If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by Jamessquared, Feb 16, 2013.

  1. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Your quote misses the second half of the sentence concerned which is to the effect that Horsted Keynes in its former state seemed like an awful warning of what might happen at West Hoathley. The former location is being sorted but it has taken many decades.

    PH
     
  2. ruddingtonrsh56

    ruddingtonrsh56 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,470
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nottinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    For whatever reason, when I first saw your response, the quote I included was the entirety of your comment. Not quite sure why but I saw nothing about any Horsted Keynes foreshadowings
     
    paulhitch likes this.
  3. glen77

    glen77 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2018
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I haven't read all the posts, so apologies if I'm repeating what someone else has already said. In one of the recent Bluebell News magazines there was a piece about undercover storage for locos at Horsted but kept in the style of the existing buildings on platforms 1 and 2, and 3 and 4. So that would surely be your answer to making an eyesore of the station as well as the storage issues for those not catered for by ASH?
     
  4. Enterprise

    Enterprise Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,275
    Likes Received:
    3,077
    I am very fond of the Bluebell Railway as it was the first preserved line that I visited 50 odd years ago but for all its contemporary attractions it lost some charm as time passed. Sheffield Park has become somewhat hypertrophic although the reasons are both understandable and necessary. I should not like to see major development at West Hoathly.
     
  5. Steve B

    Steve B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    2,069
    Likes Received:
    1,502
    Location:
    Shropshire
    This is always going to be an issue where a preserved line is doing things that it was never set up to do when built. I too remember the Bluebell in the years from 1965 to about 1975 at which time I moved away from the South East. None of Sheffield Park's former owners ever thought of putting a loco shed there, let alone a place to rebuild locos. It was a quiet, bucolic place, lit by oil lamps. The only additions for the tourist trade were a table with souvenirs for sale just next to the ticket barrier, and a restaurant car placed in the cattle dock (I think) to act as a cafe. When trains were running in the main season it was crowded, facilities were poor, and the St Bernard dog which insisted on laying down across the entrance to the booking office and had to be stepped over was "quaint", but things couldn't continue that way and had to change - but not all liked that. The Talyllyn had similar issues with some who regretted the passing of the overgrown, run down, line that was taken over by the preservationists, but at least most recognised the importance of being able to dispatch a train up the valley with a reasonable certainty that it would come back later without having broken something, or having been mis-routed into the engine sidings at Pendre by mistake, or having come off the track because there weren't enough sleepers in one piece.

    I was still a member of the Bluebell when what I think was the first of what would now be called strategic plans was published. This defined a "preserved area" of Sheffield Park, where any developments were to be in keeping with it's LBSCR heritage. Outside that area pragmatism could reign supreme. Which was why the workshop was built in modern materials, but the running shed was to be clad in such a way as to resemble a traditional loco shed (which it was - eventually!). I suspect (this is guesswork) that similar thinking still governs the Bluebell's planning for future developments. Perhaps the thinking for any development on any preserved line should be "The L&.... (add initials of choice) didn't need to build an engine,carriage/works shed here, but if they did have to, this is how they would have done it.

    Steve B
     
  6. Mark Thompson

    Mark Thompson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2017
    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    3,562
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    E sussex
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Upvote for the use of "hypertrophic"- I have learnt a new word today! That apart, I share your views on this issue- it's a vexed and difficult subject to resolve, alright.
    About 20 years ago, I spent some time with Jim Turtle and some of the northern extension gang looking at possible storage solutions at West Hoathly. What we were looking at was purely for storage, and not display purposes.
    The conclusion we arrived at was that there was, theoretically, enough space at WH to accommodate a 6x6 road shed, shunting loop, and just enough room for both up and down headshunts of 6 carriage length.
    The thinking then, was that any building should be of a style which, rather than mimicry, should be one which blended into the rural background, for example, clad in natural rough-sawn Oak which would weather into a silver grey colour in time, and to be as unobtrusive as any building of that size could be. The inspiration for this was the original sawmill building at Kingscote, which seemed to blend into its background very well and did not impinge upon the railway at all.
    Obviously this scheme was never intended to go any further, because of the known opposition of Sharpthornians To development of any kind, but more just to see what "could" be done.
    I looked at Matthew Cousins's concept for Horsted Keynes, and at first appearance I thought it was a really good idea.
    However, on closer analysis, it appeared that this new building did not actually offer a great deal of covered space, and would probably result in a considerable amount of Bluebell assets still left "out in the cold".

    Perhaps, if ultimately the only solution is for another building at Horsted Keynes, this "as unobtrusive as possible" option could be considered?
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2018
  7. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    All this talk of developing linear scrapyard at West Hoathly seems to me mischief making. There is precisely zero desire to do so: the whole point of discussion about OP5 is to work out how to get the remaining valuable stock under cover. There are variations of thought about the "how" and "where", and maybe even the "what", but certainly not the "why". Indeed, my sense is that of all the aims in the Long Term Plan, more under cover space is the one for which there is more or less universal support and priority.

    With regard "where", West Hoathly is one, but certainly not the only, option; nor is HK the only option. There are potential sites round the railway, all of which have some combination of access, planning, ground condition, visual intrusion and other constraints.

    What I would hope we could work out would be:

    1) How much more covered space do we actually need? That should be fairly easy to assess, since we know how much stock we have and what proportion of it is under cover; and the likelihood, or desire, of acquiring significantly more stock is fairly small, beyond perhaps one or two additional vintage carriage bodies.
    2) Do we intend to build just storage, or provide museum / visitor access? The LTP implies the latter, but that comes with cost implications (not least because providing access means every linear foot of storage requires more square feet of covered space because of the requirement for visitor circulation)
    3) Given the above, is one building sufficient, or several?
    4) What impact would any particular site have on how a visitor structured a visit to the railway? (For example - if you built a big museum at HK, would it result in a significant proportion of visitors from the north choosing only to do EG - HK and return, given timetable constraints of doing the whole line and a long break at HK - especially on service 1 days?)

    At that point, options could be considered. Most options will, at some level, intrude on notionally peaceful rural stations, but so does having unrestored stock under tarpaulins. Whatever is chosen, it will be a difficult decision, but may also be the last really significant development decision to be made, so I would hope that it is made in a strategic, rather than tactical, manner.

    Tom
     
  8. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Those designs by Matthew Cousins were I think very useful in starting a debate. However - personal view as always - they didn’t seem to provide very much useful space relative to the amount of cost, visual intrusion and so on that they would engender.

    Tom
     
    David R and Mark Thompson like this.
  9. Steve B

    Steve B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    2,069
    Likes Received:
    1,502
    Location:
    Shropshire
    One particular irony has just occurred to me. Here we are, quite rightly talking about the need to get out of service locos, carriages, wagons etc, under cover and away from the (open) sidings at Horsted Keynes, yet there is a clear historical precedent for using those sidings for just that purpose - engines awaiting their turn in Brighton works, and the use of one of the Ardingly lines as a store for new electric stock awaiting entry into service, and then the old stock they replaced being stored there awaiting disposal. As modellers often say - "a prototype for everything"!

    Steve B
     
    dan.lank, Rosedale and Jamessquared like this.
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'm reminded of this photo displayed in the museum at Sheffield Park (apologies for the photo of a photo, not square on). Location is I believe just south of Kingscote; loco is 34058.

    fullsizeoutput_116c.jpeg

    Tom
     
  11. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,493
    Likes Received:
    23,731
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    As an armchair BRPS member, I agree with all of the above, but think one point is missing from the bottom of the list, that should be the deciding factor in any option selection - What impact would this option have on the preservation setting of the location and the overall integrity of the preservation of the railway from Sheffield Park to East Grinstead?

    I agree with the objectives of Operation Undercover, but the interests of the locomotives and stock have to be balanced against the preservation of the railway as a whole. I think @Enterprise is being extremely charitable in his description of Sheffield Park, while Horsted Keynes is in my view about at the limit of what it can cope with without going the same way - certainly, I would oppose building a shed to the west of the station as changing the fundamental character of the station. That view has implications given that I don't believe there to be scope for significant further work at Sheffield Park; I would hope that whatever is done will draw those implications out.

    For that reason, I would also like to see a costed (money and practical impact) view of what a do nothing option would mean.
     
  12. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I agree with you about the visual intrusion, which is why I put in the last sentence about the visual impact being one of the options to weigh up. Of the obvious options, I don't favour anything on the western side of HK for that reason.

    At Sheffield Park, there are possible options that at least would be no worse than what currently exists; specifically building on the top car park (behind the current loco works; would be essentially invisible from the station) or at the far south of the station over the current Newick and Pumphouse sidings. Conceivably you could make an operationally more convenient running shed for carriages there, and then re-use the current carriage shed as a display venue. But I'm not sure if even that would give all the space you need. Bear in mind that before the Sheffield Park Carriage Shed was built, along with the museum building and back wall to the canopy, the view from platform 2 at SP was of an industrial estate, so there are visual intrusions quite apart from those of the railway. Arguably, even in pure visual terms, that development has improved the ambience of the station as it was in the early 2000s, given that you are never going to go back to how the surrounding land was used in the 1950s. In the same light, outside the railway boundary on the eastern side of West Hoathly is a very large brick works - a glance at Google Maps will show that the scale dwarfs anything the railway might build. It is partly screened by a line of trees. (https://goo.gl/maps/EH2e6Pe17U22)

    Another option would be to consider further land purchases, conceivably in non-rail connected areas for storage.

    As for do nothing: the visual impact of that option should be obvious, i.e. what we have now. The practical impact would be extremely costly, making both loco and carriage restorations considerably more costly than they should be due to deterioration while things are stored outside. The business case for more storage is very strong.

    Tom
     
    35B, Bill Drewett, Steve B and 2 others like this.
  13. dan.lank

    dan.lank Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    290
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Haywards Heath
    Not sure if you’re confusing Kingscote and West Hoathly there? WH is definitely undeveloped as there’s very little there at all, besides a PW compound and some burned out cables!

    The opportunity with WH is that it’s a totally blank canvas, and could be an opportunity to do something that’s exactly what the line needs, rather than having to make the best with a site that’s too small, or the wrong shape etc...

    The other factor is that HK is a rarity in preservation - a large junction station with several platforms, and from the south end of the platforms northwards, it’s very close to how it’s always looked. It’d be a real shame to lose that for a big out of place-looking shed. West Hoathly, on the other hand, (if it was ever reopened) would be either a basic halt, or a recreation of the original station. That’d mean it was pretty similar to SP and KC, so really not so much of a loss if it had a well designed museum/storage shed nearby.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Adam-Box, TommyD and Steve B like this.
  14. dan.lank

    dan.lank Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    290
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Haywards Heath
    Fascinating about what you measured up at WH... I’m in agreement about Matthew Cousins’ idea (although I love his painting work) - personally I thought it just felt a bit unrailwaylike... Half shed, half platform...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  15. I would have thought it was the residents of Sharpthorne who would have been more up in arms about the prospect of a station at West Hoathly, rather than the residents of West Hoathly itself...?
     
  16. Mark Thompson

    Mark Thompson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2017
    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    3,562
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    E sussex
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed it was, particularly those around the Station Road area.
    I think "West Hoathly" gets used as a kind of shorthand for that general area.
     
  17. David R

    David R Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,018
    Likes Received:
    1,386
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Surrey
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Just to remind everyone, tomorrow (Saturday) is the Toy and Collector Fair at Horsted and we will be running free 'Behind the Scenes' tours of the C&W department at Horsted Keynes, starting at 11.40, 12.40, 1.55 and 3.10.

    David R
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  18. glen77

    glen77 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2018
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Came down to the railway on Saturday, was great to see it so packed on a normal service 2 timetable day. However I found that the A set was literally full all day - first train out of East Grinstead to the last train back and I think I saw people stood up leaning against the windows at times. I feel it might be an idea to run a slightly longer train as there really wasn't enough seats available. Like I said, great to see it so busy though!
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  19. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Good to know it was busy!

    The service set last weekend was still I think the Victorian four wheelers plus the LSWR carriage. That’s a fairly low capacity set (the LSWR carriage is 50% luggage van, and the wheelchair accessible saloon only has a couple of compartments). I imagine at some point that set will drop out and the higher capacity SR set will become set A - the issue as always is managing the mileage through to routine maintenance intervals. We really need the Mets back as a high capacity vintage set - conceivably if we get the two end carriages later this year, those plus the four 4-wheelers and the LSWR carriage provides a good capacity while still being within the H / O1 weight limit.

    Tom
     
    glen77 and 45076 like this.
  20. Phil-d259

    Phil-d259 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2015
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    My thoughts were that Mathew Cousins proposal was perhaps less about a 'storage shed' and more of something akin to a display area. Thus while it duplicates aspects of the ASH project I envisaged a line of vehicles inside with a platform with a canopy like end to the south to hide it.

    Something like this inside on the IOWSR....

    [​IMG]
     
    gwalkeriow and Bluenosejohn like this.

Share This Page