Bluebell track laying South from EG?

You give the impression that you are knowledgeable on this subject. Pick out the facts for us, please.

 

I've been following Mr P's blog and photos with interest,
http://www.philpot.me/cutting2.html
and have been logging on each day to see if there have been any updates. The fact is his site is the only one with a daily update wrt the dig, and whilst he might be raising questionable points which I might take with a pinch of salt, nevertheless they are valid and could readily be countered by those in the know from the Bluebell Railway. The problem is the lack of news and updates from the 'horses mouth' and hence the rumour and conjecture. A bit like PR recently...
Mr P is simply filling a void due to lack of information, and he himself acknowledges this.

Dave

 

And he does urge people to contribute. However I don't understand his argument that stopping work now would somehow help the situation - surely that would guarantee donations would dry up.

 

I would suggest that Sidmouth4me ,s comments put it far better than i ever could Mr Platelayer.

Kind regards
Chris:

 

I'm afraid the harsh fact is that Mr Philpot tells it like it is. Trust me, I live here and am able to go and visit the site (as is anyone; it's a 15 minute walk from the station) a couple of times a week, and his reports and photos are 100% accurate in that progress is painfully slow. There is just a heck of a lot of rubbish to clear and at the current rate I can't see it happening in any shape or form by April.

(for what it's worth my dream was fulfilled when I was able to ride over the viaduct last September; behind an ED too!)

 

No facts in that post, just opinion. What I'm trying to get (rather than having a pop at Philpot) is: what are the facts around the tip clearance?

 

The suggestion of stopping waste extraction is at best naive - all the material removed up until April 2012 will be done so at much reduced cost than after that time when the Landfill Tax increases.

Fair enough, there appears to be a lot more waste to remove than previously thought, possibly as a result of the cutting being enlarged with the spoil removed being used as the capping material. It could quite easily have been missed if no one knew about this methodology from when the tip was first opened. All the test bores would probably have been in the centre of the old formation i.e. the 'worse case scenario' under the assumption that the cutting was just filled in rather than enlarged and then filled in.

Yes, I would like more information as a BRPS member, but to suggest that the waste extraction should be stopped immediately is just plain wrong in my opinion.

Regards,

Dan

 

I'll ignore the childish comment, i think we're both grown up enough not to trade playground insults, and answer the point about me having first hand information.

No i dont, but it doesnt look 'Philpot' does either and thats the point - unlike him, im not throwing round accusations in what looks like an attempt to derail a multi-million pound project, give fright to those who have donated their hard earned cash and paint Bluebell management as incompetent based on little more than what he can see from a bridge several hundred yards away.

If i dont know enough to criticise his accusations, i dont see how you can think he knows enough to make them in the first place.

Chris

 

Chris; you and I both know it's a lot less than "several hundred yards away"

 

Looks somewhere in the region of 200yds to me, but hey im just going by what you can see from the bridge....

 

As Mr Philpot is, and a very good job he is doing too:

Yes some are giving their hard earned cash, but nothing out of the "they" department.

Regards
Chris:

 

I claim no knowledge of the detail, but the fact that Mr Philpott produces a daily log of the work and the railway doesn't, tells us nothing about the relative merits of their positions. The railway has employed professional experts to carry out the work, so we probably ought to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
My personal opinion is that the Bluebell has been very candid about the situation. It has made it clear that it may not be able to complete the work on the tip by April. It has made it clear that the long term aim is to get to E.Grinstead. Whatever it can get done in the next few months makes that task cheaper. That doesn't seem to be misleading.

 

I agree that while Robert philpot's opinions may or may not be accurate (and I don't share his views), his overall contribution to the project is positive and welcome, and without his photo journal many supporters, sympathisers and wellwishers would have very little indication of progress. I have just one observation to make - namely that it is clear from the operation of the excavators that the true waste (as opposed to the capping) is comparatively light for its volume - compared (for instance) to an equivalent volume of limestone ballast which the Falcon type wagons often carry. I know there are weight restrictions on the line north of East Grinstead but I reckon the actual weight being carried by an individual wagon is well within the imposed limits (50 tonnes?). It is also clear that the diggers are now able to load a train relatively quickly.
Putting these things together is there a case for replacing the Falcon wagons with a higher capacity - eg an MBA? Even if only loaded to 75% that would still increase the load per train with a very low increase in cost.

 

Ive noticed over the last week and a bit that there has been a GBRF train Class 66 + High sided bogie wagons stabled on the sidings next the former EWS Wilesden Intermodal Depot.

I assume these wagons are being used for the tip waste?

Great Western.

 

Tip trains have used low-sided wagons, as they are sufficient to carry the weight of waste allowed on the East Grinstead line - i also believe they are used on weekend engineering works, which frees them up for this during the week.

Chris

 

OK, some facts and maybe a bit of conjecture.

Firstly, the current Waste by Rail removed 14,567 tons (figures on Bluebell website) in 15 days, or 977 tons per day. This compares with the ambition to remove 14,800 tons in this phase (figure in Bluebell News). So pretty close to what was aimed for - the discrepancy I believe is because for the entire duration, one of the wagons had a flat spotted wheel, so the train was 19, not 20 wagons. That probably cost the project about 750 tons.

Now the conjecture: Robert Philpot is mostly taking his photos from one viewpoint, which tends to foreshortened everything. This is coupled with the fact that the current waste extraction is removing a layer of waste from along the surface of the tip, rather than removing the entire depth from a shorter length. The cross section is trapezoidal; that is, there is a greater volume high up in the tip than at its foot. So a given mass removed looks insignificant at the top, especially as the removal seems to be skimming off along a length (which isn't apparent in his photos, as they are foreshortened) rather than concentrating on removing waste at the trackbed level. So the amount of dent made in the tip looks small, but looks are deceptive.

it is also significant that there is approximately 3m depth of clay capping over the whole tip (compared with a depth of about 12m of the rubbish). However, the clay capping is at the widest point in the cross section of the cutting. So although it is only a small part of the depth, it is a major component of the volume of the cutting. I thing Robert Philpot is underestimating that fact; particularly his contention that the volume of rubbish to be removed is similar to that of the Ouse Viaduct is wildly wrong.

When all is said and done, 14,567 tons is 14,567 tons: it's irrelevant where it comes from, simply that it is gone. So the only point at issue - assuming the weighing of wagons is correct, which I have no reason to doubt - is whether the estimate of volume of rubbish to be removed is correct. If that estimate is correct, and every train removes give or take 1,000 tons, it is simple maths to calculate how many trains are needed - which is what the project has done. Frankly, I'd rather trust the project, with proper professional advice, to have calculated that volume correctly than trust a single person with a camera taking photos from one viewpoint. That said, Robert is providing a useful service by at least documenting what goes on each day.

Tom

 

It is very hard to see how this would help - in fact it would be a very damaging course of action.

These are the facts:

The railway is committed to 9 weeks more digging (4 weeks this year with the dates already set; and a planned 5 weeks next year). It has been stated that that is sufficient to build a single line cutting. Based on previous figures and what was said at the AGM that that would leave another 5 weeks digging to fully remove all the rubbish.

So contrary to what Robert says, that means the remaining waste is a known quantity: 9 weeks digging is 45,000 tons to dig a single-line cutting, or 70,000 tons to remove it all.

At current rates of £25 per ton, that means £1.12million to complete the minimum dig, or £1.75million to shift it all. Clearly, after April 1st 2012, those prices go up. So if we stopped now, as Robert suggests, that is tantamount to saying we are stopping for good, with all the implications of that course of action. If we stopped now and then picked up the project in, say, 2012, the costs would be £4.05million / £6.23million straight away, and going up by £8 per ton each year after that. So it is a no-brainer that if you are serious about clearing the tip, as much as possible has to be done this year, even at the risk that it leaves a half-finished job to be completed in 2012 or later.

It is also worth considering the finances if the railway isn't able to do the currently planned partial clearance, but in fact is forced to clear the whole tip. Figures of £8m - £10m have been bandied around, but that ignores the fact that already a large amount of waste has gone, and a lot more will be gone by next April. Those numbers seem to assume not the position the railway will actually be in, but rather where it would be had it not even started before April 1st 2012.

Let's assume that by the end of this financial year, 45,000 more tons are removed as planned. That leaves 25,000 still in situ to be cleared after April 2012.

The general consensus seems to be that this is about 50:50 recyclable and genuine watse. The waste will cost £89 per ton from next year. The recyclable seems to cost about £35 per ton IIRC. So that gives a cost to be found next year of £1.11 million for the waste and £437k for the recycling - about £1.55million in total. Which would be bad news, but not catastrophic - the railway seems to have been fund raising at about £100k per month this year, so would only take a bit more than a year's effort to clear. Clearly that scenario is not ideal, but it is a damn sight better than just stopping completely now with 70,000 tons still left at a cost of at least £5million.

Tom

 

you'll do it Im sure. Full marks for taking on such a project.

ABout time I visited again, its been many years since I was that way

 

Thank you for this detailed analysis of the situation.

 

I have now heard the reason why there was a change of plan over the bank on which Robert was planning to plant seeds: the dumper truck was getting punctures from running over the rubbish, so it was sensible (and very cost effective) to run it along the soil at the top instead. That's the way of these things. You have to be flexible.

So that answers one of Robert's questions.

Other things in his blog are, however, just factually incorrect.

"...it is absolutely clear that progress is going much slower than anticipated"
We anticipated removing 15,0000 tonnes in WBR3, and have removed 14,567. Hardly "much slower than anticipated".

" and there appears to be no way that the cutting can be cleared, even to half the width, in the previously announced time of another 7 weeks, that’s just 35 trains."
What previously announced "7 weeks"? 2 Weeks in August, 3 weeks in September and another 4 in January-March was what was announced most recently. That's 9. The exact number of trains is not suprisingly an unknown quantity until we get closer to completion. But I'd trust the Railway's professional advisors estimates of material remaining to be dug out more than I'd trust Robert's.

" the trucks that costs more than £1000 each a day to cart away "
The trucks taking away clay capping/soil cost us nothing. We actually, I gather, have been making a very small amount of profit on the material shipped out by road.

Regards,
Richard