Baldwin "Lyn" new build.

Since the gala is now coming to pass on the L&B, is it possible that we could hear what the big announcement was for the Lyn project? A first steaming date right?

 

Certainly sounds like a complicated affair to sort out, though you've only mentioned the railway just running 3 train sets, I'd imagine their could be odd occasions when they'd run 4 right? If I recall the plan is certainly to have enough carriages for such an eventuality, and handy for galas I'm sure.

Just one other thing I wanted to enquire as well, when the railway is eventually rebuilt fully as it can be, will it actually be 19 miles in length? I'm aware it wouldn't be possible to reach the old Barnstaple station site, so it would have to stop off short correct?

 

Isn't the plan for the line to go further into Lynton so that could add the extra distance.

But if the passing loops remain at Whistlandpound and Parracombe surely the two longest sections could be shorter. To make the maths simpler with four trains taking 4 hours to complete a round trip and leave again that would give an hourly service which is a reasonable frequency and you can just get the next train if you miss one.

 

There was a discussion of this point on, I think, the Yahoo group some months back. The considered opinion was that the eventual rebuilt railway will be longer (about 20 miles). This is because the loss of the Barnstaple to Pilton section is more than made up with the extension to the new Lynton station (and I think also the deviation around Wistlandpound).

 

You are correct about the additional length of the railway at the Lynton end of the project and additional trackbed around Wistlandpound.

 

I see, that makes sense then, I'd imagine the deviation at Wistlandpound would add that extra bit of length to the line, in the same way the Ffestiniog's deviation did.

Though here's a potentially contentious question for thread... Since the section between Barnstaple and Pilton is lost to development, will the railway still technically be within Barnstaple's limits? In other words, though it will no doubt be called the Lynton & Barnstaple Railway, will it actually technically be the the Lynton & Pilton Railway...?

 

Pilton is within the boundaries of Barnstaple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilton,_Devon

 

Well, the Tallylyn Railway never even intended to get to Lake Tallylyn....

 

The GWSR is unlikely ever to reach Warwickshire! In fact, they should rename the 'W' as Worcestershire, as they have at least crossed the border of that county!!

 

Ah I see now, thanks for the clarification. Would I be right in assuming the ideal place the L&B wants their terminus is the site of the old Pilton train sheds? I'm aware at the moment it's just a car park, and in time as the railway expands and develops, I'd imagine the authorities within Barnstaple could be persuaded to having a station built there.

Though I'd be curious to know in what form the station would take, would it just be like the rest or something unique and distinctive? Since the railway has always been known for being laid out like the full sized counterpart, how about a miniaturised terminus with a traditional curved station canopy. Ambitious I know, but it won't be for years anyway, so no harm in speculating...!

 

Once the Broadway extension is completed it will be five more miles of new track to Honeybourne and connection to the existing track to Long Marston, which is in Warwickshire. Easy !

 

Was going to say the old town hall may be going at some point, then I realised that the have built some new home on the trackbed between Pilton Yard and the council offices.

 

I would have thought that crossing the busy roads woul be more of a block to progress for the last section of original route ?

 

Quite. Before you get to the council offices or the homes built on the site of Barnstaple Town station. And, let's face it, the section along Rolles Quay won't be especially scenic to justify the disproportionate cost for 1/3 mile extra run.

 

Pilton yard (currently a car park ) is mentioned in the North Devon and Torridge local plan as the future site for the Barnstaple terminus:


10.62 The reinstatement of the former Lynton and Barnstaple railway line is proposed

along its former route. The car park to the east of Pilton Causeway is allocated for a new

railway station including a ticket office, locomotive store and ancillary buildings, as well as

for car parking to serve the station and the town centre. The reinstated railway line will be a

tourism and leisure attraction for the town as well as helping to deliver the transport strategy

(Policy ST10). Existing buildings and structures alongside the reinstated railway line, including

original station buildings and platforms where they still survive, should be reused to provide

new stations, platforms and buildings for the operation of the railway line where available,

feasible and viable.

 

The FR used to run lots and lots of trains and it ended stuck in a cycle of being in profit in the summer and then in the overdraft during the winter. The current management decided to run less trains and tailor them more closely to the expected loading. Rather than go for the "if you build it they will come" style used before. So far this has worked, the railways finances are much more stable and the railway on a whole is in a much better position.

There is of course a balance to be had. The Tallylyn got itself in real trouble by among other things, running far to many trains that were nearly empty. But like you say a service that is two infrequent can be equally off putting. It isn't an easy thing to predict and you'll notice the FR has timetabled more days with 2 or 3 sets in use over the last few years.

Tim

 

Slightly late reply, but James Evans has been trying to interest people in his proposals for new build steam for a while. I rather suspect it's more a matter of trying to convince people to fund his ideas by matching them to a perceived need rather than looking at a problem and finding a tailored solution. His Fairatt (or to give it its proper name, Kitson-Meyer) proposal for the WHR was an example of a such a solution looking for a problem that didn't (and still doesn't) exist, which is why the FRCo had no real interest in the scheme.

 

As much as I have said in the past that I would support such a new build, the trouble is that until the L&BR are running between Blackmoor and Lynton then To be honest I can't see happening, what I think may happen is that the L&BR Trust will be offered bigger locos which come from other collections in the UK.

Please don't think for a moment that I have anything to do with collection X (which I don't), but the truth is that once we have a longer run then I do know of at least one steam loco owner who has expressed an interested in basing his loco on the L&BR if they will have it.

But the truth is that we don't know what will happen this time next year so we can only guess at what might be.

 

The Fairatt is not a kitson meyer as the rear power bogie is not under a frame attached to the cab/boiler frame . I would say it is closer to the Union Garratt locomotives that SAR tried out in the 1920's, sans the front tank and the other way round, the garratt end being at the front on the SAR versions. Not sure it fits either category to be honest!

 

I'd agree that the railway seeking already existing bigger engines as the line grows, does seem like the more realistic future outcome. And I'd say it's a justifiable enough one too, as really there are few railway of the same gauge (besides FR/WHR) that can offer a good run for people's engines of a bigger size.

Though pray tell, while I know you wouldn't to mention the owner's name and other sensitive info, could you at least tell us what sort of loco this owner has? Say, for instance, does it have a tender?