Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

It was meant to be

 

While I agree that the carriages need to have protection from the North Devon weather now, it must also be remembered that this building will only be in position until Blackmoor becomes the operational centre of the project.

Like the locomotive shed, this is an operational necessity for now. The long-term plan that ENPA wish us to have is a station at Woody Bay, just as it was when the full railway was operating up to 1935.

So much of what we have built at Woody Bay will need to go at that time. But that said, a building the size of Pilton Yard is going to be in excess of 1 million pounds to buy and construct at Blackmoor.

While I do get annoyed at the cost of these things, we also need to take into account just how much money has been spent on rebuilding the carriages themselves. I think the average cost was about £200,000 per carriage, so in the long term, it is an investment.

 

I fear you are right, but take issue with the idea that because the cause of the overrun could have been identified, it should have been identified. The elision omits consideration of what that extra analysis would have cost, both financially and in terms of delaying work starting.

When there’s a hanging jury out there for the Trust leadership, fairness can go out of the window. In this case, there was a) tremendous mistrust of the board last spring and b) a firm belief that sheltering the carriages was urgent. If the additional analysis had caused delay, or had pushed the estimate up at that time, we all need to consider whether we would have accepted it at that time.

 

But - realistically - just how far ahead will it be before that happens? In the meantime the carriages need protection.
What if (say) back in the early 2000s it had been decided that a 'temporary' loco shed and workshop was not needed at WB as we would "soon be building at Blackmoor"?

 

Wow…this forum is flaky…this is the 7th time I’ve tried to post something without success

Much of what I wanted to say has now already been said or alluded to.

Surely it doesn’t cost much in time or money to do a visual inspection of the siding and dig some explanatory holes. It isn’t a running line after all, just a siding with a steel framed shed erected over it.

If a carriage restoration costs £200k, the organisation has invested a million quid in 5 carriages, which arguably are not currently needed given the current length of the running track. A delay in the restoration of one carriage would have funded the erection of the carriage shed plus exigency funding. The carriage protection should have been a forethought rather than an afterthought.

This is not to decry the wonderful work of the true craftsmen rebuilding the heritage carriages

 

My impression is that was the basic idea originally - put up a 'temporary' steel structure over an existing siding, which can be removed/relocated at a later date. It would appear to have morphed now - for one reason or another - into a wholesale clearance and reconstruction of the existing infrastructure. Hindsight would suggest that perhaps the project should have been approached in that way from the outset, but I can understand the desire to minimise the upfront cost. Whether the approach was flawed and/or the problem should have been anticipated and dealt with accordingly is outwith my knowledge of such matters.