock movements and charters. The number of workings in the last five years I think can be counted on one hand with none of them carrying passengers, that changes this year though with 4 inbound charters and 1 outbound charter making use of the connection.

 

[DarloRich]

how do we define "success"?

 

[Krokodil]

The Dean forest did the same before they owned the branch itself, firstly with moving the stock from Parkend to Norchard, then also making use of the slew for trains of spent ballast around 1980.

Weren't there also some activities in connection with GW185? Including the broad gauge Iron Duke replica arriving on a well wagon.

I'm not so sure that the NYMR's Whitby connection has been all that successful at least in one sense,
I get the impression that the potential penalties involved in NR access has led the NYMR to prioritise that part of the service. I used to go to the railway's steam galas and that seemed to cause difficulties in keeping to the timetable for the rest of the line

It certainly has plenty of demand commercially though.

It's hardly been used since the Fitzgerald freight service ended in 1991. There was one occasion when it was used for tamper training but no hire was involved. About once a year a visiting diesel or steam loco may use it. The only reason it was retained during the Cornwall Resignalling Scheme was to provide a layby berth for tampers coming off the main line as since Lostwithiel was rationalised these are far and few between. Whether it's ever been used for this purpose I know not. I suspect that when the connection wears out it will be removed.

I remember the steam railmotor used the B&W for stabling/servicing when it worked the Liskeard-Looe line on November Sundays. I think that there were about three Sundays worked in total (one of which was rearranged after the WCRC diesel booked to haul the positioning move failed)

 

[coubpro]

The Weardale connection was very successful at one point with a daily coal working using it. Once that ended the connection fell out of regular use, only seeing the occasional stock movements and charters. The number of workings in the last five years I think can be counted on one hand with none of them carrying passengers, that changes this year though with 4 inbound charters and 1 outbound charter making use of the connection.

It is possible that if demand increases, the connection may return to regular use

 

[duffield]

how do we define "success"?

Some random thoughts from a non-expert:

Surely it's got to be primarily financial, but even given you just consider that, it's a very difficult question.

In one way it should be straightforward. Take the cost of maintaining the connection, and set it against the revenue and savings it generates.
Take the revenue from charters, or use by NR or rail operators for their purposes (such as the use of the MNR to store rolling stock).
Add the savings from transporting in visiting locos, maintenance plant, ballast etc. by rail instead of road.
Maybe evaluate over a three or five year period and decide whether it's worth keeping.

But in another way, it's impossible to evaluate some of the finances accurately, since we're dealing with an alternate reality. For example, if you had arranged a different event instead of having an incoming charter, would that have been more profitable? For a visiting loco, would you have paid the extra road transport costs for that loco, or for another more local one, or done without? Can you get a "bulk deal" for multiple road transport instances per year?

And then there's the future. You know that the connection is costing more to maintain than the revenue/savings, but you also know (for example) that you're going to have to perform major infrastructure renewals in the near future, involving (let's say) bringing in large quantities of ballast and various rail maintenance plant, and it will potentially more than earn its keep then.

Finally of course there's the unpleasant fact that if a connection is taken out and in particular removed from NR signalling, reinstating it in future is likely to be ruinously expensive. So you have to regard any decision to get rid of it as final, which makes it understandable why some lines cling to connections which may not make any financial sense.

Edit: Of course, the NYMR is a special case with extra, different considerations and so too could be the SR and WSR; the above is meant to apply to railways which do not run onto the national network themselves or have any incoming or potential incoming passenger services apart from charters.

EditL Correct SVR to SR in the above edit.

 

[nanstallon]

Weren't there also some activities in connection with GW185? Including the broad gauge Iron Duke replica arriving on a well wagon.


It certainly has plenty of demand commercially though.


I remember the steam railmotor used the B&W for stabling/servicing when it worked the Liskeard-Looe line on November Sundays. I think that there were about three Sundays worked in total (one of which was rearranged after the WCRC diesel booked to haul the positioning move failed)

That year (2012), the steam railmotor also worked on the Bodmin line on at least one Sunday in October, because I travelled on it. I recall the main line connection being used for the Fitzgerald freight workings until 2001, and since then occasionally for visiting locos. I hope that it will not be abandoned. In any case the cross platform interchange with the main line is very useful.

 

[paul1609]

Edit: Of course, the NYMR is a special case with extra, different considerations and so too could be the SVR and WSR; the above is meant to apply to railways which do not run onto the national network themselves or have any incoming or potential incoming passenger services apart from charters.

The NYMR is also very much a special case because the part of the national network it runs onto is a slow speed single track deadend branchline with no signalling and which runs on a now obsolete remote operated token system. Even so the NYMR is now restricting its operation to 25 mph and no longer includes the Grosmont to Battersby section in its safety case and is facing its own financial difficulties. Its difficult to see how either the SVR or WSR could operate on a similar basis without facing the same issues that were encountered at Wareham.

 

[duffield]

The NYMR is also very much a special case because the part of the national network it runs onto is a slow speed single track deadend branchline with no signalling and which runs on a now obsolete remote operated token system. Even so the NYMR is now restricting its operation to 25 mph and no longer includes the Grosmont to Battersby section in its safety case and is facing its own financial difficulties. Its difficult to see how either the SVR or WSR could operate on a similar basis without facing the same issues that were encountered at Wareham.

Whoops, I meant the SR, not the SVR. Original post amended.

 

[alastair]

The SDR still have their connection but make seldom use of it. The last movement was the class 60 for their diesel gala last November. It’s a shame the SDR don’t make further use of this connection as it would open many opportunities.

Not so. The link was used in November to deliver hired-in stock from West Coast for the Polar Express trains and then in January to remove the stock back to Carnforth. Of passing interest is that due to some issue with the points at Totnes, the inbound working had to go via Plymouth.

 

[Parham Wood]

East Somerset Railway has a main line connection. After a time of not being used it was used twice I think last season. Once for a charter and once for a loco naming ceremony.

 

[paul1609]

By a coiincidence its the 10th Anniversary of our diy mainline connection at Robertsbridge this week for the RVR and K&ESR. Hopefully it'll be getting a lot more use in 2028

 

[duffield]

East Somerset Railway has a main line connection. After a time of not being used it was used twice I think last season. Once for a charter and once for a loco naming ceremony.

Coincidentally I was peering closely at the satellite images on Google maps just yesterday and although it's a bit difficult to see I came to the conclusion that it was so overgrown to the east of Withy Road bridge that it must be out of use. But it looks clear on Bing, so I guess that means the Google image is out of date.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Of passing interest is that due to some issue with the points at Totnes, the inbound working had to go via Plymouth

There was a problem with the NR mainline facing crossover and nothing to do with the SDR.

 

[The_Van]

It's hardly been used since the Fitzgerald freight service ended in 1991. There was one occasion when it was used for tamper training but no hire was involved. About once a year a visiting diesel or steam loco may use it. The only reason it was retained during the Cornwall Resignalling Scheme was to provide a layby berth for tampers coming off the main line as since Lostwithiel was rationalised these are far and few between. Whether it's ever been used for this purpose I know not. I suspect that when the connection wears out it will be removed.

It was used for the Long Rock open day in 2019 the 47 and 50 were sent, I seem to recall the BWR used the mainline loco as a guest when they were dropped off

 

[alastair]

Unusual working over the Totnes/SDR link due on 10 May. https://vintagetrains.co.uk/the-south-devon-explorer/


This May we return to Plymouth, with guest locomotive, D1015 ‘Western Champion’ hauling the South Devon Explorer over the rails it once ruled in the 1960s and 1970s.

The train will depart from Birmingham New Street, via the Chilterns and the Great Western Mainline into Bristol Temple Meads. From here D1015 will be unassisted by another locomotive for the run down to Plymouth and back over the South Devon Banks and the seawall at Dawlish.
After a few hours in Plymouth, the train then returns to Bristol, stopping at Totnes for a return trip through the scenic Dart Valley of the South Devon Railway to Buckfastleigh, which is possibly the first time a ‘Western’ will have ever been seen on this branch line.

NB, does not seem to be open for bookings yet.

 

[Ashley Hill]

South Devon Railway to Buckfastleigh, which is possibly the first time a ‘Western’ will have ever been seen on this branch line.

D1023 was kept at Buckfastleigh for a time back in the 1980s. It may have been transported by rail to and from the railway.

 

[DarloRich]

it's a very difficult question.

Isn't it?! Personally I think just having one is a success as it is an enabler to commercial activity. How you exploit that commercial activity is the hard part.

 

[Ashley Hill]

D1023 was kept at Buckfastleigh for a time back in the 1980s. It may have been transported by rail to and from the railway.

Here’s a link to face book showing the transfer of D1023 from Buckfastleigh to York in 1990.

Railways of Devon & Cornwall | As its cold outside i thought i would warm us up a little with this view | Facebook

As its cold outside i thought i would warm us up a little with this view ! Some proper traction is seen at Totnes as D1023 "Western Fusilier " stands in the morning sun as train loco 47292 runs round...

www.facebook.com

Photo Steve Crowther

 

[notverydeep]

To be fair I have also heard this said before. I definitely did enjoy the gala in 2023 with Pendennis castle charging the Epping forest gradient to the very end extent of the line. Then again, if TFL is trying its best to not increase spending with the financial problem its in, a new station at Epping probably isn't anywhere close to a priority project.

There are two fundamental problems that would need to be solved in order for Epping Ongar Railway services to reach the existing Epping station. The first is that the approach speed at Epping for Central line trains relies on a full speed overlap, which extends some distance from the buffers towards Ongar. This explains the 'apparently unused' track beyond the fixed red lights. The second is that the frequency of Central line services at Epping cannot be accommodated at a single platform while maintaining layovers long enough to give a useful amount of recovery time (which benefits line wide reliability) during the reversal.

These issues mean that EOR would need to construct a new, separate platform east of the current Central line platforms, with a long walkway between them - less attractive than an interchange at the existing station and probably more expense in infrastructure terms, which EOR would need to fund. Such a platform could be moved slightly nearer, if the Central line over-run track was 'inter-laced', converging at a point beyond the fixed red lights, but even this would probably require some expensive signalling design works and alterations...

 

[DanNCL]

These issues mean that EOR would need to construct a new, separate platform east of the current Central line platforms, with a long walkway between them - less attractive than an interchange at the existing station and probably more expense in infrastructure terms, which EOR would need to fund.

Weardale have managed to make such a set up work at Bishop Auckland. If the money and the will were there then I struggle to see why Epping & Ongar wouldn’t be able to make it work.

 

[paul1609]

Weardale have managed to make such a set up work at Bishop Auckland. If the money and the will were there then I struggle to see why Epping & Ongar wouldn’t be able to make it work.

Its probably to do with the fact that Bishop Auckland is a single platform at the end of a single track branch from Darlington that gets 150, 000 passengers a year. Wheras Epping is the end of a double track line from Central London that serves 3,200,000 passengers pa.

 

[notverydeep]

Weardale have managed to make such a set up work at Bishop Auckland. If the money and the will were there then I struggle to see why Epping & Ongar wouldn’t be able to make it work.

Assuming that the boundary is at the end of the over-run tracks, the distance that would be required between the LU and a separate EOR station is probably greater than at Bishop Auckland, where the National Rail station over-run appears to be about 70 metres from the platform to the boundary. There is then about 75 metres between that point and the end of the Weardale Railway platform.

It is about 155 metres from the stopping mark at Epping to the buffer stops at the end of the northern most of the two over-run tracks, presumably the boundary between LU and EOR tracks is at roughly this point. Add a further 75 metres for the run around facility. Thus the potential EOR platform is now 230 metres from the LU platform, probably about 100 metres further than at Bishop Auckland. Unfortunately, the EOR is on an embankment by this point. Then there is the question of whether the formation is wide enough at this point for a platform and track and can accommodate a walkway between the two (which might have to be wide enough to be used for vehicle access as required to the EOR platform), otherwise additional land might be required that isn't currently owned by the EOR...

 

[Belperpete]

Would Welsh Highland railway out of bleauna Ffestiniog count? Narrow gauge but is preserved

Welsh Highland trains do indeed routinely run on the national network. But not for very far (20 metres?). And there is the WHHR connection at Pen-y-Mount with the WHR mainline.

The main reason that it is rare for preserved railway passenger trains to run on the national network is that it would mean the locos and stock meeting National Rail standards, with all the associated costs etc. It would only be cost-effective if the stock was used regularly on the mainline, such as the NYMR service to Whitby.

The alternative is for national rail stock to run onto the preserved railway. I believe that there have been a few cases of TOCs running a special service onto a preserved railway? There was at one time talk of a regular through commuter service onto the K&WVR, but this came to nothing (presumably because it would have been too disruptive to the heritage operation).

For mainline charters onto a preserved railway, this needs a charter company seeing sufficient profit in running a through service. There are only a limited number of charter companies, and a surprisingly large number of preserved railways with a through connection, so in reality any preserved railway would be lucky to see more than one or two such services a year. And probably only if the route to the preserved railway was deemed sufficiently interesting in itself to attract non-enthusiast custom.

I am not convinced that use of the national rail network for making stock transfers is cheaper than road, considering all the costs involved in getting approval and resourcing. Probably only makes sense if a loco is already approved for use on the national network. The Ecclesbourne Valley, for example, has eschewed a through connection as not being worth the cost. At one time it used to have a profitable side-line in testing and training, but it was cheaper and easier to bring the stock in by road.

 

[Magdalia]

I am not convinced that use of the national rail network for making stock transfers is cheaper than road, considering all the costs involved in getting approval and resourcing. Probably only makes sense if a loco is already approved for use on the national network.

That may be the case for a single locomotive, but the marginal costs of adding an extra loco/vehicle are very different. Adding another locomotive to to a rail movement will have a significant marginal cost saving, whereas in a road movement any marginal cost saving from moving more than one locomotive is almost non-existent.

 

[Krokodil]

That may be the case for a single locomotive, but the marginal costs of adding an extra loco/vehicle are very different. Adding another locomotive to to a rail movement will have a significant marginal cost saving, whereas in a road movement any marginal cost saving from moving more than one locomotive is almost non-existent.

Hence the use of a convoy for the big galas. A WCRC drag picking up one loco after another as it makes its way down the country.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I am not convinced that use of the national rail network for making stock transfers is cheaper than road, considering all the costs involved in getting approval and resourcing. Probably only makes sense if a loco is already approved for use on the national network. The Ecclesbourne Valley, for example, has eschewed a through connection as not being worth the cost. At one time it used to have a profitable side-line in testing and training, but it was cheaper and easier to bring the stock in by road.

That may be the case for a single locomotive, but the marginal costs of adding an extra loco/vehicle are very different. Adding another locomotive to to a rail movement will have a significant marginal cost saving, whereas in a road movement any marginal cost saving from moving more than one locomotive is almost non-existent.

As always, a lot depends on your individual circumstances, but, generally speaking nowadays, Rail moves can be cheaper and easier than road.

If your road access point has features which make life difficult then a rail move can be a lot better.

At the KWVR for example because the road access point:

a) is on a very busy main A Road;
b) has a road with a weight restriction for heavy abnormal loads nearby; and
c) because of b) all convoys need to go through the middle of a very busy and congested town centre and require some driving on the wrong side of the road,

Then the local authority and police have controls on the movements - vehicles above above a certain weight and size can only arrive and depart at certain times - generally late evening / very early morning and a police escort is required as a road closure is required for a short time to allow wrong direction movements and shunting.

The time restrictions make movements awkward and add cost to the move as they can't just come and go as they please at times convenient to the haulier; and the police charge for the escort. Last time I checked this was around £1200 per visit, but will probably be more now. Thus, before you've even paid for the lorry you've got a bill of around £2,400 just for the police escort alone. Oh, and this needs to be booked a long time in advance and will be on days that suit them to resource it. If they can't resource it then you won't get an escort and therefore can't do a movement.

Rail movements are far easier and far cheaper overall in those circumstances.

 

[Notabene]

A mainline connection is to be treasured.
The faff over the single turnout east of Skipton for Bolton Abbey is depressing.

The Rylstone branch is very busy, but it's disappointing no accommodation has been made.

 

[michaelh]

Would Welsh Highland railway out of bleauna Ffestiniog count? Narrow gauge but is preserved

The Welsh Highland Railway runs to Caernarfon, not Blaenau Ffestiniog

 

[D Mylchreest]

The Welsh Highland Railway runs to Caernarfon, not Blaenau Ffestiniog

Nit-picking but the WHR runs Caenarfon to Porthmadoc while the Ffestiniog runs Porthmadoc to Bleanau Ffestiniog. Both are owned by the same company