Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Of course, at Exeter and Plymouth (to name but two examples), two trains could be sitting side by side at adjacent platforms, facing the same direction, but one was “up” and the other was”down”!

Tom

 

If you’re so inclined you can get a northbound Victoria Line train from Euston to Kings Cross, change to the Northbound Northern Line and go back to Euston. (Southbound excursions of a similar ilk are also available.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

In preparation for Col. Yorke to inspect the line in 1898 the Engineer got a signal engineer called W. Gamble (who can be found so described on census returns) to list the signals and their distance from the cabins. He used the convention of up trains to Lynton and down to Barnstaple. Thus the signal on the curve at Barnstaple Town Station was listed as the Down Home Signal. The Engineer used this information in providing the detail required by the BoT in advance of Col. Yorke's visit. He also listed the facing points following the same convention. Col. Yorke made no mention of up and down in his report or re-inspection reports. The Southern Railway used the usual convention of up to London in their accident reports relating to the L & B branch.

 

I have now looked at the L & B public and working timetables and they consistently show Up trains from Lynton to Barnstaple from the opening. The first timetable is reproduced in Catchpole. The earliest timetable I have to hand is GWR for 1853 and that has Up trains to London as do the LSWR timetables from Ilfracombe to Waterloo and Paddington from at least as far back as 1884.

 

It was not uncommon, of course, for railways to change their 'directions' for various reasons during their existence. There are instances of this for example in the South West during BR days.

 

The "Red line" boundary corrections, which were announced on the members page last week have now been made public:
https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/news/planning-application-approved
On the surface, this may not sound very exciting, however an inestimable amount of hard graft went into these amendments, which are crucial towards the TWAO application.

An account of the track walk by ENPA committee members which preceeded this planning meeting can be found here:
https://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov...ts/exmoor-national-park-authority/03-aug-2021
Go to the first item on the agenda, click on "Site visit minutes", and this will download in PDF.
With the mix of local parties present for this track walk, the atmosphere must have been "interesting". It was made clear that this occasion was a fact-finding mission, and not a forum to put forward opinions, yet reading between the lines of ENPA's notes, it is evident that some degree of badgering went on, nonetheless.

 

Noted with some interest:-

"It was confirmed that Churchtown was classed as a halt not a station, and would allow passengers already on the train to access the public footpath network and services of Parracombe. It would not be advertised as a location to join the train."

But I assume that - as a Halt - potential passengers waiting at Parracombe would be able to 'hail' the train to stop to pick them up? In any case, if/when open as a passing-loop then most trains will have to stop there anyway. Presumably the basic idea is to dampen down any local fear of Parracombe being swamped by hordes of car-driving travellers ?

 

One would guess. Not that there's anywhere or the great unwashed to park a car in Parracombe, anyway.

 

I am glad the news is now public. If you have a couple of hours to spare you can listen to the discussions at the Committee meeting - here is the link. It is more or less the first item on the Agenda - but you will need two hours to listen. A lot of the discussion centred on the fact that it is a steam railway currently burning fossil fuels.
It was interesting that the account of the track walk reported that the landowner would not be selling - Mark and I have heard this recently in connection with the RVR. which has the Public Inquiry into their TWAO in progress.
I suspect that the L and B TWAO application might happen soon.

Harold

 

True, though I have managed it (just)

But the problem of course will be those who (a) will drive there to try their luck anyway and in doing so clog up the roads and (b) may then leave their car in some stupid place and cause more problems. No doubt time will tell.....

 

My interpretation of those words in the ENP document is that it perhaps reflects the planning conditions imposed at Kingscote Station on the Bluebell Railway. There, the planning authority have effectively prevented passengers from arriving by motor car as they have prohibited parking on railway property except for working staff and volunteers, plus one car displaying a disabled blue badge parked on the forecourt. The bus service was discontinued when the East Grinstead extension opened in 2013, so now Kingscote Ticket Office can only sell tickets to passengers arriving as pedestrians or by bicycle.

There is no car parking available at Parracombe Halt. Anyone parking in the narrow Lane will effectively be causing an obstruction to other road traffic.

 

Same here- There is a slight widening of Church Lane just before it takes the bend over the bridge. A couple of years ago, my wife and I found the need to sample the tranquility of St. Petrock's on a still autumnal afternoon. There was just enough room to park one car without blocking the road, but we knew we couldn't stay long. The church is a very special place, where the far distant past meets the present in a continuity which is beyond words. When the railway returns, others of a similarly spiritual bent may do the same, without having to worry about where they've had to leave their cars.
And that place of deep peace, and spiritual uplift should be there for anyone, not just those lucky enough to live within walking distance. It's not an exclusive club. Its a place which defines our very DNA as a people.

 

Indeed, I've used the same spot for much the same reason, although on my last visit it was a bit of a squeeze as someone had used one end to dump a load of chippings!
I would be quite happy to park at the Village Hall and walk the rest of the way, but I suspect that 'hall users only' would apply and I don't want to cause any upset :-(

 

Woody Bay this afternoon

 

Excellent news, very many thanks; a testament to the skill and dedication of the L&B planning team!

 

What were the "Red line" boundary corrections about?

 

If I understand correctly there were drafting errors in two places on the plans submitted in the original planning application which was passed in 2018. This application was to correct these. If I remember correctly there was a similiar application for the part of the lin in North Devon Council's area which have alredy been passed. These are hurdles to be overcome prior to the submission of the TWAO.

 

I have looked through what I have transcribed on this railway (marvellous the word search facility on a computer - how did we manage with quill pens ?) There are no references to up and down, and that includes the Board of Trade inspections. In this case the way the gradients ran might be a clue.

 

There doesn't seem to be any firm indication either way... Given the Spooners involvement in both lines I suspect the NWNGR used the same convention as the FR. Maybe someone, one day will find some clarification but meantime supposition is about all we have to go on.

 

A look through my files brings to light a timetable sent by the NWNGR to the Board of Trade in March 1896 when there were discussions about mixed trains. This is printed with DOWN above the 'Main Line' (handwritten) Dinas to Snowdon, and UP above Snowdon to Dinas, and nothing against the 'Branch Line', Tryfan Junction to Bryngwyn and vice versa, but a pair of scissors has been used on it which might suggest that Tryfan to Bryngwyn was also DOWN, and Bryngwyn to Tryfan Junction is also UP. As I think has been said the Railway swopped round what they referred to as the Main Line and the Branch some time before this. The original letter and timetable is in file 3069 of 1896, TNA ref MT6 1108/1.