Bluebell Northern Extension - so what's occurring then?

Given that the conditions in the cutting are so bad wouldnt it be better if the Bluebell dropped any plans to open the section at easter and just instead were to say it will be open when its ready and instead held back any gala plans till next year when they know the line should not only be finished but any issues would have been dealt with on the new section ? and possibly a basic station building be provided at east grinstead by then, what about re using some of the old sections of the now dismantled BR clasp station building?

 

Well, right at the moment, the railway is still cautiously optimistic about opening on the planned date. The thing with extensions is that the key thing that most people want to do - whether hardcore enthusiasts, or locals, or regular visitors - is to ride on the extension! So having an "opening" gala next year would be a bit silly: by then, everyone who is desperate to ride the extension will have done so. Also, there is a certain pressure to open as soon as possible, because there is probably a bit of suppressed demand, whereby the people who make maybe one or two visits to the railway every year will probably hold off until they can do the whole journey. So we are expecting a rather quiet time of it until the extension is opened. So we'd prefer to open sooner rather than later.

As for the old mainline EG building: as far as I know, it was pretty well demolished as part of the project to build its replacement. It was widely regarded as a bit tatty, and not something we would have wanted for our new station; it would also not have been in character (having been built in 1973) with the 1960s theme for EG Bluebell station. The railway has submitted planning permission for a permanent building at EG.

Tom

 

Technically, a southern extension is still on the agenda, in as much as it is mentioned as an aspiration in the draft long term plan. However, I think that is essentially because it gives us a legitimacy to make representations to the council about any development activity that would make it harder to extend south. Even with no further development, the problems of extending south are formidable. I think in the rough running order in the LTP, it was listed in the projects in the "within the next fifty years" timescale.

As for Ardingly / Haywards Heath. It's true that the chairman, no less, has called for a period of consolidation once we get to EG before thinking about anything in that direction. So in the immediate future, I would expect nothing more than preventative maintenance work on our land. We own all the freehold to the trackbed to the outskirts of the Ardingly station site, (where Hanson are based) except for Cinder Hill Tunnel which is still own by the British Rail Residuary Board.

However, at some point, we will move in that direction. The first big problem is to cross the station road in HK (where Sherriff Mill viaduct was demolished in the 1960s) but thereafter it is a much simpler prospect than going to EG was, and all the signalling work at HK has already been done in anticipation of HK becoming a junction again. I think the first move would be to a small, new, station outside Ardingly, probably only accessible on foot. Potentially, we could then have an end-on connection with the stub of line that serves the aggregates depot, and thereby gain a connection to Network Rail from the south (i.e. trains from the Brighton direction).

It is hard to imagine that we would ever get back into the original Ardingly station (which still exists and is used as office accommodation by Hanson) until they vacated the site, and there is no indication that they will do that anytime soon.

I believe we do have a guaranteed corridor through the site. I think this means that, if we did ever make an end-on connection, we would have a right to run our trains through at any time towards Copyhold Junction regardless of what work Hanson were doing - i.e. we would have space to construct an separate mainline clear of their sidings.

Beyond that, it is way more problematic. There is a redevelopment plan for a site adjacent to Haywards Heath that has made specific provision for Bluebell trains. However, the railway has objected, on the grounds that not enough space has been left. In effect, the plan as drawn would build a platform on the east side of the station, opposite the current down slow platform. Currently there is a siding here called the "reception siding" that is used by Hanson's trains coming from the north, which then run round via the down slow platform to head back the mile or so north to Copyhold Junction and thereby Ardingly. The proposed redevelopment calls for a Bluebell platform to be built on the reception line and for us to run-round via Platform 1 at Haywards Heath, just as the stone trains do. The railway's view is that that is a non-starter, and we would need an extra (third) track built, so we could run round via the current reception siding and avoid the mainline platform altogether. That planning application (for the car park) is currently being decided on I believe. Obviously, if it gets built where the planning application says, we don't have enough space - it needs to be shifted a few metres east.

Even if we win that little battle, there is still the bigger problem of getting between Haywards Heath and Copyhold junction, along one of the busiest stretches of four track mainline in the country. Clearly we will never get to run on the mainline itself (as the current aggregates trains do) so you would need to construct a fifth line - and there isn't space without cutting back various cuttings and widening embankments.

So my view is that Haywards Heath is a complete non-starter (even if we end up with suitable reserved space at HH station); but we could extend as far as a small station outside Ardingly - a distance of two miles - with an end-on connection to the mainline, via the Hanson site, quite easily, and possibly within the next ten to twenty years.

Tom

 

I hear the BB have replied for planning permission again at EG. After the 2007 planning application for building work at EG has expired.

 

Indeed you're right. Meant to say in my original post "has submitted a planning application", not "planning permission".

Tom

 

And if they could have sorted out the iron/steel, and sold that off for scrap, they'd have done even better!

I wonder if they could incinerate the old plastics? If so, there might not have been much left to re-landfill!

Noel

 

Shanks may well have done all that. The issue the Bluebell had was that there was insufficient space to erect the necessary separation machinery within the cutting. It could have been placed at the top, on the level shelf to the east of the cutting, but that would have meant double handling of the material, which would have lead to extra cost, reducing the viability of any scheme. It also would have been expensive to hire and then have sitting idle for long periods, giving the somewhat stop-start nature of the work to dig out the waste, as cash and / or GBRf diesels became available in short, concentrated bursts. Whereas Shanks, of course, had all the right kit set up to process the waste when it came in.

We did separate out some old car tyres (which went for incineration in cement works, so I believe), which was a practical proposition within the cutting without holding things up too much, and did lead to a small reduction in volume that had to go to landfill. There was also a small amount of separation of old metal on site, but I think more along the lines of odd large lumps that very obviously came to the surface, rather than a systematic sweep to get all the old metal out.

In the end, the economies of scale weren't there, whereas for Shanks, it's their stock-in-trade. Financially, it was best to let them concentrate on their core skill (processing waste) while we try to do ours (running steam trains!)

Incidentally, if anyone wants to see the current state of play, here's a rather snowy cutting, courtesy of John Sandys: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/sets/72157632557301503/with/8395742646/

Tom

 

Did I hear somewhere that half an old traction engine was dug out of the tip at some point, or is that just a tall tale? If its true, what happened to it?

 

Tall tale...

Amongst other items that were predicted to be found (with various degrees of seriousness) were a council rubbish lorry from the 1960s, a Sherman tank, Shergar, Lord Lucan and Piltdown Woman. None of them was found...

Tom

 

I seem to remember that photos were, in fact, published of pieces of a steam roller found in the early stages of the excavation.Ray.

 

Well, I'd be interested to see a photo, as I certainly don't remember anything like that! I did a quick text search on Robert Philpot's site (he being the sort of person who would definitely have commented on anything like that had he seen it) and also on the Bluebell Extension pages, and can't find any of the words "Traction" or "Engine" or "Roller" on either site. So if anything was found, it was certainly kept pretty quiet.

Incidentally, with regard the Council Rubbish Lorry supposedly in the cutting, which was the only slightly serious suggestion in my list above: Robert is the main person who believes it is there, the story being that it fell into the cutting while unloading one day in the 1970s and was abandoned as it couldn't be retrieved. It was never found, but to be fair to Robert, the position he indicated that he believed it was (over on the west side of the cutting) ended up not being excavated. So I guess it is still a possibility, though equally we will probably now never know.

Tom

 

No Spitfires there either, Tom!

 

No. If we did find one (or even 24...) then I guess we'd no longer be appealing for "fivers for the finish", but instead drawing up immediate plans to go to Haywards Heath, Lewes and all points between! Sadly, I don't think a rubbish lorry or rusty fragment of traction engine would have quite the same effect on our finances...

Tom

 

Thats basically the same sort of thoughts I've had about extending into Haywards Heath as much as I would like to see it happen (as someone who lives in Haywards Heath I can say thats there's not much to do here. No cinema, bowling alley, decent shops etc). In particular the section between Copyhold Junction and Haywards Heath. I remember the chairman saying that should the Bluebell would require a platform of its own and a Water column but there's just insuffiecient space and thats after you'd have to deal with the line from Copyhold Junction.

But I think recently a survey went around Haywards Heath and the Bluebell was found to 70% (or there abouts) as important to have have in the town.

 

Tom. You forgot to mention the only real significant find so far in the tip, the Machynlleth totem. It is now on display in the new museum
at Sheffield Park. However I do not think that would beat Shergar or Lord Lucan and co!
Roger.

 

Project update from Chris White, via the Bluebell Newsletter:

Tom

 

There was an article in Steam Railway about July 2009 - I believe it was described as half a traction engine. Subsequent discussions on " Traction Talk" 24-27/7/09 described the find as an Aveling and Porter rear wheel hub with the remains of cut off spokes. Photos were posted on the Fotopic site. I'm pleased to confirm that I didn't imagine it! Ray.

 

Hmmm, curioser and curioser! We weren't actually removing waste from the cutting in July 2009. The initial extraction of waste took place in November 2008 by road; the next removal was July 2010 by rail. So if that date is right, wherever it was removed from, it wasn't from the domestic waste in the cutting...

See:

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/extprog_arch9.html for 2010 - scroll down to July for the first Waste by Rail coverage.
http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/extprog_arch8.html for 2009 - in July, the work was concentrated on building EG station - the only removal of material from the cutting was the spoil trains removing inert spoil (not waste) from the south end.
http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/ext/extprog_arch7.html for 2008 - scroll down to November for the trial removal of waste by road.

Am genuinely intrigued now - do you have a URL?

Tom

 

Tom,
Here's the URL tractiontalkforum.com/showthread.php?t=7793&highlight=bluebell+railway

I'll try to find the SR article but unfortunately Fotopic is no more. Regards Ray.

 

Would this be it?
Kingscote to Imberhorne Lane - Derek Hayward's Photos

To be fair, it's going to be a pretty huge restoration to get that back to running order!

Given the date of the photo and the story, I'd suggest it most likely that it was contained within the inert clay capping; given the excavation dates, it can't have been in the municipal waste, i.e the rubbish tip proper.

No idea what happened to it: I'd imagine either scrapped or still in situ by the lineside.

Tom