Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by nine elms fan, Nov 4, 2012.
it would make sense. However, there was no provision for a signal box in the planning application.
I am not entirely certain that planning permission is needed for a signal box (though it would probably wind-up the county planners a fair bit if you didnt include it in the plans)
how would it work in practice though, would the section be Northiam to Junction rd., then another token needed Junction Rd to Robertsbridge ? and what when the box is switched out?
I'm assuming the same token will be needed to unlock the frame at Robertsbridge in order to operate the run round points. The only way I can see anything working is that the section is Northiam To Robertsbridge, and that the loop at Junction rd is operated by a flagman if its found that the level of demand means more than two trains running , then later a box can be added and the section split, it means that the level crossing could then possibly be operated from that box,
You couldn't do that. One block Northiam to Robertsbridge. If you need to use a loop at all, that would mean two trains in one section. Not happening, flagman or not. If you are going to put a loop in, it will have to be properly signalled and protected.
Quite right. There is a response on the RVR blog from RVR which states that the siding is not intended to form part of a passing loop. Currently KESR pass trains at Rolvenden, Wittersham Road and Northiam depending on the timetable. Longer term I suspect that trains will need to pass somewhere between Northiam and Robertsbridge but we will have to wait and see exactly where this is. My understanding is that the 'cabin' proposed for near the A21 is intended to monitor the new level crossings [including, I assume Junction Road].
There’s a passing loop at Glaisdale that is not signalled, other than with fixed distants and stop boards. The points aren’t even locked, only provided with switch detection and a points indicator. Drivers operate the token instruments. It works. There’s even a junction at Battersby which doesn’t have an associated signal box to control things. Things can be done in a minimalist way.
May be easier to signal Bodiam and build a second platform there and have the ability to pass trains there, plus if Bodiam becomes the most popular destination from Robertsbridge and some services may terminate there, or have the potential to be turned round to operate a shuttle, then that makes more sence than a loop at junction Rd.
Physically easier, yes, but planning permission is a no-no. Also, the KESR does not want to "spoil" Bodiam station, so a loop further west was always the intention.
The Festioiog Railway operates with only one signal box at Porthmadog most of the time and the train crew usually operate the crossing places.
In such instances practicality will win , and how much would it change the station , and I would imagine that operationally it makes better sence and be safer if you could pass trains with in a station,
As far as I am aware there is no intention to alter Bodiam. A passing loop between Bodiam and Robertsbridge is one of the proposals that I have heard about. Loop long enough to allow two trains in with the locos opposite each other and train staff to handle token exchange.
Can't see how planning would be a no-no as you wouldn't need it for a platform. That's not to say that Bodiam should be altered in such a way.
Is there a station platform planned to be built at the junction road site?
Do I recall rightly that there is a limit imposed of the amount of trains that can be run daily?
There are two updates on the blog at the www.rvr.org.uk website. There are lots of pictures of the work at Junction Road. The scrub has been cleared all the way to Austen's bridge.
Another update on the http://www.rvr.org.uk/ blog.
As I'm finding it almost impossible to actually post a comment on the blogsite, I'll ask the question here:
Does anyone know who actually owns Austens Bridge- is it the Highways England Historical Railways Estate, or the Ainslie family?
As it crosses the river Rother, who is responsible to ensure the abutments etc are kept in good order as some time I would expect the bridge structure will need maintaince. unless its been used as a means to access other fields I don't expect its had much work done to it, I saw avideo someone posted some time back, of Austin's Bridge, it was heavily overgrown, with mature trees growing round it.
The 31st Oct blog says:
Austens bridge is not in RVR ownership and we are at great pains to respect the owners privacy and restrict access from RVR to theirs, by trespassers, albeit often well meant.
Separate names with a comma.