Peak Rail General Discussion

Braunton [Lord Dowding] at Rowsley South today on the Peak Forester from Kings X

 

Shame folk didn't get steam all the way back to Kings Cross, I spoke to several passengers when doing the stock watering up at Rowsley (all done by LMS Carriage Association members) and no-one complained about the slow outward journey. PR amended the normal timetable, and shunted the service stock out of the way. this worked much better than previous attempts to run a service train, and given that we only had an hour to do everything (two hours on previous charters) it worked OK, despite a moan from one quarter about slow shunting. You have to bear in mind that the support coach couldn't be taken off until the loco was watered, and you have to keep herding the large number of visitors off the crossing when several shunting movements are being made. Anyway a few pics from Rowsley.

Dave

 

Peak Rail retained part of the Midland Railway Station site in Buxton, they sold part of it to Nestle who I assume still retain ownership or have sold it on. But saying that here is an interesting nugget

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/AttachmentShowServlet?ImageName=286419

 

Nestle over the last few years have employed multiple development company's to draw out plans for the redevelopment of the site and each master plan has received large criticism from the community, so I could believe the stories of an article that claims nestle has given up trying to redevelop for now. It would be great if peak rail could buy the whole site off nestle, it's a large amount of space that would future proof PRs expansion needs if they were to come back to Buxton, but nestle would want top dollar, and it's always a question of money.

 

Yes you have it, one of the main reasons why they've given up, with the LRO and the access rights to the land they still own PR can effectively block any redevelopment, nestle have got the message. Their was a local newspaper article detailing all this a few months back. Makes me very happy, if nestle had got their way a dirty great tesco would've been built there, opposite a waitrose and adjacent to an aldi.

 

Yes the crossing is due to be replaced and we are looking at options including rubberised modern crossings which tend to be the standard nowadays,usefull for maintenance too as hey are far easily removed, I remember once digging a location cupboard base up and finding a fibreglass BR vestibule door end, the thing still folded too, as for the signalling this is something long in the tooth,but is being discussed ,I would like to see it used and that's what we are working towards.

 

Another possibility would be to re-establish a base at Buxton and start working towards Matlock from there, as originally was the case. A bridge enabling a "break out" from the Peak Rail station at Buxton was provided, IIRC, by the Greater Manchester Council in its death throes. Ironically, almost as soon as it was installed, Peak Rail abandoned Buxton, selling off some of its land in the process.

Heritage railways having running rights over Network Rail tracks is now an accepted practice. Indeed Peak Rail already has this at Matlock. If the station yard at Buxton was relaid and a connection was provided to the existing Peak Forest freight line at Buxton Curve Junction, an initial 'top and tail' service could be provided between Buxton and the Buxton Junction/Millers Dale Junction area. Indeed the current Riverside platform could be recycled to its original location for such a service!

Preserved railway restorations working from both ends to bridge the gap have occurred before. The Great Central is one example and the Kent and East Sussex is another that comes to mind. Another advantage of this method is that it gets additional volunteers involved - those in the local area - as well as raising the profile of the railway as a whole.

 

Yes, you are right, reinstating the platform at Blackwell mill cottages would be very useful, especially with the popularity of the monsal trail (which starts tens of metres away from the original location of PRs halt). This could earn valuable revenue for peak rail. It's a great annoyance to me that if I want to cycle the monsal trail, I have to drive there when it really isn't very far.
A few things to consider though:
has the quarry traffic decreased enough to allow a substantial time window to run a service along the line? I'm not sure of the answer to this, I would say the frequency of quarry trains has decreased but the train length is increasing, DB schenker is about to make heavy investment in longer sidings at Buxton for the quarry traffic.
Does PR have the money? Possibly they do, but with the possibility of a joint rail/Cycle path bridge over the A6 being planned aswell as the other things happening such as the haddon section of the track bed potentially being reinstated for cycle use, it's a question of where to best use available money. And with those things occuring sooner rather than later, that's the best place to use the money to get the infrastructure in place.

 

I believe the cost of a junction and associated signalling made this idea far to costly.

 

I had forgotten about the issue of the "missing link" in the Monsal Trail between Buxton Junction on Buxton and, as I understand it, Network Rail's reluctance to allow a path on their land. Indeed, yesterday, after a very enjoyable day on the ELR, I stopped off at the lay-by on the A6 which overlooks the cottages, to take in the scenery, when a light engine trundled past on its way to Great Rocks. This does give another argument as to why the proposal has merit but, of course, it would be just the first stage. The next logical move would be to re-instate the railway to Millers Dale alongside the existing pathway and, of course, the halt at the cottages for those who wish to go by bike or foot.

I checked Realtime Trains to see what the current usage of the Great Rocks - Buxton section is. In the last week there was a maximum of two up and two down trains daily in the 1000 to 1800 hrs time slot that would be needed for Peak Rail trains. The running time for each train is about 20 minutes for the section. If we were to allow 30 minutes per train, this would mean two hours in the eight hour period would be required for freight trains. i.e. six hours would be available to path Peak Rail trains.

The cost of Network Rail access, based on their published charges, should be less than £10 per return journey. The cost of the infrastructure required should not be too prohibitive, certainly a lot less than was required at Matlock. The only Network Rail work required should be the turn out at Buxton Curve Junction which is a lot less than the work done at Matlock.

In terms of signalling, I think the Great Rocks - Buxton section is worked by electric key token. Dom (kestreleyes) can correct me if I am wrong. Unfortunately I have lost my SRS 'bible' on such matters! The same system is used on the Whitby line that the NYMR accesses at Grosmont by means of an intermediate instrument. Hence I would envisage that a similar, relatively low cost, system could be used at Buxton Curve Junction.

The point about resource allocation with the extension works going on at the other end of the line is a very valid one. This is why I suggested the Great Central/KESR model of having a related but different group responsible for the work at the other end of the line. As Peak Rail PLC own the land at Buxton, any group undertaking restoration at Buxton would be responsible to the Peak Rail Board. Experience has shown that such ventures bring additional volunteers and resources into the overall railway and do not detract from the main railway's operations.

 

Iteresting all this talk about Buxton again. I've just happened to find myself randomly watching "The Train Now Departing" on BBC iPlayer and low and behold Peak Rail at Buxton! Take a look. Here's the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p011v89n/the-train-now-departing-6-the-survivors

Film of Peak Rail at Buxton start about 15 minutes in, but it is all a good watch.

 

Being outside of the UK I can't see that. But I guess that is the one with my brother (DaveP) raising his eyebrows which was the cause of much leg pulling...

 

Before everyone gets carried away with connecting Buxton (PR) to NR and beyond. The Steam Beano has already gone big on this and Facebook has gone onto meltdown - we'll be in Bakewell by the spring, etc. A few words that everyone forgets:

1. Money
2. Network Rail
3. Logistics - running two sites, two lots of expense
4. Peak District National Park Authority

Let PR sort out getting to Rowsley / Bakewell

 

You know the real trick is to cultivate the increased interest and enthusiasm from this news to make any expansion of the railway a reality.

We cannot just leave Peak Rail to sort it out. They will need everyone's help in all kinds of ways: From fund raising, dealing with and paper work aspects, acquiring materials, planning how to do it, organising a team to work together and make it happen and pulling together the manual labour to do the hard graft of building a railway. We all need to step forward if this is to happen - Peak Rail and the volunteers/members and even new members.

After all, any preserved railway is all about people first and foremost and any railway will stagnate or fail if it forgets that. We all share a common interest in various aspect of railways and we all crave that buzz of achieving something together. For us that is preserving a railway and everything that entails. Being able to learn new skills, share your achievements with everyone and also to benefit the local community is really a fulfilling thing to do. It turns a preserved railway from just a group of people doing their own little thing into a railway family where anything is possible, including getting to Buxton.

So I say, come on Peak Rail. Come volunteers. Let's build a railway!

 

some sensible and wise words, yes social media does tend to go into nuclear meltdown when sensational stories usually pop up, I know there's a lot going on behind the scenes and like most icebergs it always appears there's very little to show but much going on below the surface does happen, indeed before we crack on with the extension there's much work going on to complete some of the stuff we've been trying to get done for a while, the footbridge and Darley down platform and lighting are all in progress but I cant say much at present ,but you will hear and see the pics when it starts, there's also the cycleway which some view with praise and others will dismiss its value, however having seen the northern end heaving with customers one cant complain the benefits it will bring in, I've already noted even on the small bit from Rowsley towards church lane its got much busier and with the car parking at Rowsley being free it brings potential custom closer to us, even if just for a cuppa tea while cycling or an ice-cream ,it is also not going away as tourism locally has taken off since the start of the credit crunch and this can be seen across the county very much so,so we have to embrace it and maximise what it can bring in so it looks like the amber valley and Matlock area are a winner for the future tourist trade at least.

 

the signalling was the problem quoted in the late 80`s, which hasn't changed, apart from that the NR track has been centre slewed in many places to reduce the curves all of which are not cheap to change to put back to either a double line to keep things separate or to allow PR trains to traverse the branch between NR trains, many of which aren't regularly timetabled and run as and when required, cost wise you're looking at a small fortune which makes Matlock pale into insignificance, in the real world wed have a simple solution and crack on with it after coming to agreements with NR about the simple solution, but no dealings with NR are ever simple, the Swanage,PR and MCR can all attest to that, from experience.

 

Before thinking of expanding PR need to take stock of what they currently have.
One(hired) loco available today on load six .The two coaches I sat in both had numerous worn seats stuck with gaffer tape.
Waterman fleet coming on in leaps(sorry dumped in a line with 37152)-how's the apprentice training scheme coming along?

BH Monday, I would think an expected busy day and ticket office closed after first train, please pay on train. Lord Phil in light steam with one person seen attending to it's maintenance.

 

I'm sorry that wasn't a good experience for you, I can't speak for the operations side but PR are now addressing the upholstery issues.

Dave

 

I would tend to agree, I think at the moment, what would be tempting me to visit is not a longer line but some relevant motive power and stock, in good condition, and just generally develop what's already there, before extending, when really, the state of the existing railway needs improving first.

 

What is the latest on the Waterman Trust fleet at PR? I've lost track (pun intended)

Thanks

Patrick