Great Central Railway General Matters

And the line south of Rothley... simply because the fundraising efforts at that time didn't raise sufficient funds to buy it before BR's deadline.

 

If I recall correctly, it was because they didn't buy it. Any track you didn't pay BR for, they lifted

(Apologies, the forum didn't show me pmh's reply until I'd posted)

 

I recall that at the time the railway could only afford to purchase the single line from Loughborough to Rothley, as per the previous post BR lifted the second line and all track beyond Rothley. I remember reading a report that BR said that they wanted to re-use the track elsewhere and set a deadline for purchase. In the event the rails were cut into short lengths and taken away for scrap, it smacks of just being awkward as leaving the track in place until the purchase price was achieved wouldn’t have harmed them.

 

There are several published accounts of the efforts to buy the GCR line by what was the Main Line Preservation Group - which became the Main Line Steam Trust, and then the GCR (1976) PLC. At various times it was only due to the personal bank guarantees etc. by individuals such as James Tawse, Richard Willis and Bill Ford, that the line was able to be saved. The support of Charnwood Borough Council was also absolutely crucial.

 

They could not afford it

 

As a small correction (maybe you didn't mean it this way, but this is how it reads)... MLST did not 'become' the PLC - the two worked side-by-side for many years until the formation of the DCRT, and subsequent transfer of assets to DCRT and members to 'Friends'. Even then the MLST continued to exist for another couple of years before being eventually wound up (I think a change of rules around transfer of legacies in the event that a body has been wound up are what eventually allowed that to take place).

James Tawse deserves a special mention here as I understand he was personally paying BR (IIRC) £1100 'interest' monthly at one point in the 1970s just to allow the railway to continue. And I believe he eventually bankrupted himself... certainly he ran out of funds for restoration of Boscastle, which is why the owning syndicate was eventually formed in the 1980s before the (first) restoration could be completed.

 

Whoa! Bloody Hell that’s a serious case of someone prepared to put their head on the block for something they believe in.

 

pmh_74 is quite correct to highlight James Tawse, I believe he also purchased the GCR loco shed from RAF Langer (or from the scrapman concerned) and the two Mk1 coaches that made the first passenger carrying trains, as well as the significant financial contributions and guarantees.
I'm sorry that you read it as the MLST became the Plc, but it does say ".....Main Line Steam Trust, and the then (1976) GCR PLC."
Many people now do not realise how fraught the purchase of the early preservation schemes were..... at the time. It is fantastic that we have so many wonderful HRs these days.

 

£1100 would have a whole house back in those days!

 

No you wrote "then the" instead of "the then". Two little words which changed the whole meaning of the sentence!

 

Well the meaning of the sentence was that it was a fraught time financially with many people and organisations involved, principally MLST and GCR(1976)Plc on the railway's behalf. Sorry if that was unclear.

 

Are there any plans to build a signal box at Leicester North at some point?

 

As it is still the stated intention to double the track from Rothley to Leicester North then I think it is safe to assume there will be a need for a signal box. Especially if there is to be a museum there as well, which is still being looked at I believe.

 

Which one? I feel like I've read a few different plans that seem to have died from the cause of nothing happening over a long enough period or priorities elsewhere. I was reading why the old Belgrave & Birstall station was demolished and the plan seemed to involve some fancy grand terminus till the discovery of a water main.

 

Paul is quite correct in saying that there have been several plans made for Leicester north over the years but the water main is a huge factor ...as is where the money may come from! So we will just have to wait and see.

 

Do you still suffer from vandalism at Leicester north? I remember the “locals” making a hole in the wall of the booking office not long after it was built. The adjacent Beaumont Leys not being the most salubrious of areas.

 

When trains run round at Leicester North do the loco crew operate the ground frames or is it the responsibility of the station staff?

 

Whilst I couldn't say for definite as the wonderful station staff may have cleared anything up, I can't say I've noticed any obvious evidence of vandalism in the last couple of years.

Normally the responsibility of the guard, although the crews are qualified to do so.

 

I think the loco crew (fireman) operates the point at the South end of the station and the guard does the ground frame at the North end.

 

The RAIB have published their report in the Serious Injury to a Passenger Alighting from a Train at Loughborough Central Station. This incident caused concern amongst various heritage railway on the implications. The report is typically forensic in terms of events leading up to the incident and also provides some interesting learning points on risk assessment as well as recommendations.

It will be interesting to see how the ORR reacts to the investigation report in the context of the GCR specifically and wider heritage railway sector. They may say nothing, decide to take action against the GCR and or provide guidance to the sector on passenger alighting.

The summary of the report states:
"At 11:50 hrs on Saturday 14 January 2023, a passenger alighting from a train at Great Central Railway’s Loughborough Central station lost his footing and sustained a serious injury. The train had made a planned stop at platform 1. The door used by the passenger opened onto the platform end ramp, approximately 1.6 metres beyond the end of the level part of the platform.

The passenger, who was visually impaired, lost his footing and fell while alighting from the train because he was unable to safely negotiate the step down onto the platform end ramp.

This was because the level platform was only around two metres longer than the distance needed to safely accommodate all of the train’s doors, and the train’s brakes were not performing in a consistent, predictable manner. Measures implemented by the railway had not effectively controlled the risk of passengers using doors which were not adjacent to usable platforms.

RAIB identified two underlying factors, that Great Central Railway did not have effective processes for learning lessons from operational experience, and had no effective process to support the identification, management and monitoring of risk.

Recommendations
The report makes three recommendations. The first is addressed to Great Central Railway and relates to the assessment and control of risk, learning from previous events, and ensuring that the needs of disabled passengers are considered. The second recommendation, also addressed to Great Central Railway, relates to auditing and assurance of its risk management activities. The third recommendation is made to the Heritage Railway Association and relates to the provision of guidance on managing the risks around the passenger / train interface at heritage railway stations.

RAIB has identified two learning points. The first is a reminder of the importance of having a robust system to manage staff training and competence records. The second reminds duty holders of the importance of prompt accident reporting."