End of the Line

I am not going to defend the architecture of the KD shed or the Engine House in aesthetic terms. In both cases cost and engineering were key players. It is my understanding that the land at Highley, being made up ground, would not support a traditional building.

Those of us who follow the likes of "Grand Designs" and "The Restoration Man" will be well aware of the problems owners have with conservationists. The mantra of most is that buildings adjacent to historic ones should deliberately clash so as not to confuse the onlooker which is the historic building. This sometimes leads to absolutely ridiculous buildings wher the character of the origional was lost. The SVR won an important battle with what I describe as "intelectual codswallop" and have persuaded the powers that be to accept the concept of a cohesive heritage ensemble. In the case of Bridgnorth that means buildings of a heritage charecter can be adjacent to listed structures.

 

Why can't I "like" posts more than once?

 

You can - but for every n likes, you have to give (n-1) unlikes ...

Tom (I need to get out more ...)

 

Unfortunately preservation and "Chocolate Box" stations in most cases don't go hand in hand unless there are enough stations on the line to have some still some where they don't have to be also used to repair engines and stock storage with other modern buildings.

 

When we had a 117 DMU we, too, found it relatively unpopular (and very unreliable!) However a DTS from the same class, when coupled to a loco, even a diesel, is very popular. Strange but true!

 

Interesting, I don't have passenger numbers to support, but I think our class 117 and a train headed by a diseasel gets about the same loadings on the few days I've been around when both were running on the same day. The one steam train obviously got much higher loadings, as it should be!

 

I think it is difficult to work out on loadings alone. On days when we run a vintage set (i.e. every weekend) we have a Mark 1 / Bulleid set running as well. Typically people arrive when they arrive, and then catch the next train - which might be vintage or might be modern. Even for people who stay all day and make several journeys, they probably have some kind of schedule in mind to travel, visit museum, visit engine shed, have lunch etc, so again the trains they catch tend to be what is around when they want to move. How much people choose their arrival time at the railway with a clear intention to travel on a specific set I don't know - I know I do, but I'm not the average visitor. I do get the sense that on our corridor sets, compartments fill up before open saloons.

Interestingly, of the vintage carriages and purely anecdotally from overhearing conversations, I think the set that makes people sit up and think is the Mets. I think when they see "Metropolitan Railway" on the side, they suddenly make the connection with the underground, which instantly sparks interest, because the Metropolitan Railway still in essence exists as a line on a map (in a way that e.g. the GWR, LMS, don't - no-one connects "modern" Southern with "real" Southern!). We'll never know, but I suspect that if we had a close-coupled set of teak bogie LCDR carriages, they would be very nice, but wouldn't have the same eye-popping effect that the Mets do.

Hypothetically, if we could go back to the 1960s and preserve any single carriage that got away, there are all sorts of romantic choices (the LSWR gate set was one that did escape) but for pure hard-headed pragmatism, I suspect we would take the second LNWR North Wales Observation Car to go with 1503. That carriage must have raised hundreds of thousands of pounds in supplements over the years, and has probably worked the biggest mileage of almost any carriage on the railway, the wheelchair-accessible Mark 1 included. She's been much missed while away in the workshop!

Tom

 

I took my wife, mother and sister in law and niece/nephew on the Bluebell a couple of weeks ago (got to be polite as apparently Tom was firing!) Our coach was the Mk1 disabled saloon, which was maybe a bit faded and careworn but clean and generally fine. On the way back South we crossed the E4, the Mets and the four wheelers at HK. Whole family were completely wowed by them, sister in law was blown away and was gutted we'd not caught the later train. Nobody could believe the Mets had been recently running on the underground, and they all wanted to come back to have a ride on them.

So from my experience, everybody was happy enough with Mk1s, but the pre-grouping stuff had the xfactor.

Incidentally sister in law grew up on a farm which borders the Bluebell and mother in law still lives there-Freshfield Halt would have been opposite one of their fields. Sister in law lived there 25+ years and it was her first trip-she loved it. Not sure how much they enjoyed my running commentary and 'interesting facts' though!

 

And yep, I honestly wrote my previous post before I saw Tom's!

 

Better by far to have a rather basic modern building than a (yes, you have guessed it) a linear scrapyard! I suspect though that rather too many places would indulge in both.

PH

 

I think that is rather an oversimplification of the requirements of EH and similar organisations.

 

My experience with 'non-enthusiast' friends and family is a distinct preference towards more interesting and 'attractive' rolling stock. Generally the Gresley stock on the SVR and NYMR get rave reviews for example, for their beautiful 1920s and 30s art deco touches. But my wife loved the thumper at the EOR, principally because it is painted in Network Southeast livery which she remembers from growing up. What they will not tolerate are dirty and uncomfortable carriages.

 

So teaks and the mets seem popular, maybe we should scumble some mk 1s...

 

Something like this coach then. http://www.cs.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=989

Or go for the named coaches http://www.cs.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=1301

 

It has been done before! Mk1 open 1st 3083 on the Severn Valley

 

As I have said before, I fully understand the need to have such structures but I can't agree. I'm not sure many people would make the Eastleigh conection, that to oneside the sheds to me detract from the station and do not fit a country station..

 

I think a clash is almost inevitable. The typical preserved line is a small country branch line (because, with a couple of notable exceptions, it wasn't big mainlines that got closed). But that typical branch line has to cope with daily passenger numbers that could be 100 times what they saw in pre-preservation days, concentrated in s shorter day, and moreover has to be more or less self-contained in maintenance facilities - no sending your locos off to Ashford or Brighton when they wear out! So they pretty much end up having to accrete buildings to survive. Indeed, there is a bit of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" to this: I see the SVR are getting some criticism for the Kidderminster carriage shed and the Engine House, but they would no doubt be getting flak from other quarters for a "linear scrapyard" if they had the same amount of stock sat in sidings. At least undercover, the rate of deterioration for out-of-service stock is diminished, which gives a fighting chance of actually getting ahead in maintenance terms.

Preserved railways are resource-hungry beasts, but are always short of resources, and one of those resources - often not discussed - is space. If you are lucky, you still have your goods yards, but they may well have been taken for car parking or a local supermarket(!) Given all the above, it is pretty well inevitable that the country atmosphere will disappear. What is important, it seems to me, is firstly to have a clear development strategy; secondly to think as far as possible about things like sight lines etc; and thirdly to try and concentrate development so that at least some parts of the railway preserve their original atmosphere. (I'll quietly pass over the rash of modern bi-directional signalling some railways like to implement ...)

With regard Sheffield Park - personally, I don't find the new carriage shed too offensive: given that having it was a necessity, the new platform 2 buildings shield it quite well for anyone on the station, and the buildings behind are a modern industrial estate with big hanger-like buildings anyway. I'm less convinced by the Bessemer / Shop / Offices building, though I guess we have it now: it would have been nice (though less convenient for the public) if it could have been built further away, though given the constrictions on land, it is not completely obvious exactly where it could have been built. My big "fingers crossed" hope at the moment is that, once the new shed at Horsted is built, the sidings to the west of the station are left alone and aren't seen as a potential site for another storage building, even though we need one.

Tom

 

can I just say how great it is to see a young member of the fraternity so enthusiastic and committed, after a bit of a shaky start. We need more Flying Scotsman 123s. I doff my cap.

 

I certainly don't disagree with need to have storage - as I have said above. I was merely commenting on someone from the Mid Hants talking adversely about the SVR when to me the necessary MHR sheds are more intrusive than the SVR ones.

Your point about the carriage shed hiding other more modern buildings is also important, few preserved lines are lucky enough to be free from the encroachment of modern development around the line,often right up to the boundary fence.