Great Western Coffee Shop

Sideshoots - associated subjects => Campaigns for new and improved services => Topic started by: grahame on July 10, 2016, 07:34:12



Title: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on July 10, 2016, 07:34:12
http://www.mineheadraillink.org.uk

Quote
Minehead Chamber of Commerce & Minehead Rail Link Group

Ever since British Rail closed the Taunton - Minehead line, the people of West Somerset have been asking for a through train service to Taunton and beyond to run alongside the steam trains that run between Minehead and Bishops Lydeard. Sadly this hasn’t happened and at the moment there are practical reasons why the steam trains cannot regularly run through to Taunton; the main one being that WSR trains are not authorised to travel over Network Rail tracks.

However it is possible for some of Great Western Railway’s existing hourly Cardiff - Taunton trains to continue on to Minehead, giving the people of West Somerset a regular service to Taunton, Bridgwater, Bristol and Cardiff. The infrastructure is complete and maintained to the highest standard and there is capacity on the W.S.R. to accommodate the extra trains.

Obviously, before this can be done the W.S.R., local authorities, Great Western, Network Rail and Government agencies need to get together and work out a package that is viable and most beneficial to the people and businesses of West Somerset and Taunton. Fortunately with the electrification of much of the Great Western network underway, additional diesel trains will become available, however several other factors including timetabling, staffing, marketing, operational matters, financial and practical support from Government and other agencies all need to be addressed and this takes time and energy.

The Minehead Rail link Group was set up by Minehead Chamber of Commerce to find ways of realising these aspirations and to encourage those involved to work together to give West Somerset the rail service it has long been asking for.

Continues ...


At yesterday's RailFuture meeting at Yatton, this was on the agenda with a presentation by Alex de Mendoza and David Latimer, and to hear of a serious effort being made (with some positive results) in getting the operational and business cases analysed.  There are parallels to draw looking back to the very start of this decade to the TransWilts - at the point that it moved from campaigning to putting all the jigsaw pieces into place.  Whether the pieces all fit for the Taunton to Minehead line is an interesting question; my personal thought is that there's a high probability that they should / could.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: John R on July 10, 2016, 07:54:35
I'm intrigued by the comment that the speed limit has been increased above 25mph on heritage lines elsewhere. I can't think of any where it has been increased for passenger services.

But other than that, a very positive move, and I hope it is successful.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on July 10, 2016, 08:32:05
I'm intrigued by the comment that the speed limit has been increased above 25mph on heritage lines elsewhere. I can't think of any where it has been increased for passenger services.

But other than that, a very positive move, and I hope it is successful.

Great Central?   From Wikipedia:

Quote
Her Majesty's Rail Inspectorate has granted powers to run private test trains at up to 60 mph. Other special trains at public events run at up to 45 miles per hour (72.4 km/h). Typically UK heritage railways are limited to a maximum speed of 25 miles per hour (40.2 km/h).

And I think those 45 m.p.h. trains are public, passenger carrying. 

On the West Somerset, 25 to 45 m.p.h. would make an enormous difference; not sure how much going up to 60 m.p.h. would add as it's not exactly straight!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on July 10, 2016, 14:43:45
Speed is probably the limiting factor, but I hope it doesn't defeat the idea. Even a very limited through service, such as two trains daily, timed at weekends to match Butlins' kicking out times, would be a great asset.

The one-third of Butlins inmates who come from South Wales would probably be better served by a ferry. I read that a through service will benefit those with children and bulky luggage. Presumably, the same goes for those with luggage and bulky children?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Chris125 on July 16, 2016, 19:56:12
And I think those 45 m.p.h. trains are public, passenger carrying. 

I believe that refers to the demonstration mail trains, no passenger carrying services operate above 25mph on the GCR and I'm not aware of any plans to change that.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Puffing Billy on July 17, 2016, 18:52:00
On the West Somerset, 25 to 45 m.p.h. would make an enormous difference; not sure how much going up to 60 m.p.h. would add as it's not exactly straight!

Would it really? I suspect that the limiting factors just as much as the track geometry are the signalling system (as far as I know the remaining distant signals are all "fixed") and the presence of several unbarriered (at least one without even warning lights) public road crossings. An "express" train would also need either a clear run, or timing to coincide with an opposite "express"; otherwise it would just end up waiting at the end of the single-track sections.

A regular year-round service would not be possible unless GWR/Network Rail between them organise (or pay WSR for) the manning of the signal boxes at the time they would normally be closed, and undertake overnight track maintenance to replace the current out-of-season maintenance. Therefore any regular through trains would be limited to the summer season, and here the suggestion that spare capacity can be guaranteed is very questionable. On any of the "gala" weekends the line is operated at , or very close to, maximum capacity, and on other weekends any spare paths are regularly taken up by visiting charters. Away from weekends there are often stock/training/maintenance trains to fit in.

I believe that Mr Mendoza and others in his group should be concentrating solely on the one aim that seems to me to have a realistic chance of success, which is the extension of some Taunton-bound trains to Bishops Lydeard, possibly to an independent GWR platform. Transfer from there to a WSR service would hardly be onerous, and once this aspiration is realised, then by all means start pursuing grander plans.

A Bishops Lydeard service could also, at different hours, serve a completely different market, namely as a park-and-ride for West Somerset commuters to Bristol and beyond.

At the same time (apologies for straying into "bus" territory, but relevant to this subject, particularly as the bus belong to First Group), we really do need buses that are adequate for holidaymakers. Struggling past the suitcases and pushchairs on a summer Friday-afternoon Minehead-bound bus is a bit of a nightmare. And can not at least some of the services be scheduled to miss out the lengthy detours to Lydeard and Watchet? Perhaps someone who cares to step into the shoes of the late-unlamented Webber Buses could offer such an "express" service?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 17, 2016, 19:46:12
Thanks for posting those thought-provoking comments and suggestions, Puffing Billy.  :)

For the benefit of our readers, there is a previous topic on the Coffee Shop forum which contains a lot of background information relating to the West Somerset Railway, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=2688.0 


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 18, 2016, 00:26:51
Having refreshed my memory of what has been discussed before (see my previous post), may I offer the following comments and suggestions?

If I were running a business in Minehead, I would much prefer a rail service that brought people direct to me by train from Taunton, from morning commuter time through to early evening.

If I were a home owner in Minehead, I would welcome the 15% increase in property value resulting from a decently served local railway station.

If I were a resident of Minehead, I would welcome the work, business and pleasure opportunities provided by a decent local railway service, offering through links to the national rail network.

If I ran a heritage railway, I would welcome it running to a vibrant seaside resort, rather than to an inaccessible and relatively rundown backwater.  At present, I have to drive down the M5 from Nailsea and then turn off at Taunton onto the A39 to Bishops Lydeard to have any realistic expectation of enjoying a worthwhile amount of quality time in my day out on the West Somerset Railway.

A decent local rail service isn't one that requires a change, 4 miles short of the county town, with a first service getting there just before midday, and the last leaving just before 4 pm, with no service at all off season.  ::)

May I offer a comparison with the situation on the Portishead Branch line, where local businesses and residents are fairly crying out for the line to be reopened.  Or indeed the various branch lines in Devon and Cornwall, which have seen spectacular success, in terms of passenger numbers and the associated boosts to their local economies.

Yes, there are logistical and therefore cost implications in such proposals for Minehead, but please let's take a more positive approach and try to achieve them!  ;D



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on July 18, 2016, 05:06:50

If I were running a business in Minehead, I would much prefer a rail service that brought people direct to me by train from Taunton, from morning commuter time through to early evening.

If I were a home owner in Minehead, I would welcome the 15% increase in property value resulting from a decently served local railway station.

If I were a resident of Minehead, I would welcome the work, business and pleasure opportunities provided by a decent local railway service, offering through links to the national rail network.

If I ran a heritage railway, I would welcome it running to a vibrant seaside resort, rather than to an inaccessible and relatively rundown backwater.  At present, I have to drive down the M5 from Nailsea and then turn off at Taunton onto the A39 to Bishops Lydeard to have any realistic expectation of enjoying a worthwhile amount of quality time in my day out on the West Somerset Railway.

The Minehead line was a very late closure and along with some other lines (Oxford - Cambridge and Edinburgh - Carlisle via Hawick come to mind) is one of a group that seem to offer very real prospects of being a huge success  if they were to carry regular passenger traffic again - and by "regular passenger traffic" I mean people who's primary reason for being there is to get from one place to another along the way.  i.e. primary use being to get from "A" to "B" and not for the journey itself.

When we were looking at options for our own line - a service enhancement rather than a new service - we could have batted for something less than we have - i.e. what fitted with current stock and services.  We concluded that would have been unlikely to work and that we needed true peak commuter services to form the backbone.  Without a fully worked case - which the Minehead Chamber of Commerce based group now plans - I don't know how much of a parallel there is, but I would make an educated guess that this may not be the time to be timid, and to fulfill what the town's said to be crying out for there's need for a boldness beyond the minimum which whilst it might generate other traffic and uses wouldn't fulfil the town's / Chamber's stated goals.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on July 18, 2016, 14:15:18
As Operating Superintendent and for a while General Manager of the WSR from early in 1976 through to the winter of 1979 I had a hand in the re-opening of the line after 5+ years of closure.  Our intention was the re-opening of the line right into Taunton with a year-round service provided by DMUs, with income supplemented by the summer steam tourist trains.  The high price demanded by BR for the Running Powers Agreement for the couple of miles from MP 165 1/4 into the Bay Platform on the Up side at Taunton (along the former Up Relief line) plus the difficulty with the Western National bus drivers who were represented by the NUR for historic reasons and who saw the WSR as a threat to their members, made the attainment of the objective impossible for a cash-strapped company.  The situation was made worse when Somerset County Council withdrew their loan offer, once it was realised that the Taunton service would not be starting any time soon.

The 1975 Light Railway (Transfer) Order authorised the running of loco-hauled trains at 25 mph and DMU trains (subject to maintenance and inspection being done by approved people [ie BR]) to be run at up to 40 mph.  The AOCL and Open Crossing where laid out for 40 mph with speed restrictions across them varying between 5 mph and 25 mph according to the circumstances at each of them.

The speed limit for the whole branch in BR days was 55 mph.  The general condition of the trackwork is now far better than it was in BR days, I'd say.  But the curvy bits are still very much a limiting factor for speed.

My motivation was to show that my former employers BR(WR) Bristol Division (whom I had come to loathe for their short-sightedness in chopping out as much infrastructure as they possibly could) had been wrong in closing the line in the first place.  We started a year-round service over the sections of line that were re-opened, reaching Bishops Lydeard from Minehead by summer of 1979.  The Saturday DMU trains which connected with our own bus link running between Bishops Lydeard and Taunton BR Station were very well used, and showed what could be done.

The railway is now in the hands of a large group of supporters, who have given very freely of their time to turn it into a major tourist attraction.  I do not think many of them would support the loss of the "heritage" side of the railway to make way for a public service.  If the line had stayed in BR hands, I guess it would now look something like the Newquay line - pared right back to minimal track, maybe a passing loop at Williton, and a single track terminus.

As internal politicking and money shortages plus the problems I've already referred to took their toll, I became very demoralised about the whole project and my career went in very different directions. 


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on July 29, 2017, 15:06:18
From This is the West Country (http://www.thisisthewestcountry.co.uk/news/somerset_news/15435442._/)

Quote
A STUDY to find out whether regular train services between Minehead and Taunton are viable would be too expensive to carry out, Somerset County Council has said.

[snip]

An SCC spokesman said: “Somerset County Council recognises the effort the Minehead Rail Link Group is putting behind their goal to see non-heritage rail services running between Minehead and Taunton.”

The council said it is always supportive of organisations seeking to expand transport choices but does not currently have enough information to know whether such a service is feasible.

The spokesman added: “To answer [these] questions detailed studies would have to be undertaken which would cost tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of pounds.

“Given the current pressures on local government funding, SCC does not have the resources available to undertake this detailed work.

“We will keep the situation under review and continue looking for funding opportunities which may enable the detailed work required to take place in the future.”


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on July 30, 2017, 18:48:48
As a fairly local resident I would certainly support a regular through train service from Minehead to Taunton.

The bus 28 service is not just poor but is getting worse. Considerable housing development is underway in the general area, in the near term this adds to road congestion due to deliveries of building materials and utility works, in the longer term the cars driven by the occupants of all these new homes will add permanently to congestion.
There is of course no question of providing public transport to serve the new developments, so everyone will drive.

The most recent change to bus services has been the withdrawal of the 18 bus, that also ran between Minehead and Taunton but via a different and quicker route, and also served the hospital.

Through trains would help a lot. In reply to the usual cries that it will cost too much, I would observe that the TPTB seem able to find money for road schemes, but not for rail.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on July 30, 2017, 19:43:55
Perhaps The Powers That Be could be included in the LOA. (Sorry - List Of Abbreviations).


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: onthecushions on July 30, 2017, 21:52:00
There's another abbreviation relevant - HotSW - Heart of the South West LEP, the quango that governs a lot of government economic spending, including transport in Devon and Somerset.

If a group sensibly wants to get trains running from Taunton to Minehead then this is the body it must win over. They are hard nosed and would have to be convinced of the transport, economic and tourism gains as well as modest cost (i.e not NR) but may be more reasonable than a County Council Roads Dept.

The obvious link along the mostly vacant track-bed of the former up relief (or is it slow) line to Taunton's  NW bay (ex platform eight), avoiding main line conflict, has been discussed over time, without result. The example of Eridge and the Spa Valley line comes to mind.

Whether the heritage line would entirely welcome the cost and bother of an ORR supervised interval service 24/7 is debatable. Perhaps if it had independent control of the entire route/service - and suitable rolling stock - it might be different.

Good luck to them all,

OTC


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on July 30, 2017, 23:42:21
I have now been given permission by TPTB* to make amendments to the Acronyms/Abbreviations page, and as I agree with you, HotSW has been added, along with, of course, TPTB.

Our very own West of England LEP is not my favourite Quasi-Autonomous Non-Governmental Organisation (blast - I logged out of the A/A list before I realised that wasn't in there!) having started, albeit in its former guise, with the chance of a state-of-the-art tram system for Bristol and beyond, to rival Manchester, Birmingham, Blackpool, and Seaton, but delivering state-of-the-ark MetroBust, to rival Caracas, Harare, and Kabul. I know, though, that they should not all be tarred with the same brush.

It seems that the composition of the unelectable unaccountable oligarchy, other than the obligatory political appointments, is a major factor in deciding road or rail as the prime subject on the agenda. It is true that the government of the day's attitude is crucial too, but the LEP should be business, academe, and local government singing with one voice from one hymn sheet for local infrastructure projects. I believe HotSW does this better than the somewhat appropriately abbreviated WoE, where the Bristol LEPers, who bear the strong offender's cross* in the form of the traffic influx, are heavily outvoted by the others.

Always remember, though, that it takes two to QUANGO.

*Spot the link? I'm sure Red Squirrel will, and probably bnm too.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 30, 2017, 23:50:15
Thank you, Sir Humphrey Appleby.  ;)



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on July 31, 2017, 00:06:02
Thank you, Sir Humphrey Appleby.  ;)
Ret'd, my dear fellow!


Title: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 07, 2018, 07:59:50
Minehead Rail Link Group meeting

Early diary notice ... "The meeting is at 7pm on 30th October 2018 at the Old Hospital." - I expect full details at http://www.mineheadraillinkgroup.org.uk and / or on social media in the next week or so.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 07, 2018, 13:01:22
Sounds a good idea.
Looks as though through trains from Minehead to the national network are back on the agenda. High time too !



Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on October 07, 2018, 17:44:12
I've always said the first target should be to extend the existing services to an Upside bay platform at Taunton.  The old Up Relief line formation is still free of obstruction, except for a signalling cable route and a few equipment cases that would need moving.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 07, 2018, 20:24:24
The up bay at the country end of Taunton station can't accommodate a steam/diesel loco and any more than two carriages if there is to be a run round loop. Otherwise it's WSR's heritage DMU only. Is that an attractive enough proposal to extend the WSR into Taunton?

I think WSR would do better to explore developing a station and transport hub at Norton Fitzwarren, utilising the land they have there around the rail triangle. With an extension of Great Western Way to this new station site.



Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Andy on October 07, 2018, 21:51:11

"West Somerset's under utilized railway line could provide a new route for all it's residents to reconnect with the modern economy."

Apostrophe abuse notwithstanding, I'm glad to read that this aspiration hasn't been abandoned. There are various options to explore:

A summer weekend service à la Okehampton.
A summer through trains service à la Newquay.
A limited Minehead-Taunton commuters/shoppers/day-trippers service in addition to heritage operations
A Bishop's Lydeard-Taunton shuttle connecting with WSR services.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 08, 2018, 13:15:58
The up bay at the country end of Taunton station can't accommodate a steam/diesel loco and any more than two carriages if there is to be a run round loop. Otherwise it's WSR's heritage DMU only. Is that an attractive enough proposal to extend the WSR into Taunton?

I think WSR would do better to explore developing a station and transport hub at Norton Fitzwarren, utilising the land they have there around the rail triangle. With an extension of Great Western Way to this new station site.



Not certain that I agree with the Norton Fitzwarren idea. This would still entail a change from rail onto a bus, or more likely into private cars. What should IMO be encouraged is use of rail throughout by provision of through trains to Taunton and further afield.
I also suspect that considerable local opposition would exist to this. When the WSR purchased and developed the Norton fitzwarren site there was a certain amount of opposition to "building an industrial site on greenfield land" and also concerns were voiced about the amount of extra traffic feared to result.
These concerns were addressed by reassurances that the Norton site was to be primarily accessed by RAIL with very limited parking and therefore little extra road traffic. "public train services will continue to operate between Minehead and Bishops Lydeard, with the Norton site being primarily for through trains to network rail, for stabling trains, and for turning via the triangle"
Turning the Norton site into a "transport hub" AKA a car park and bus stop, and road expansion to serve this car park transport hub would be strongly opposed.

It will be bad enough with "fire breathing, spark snorting iron monsters roaming the countryside at will ! crops will be destroyed by fire, horses be frightened before becoming extinct, the hovels of the poor be tumbled down, hens will stop laying, cows dry up, and the district be covered in smoke, dirt and misery"


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 08, 2018, 13:58:19
This should be an interesting evening.   There is clearly not (yet?) any unanimousity between all the various ideas - and as such the "leave is as it is" elements are well placed to get support from all sorts of governmental quarters, and all the more so because "as it is" requires no public funding.    Sadly, "as it is" only does a proportion of what it might do for the town of Minehead, its residents and visitors, compared to what a corridor able to support a wonderful heritage line and a realistic service for the wider use of the area could do.  That latter would most likely need 'near provision' financial support, but the benefits brought to the wider economy of West Somerset should well outstrip that near provision.  That is a set of general thoughts which are not getting into practicality / impracticality arguments.



I have seen many suggestions that all-rail services to Minehead might be provided by extending the Cardiff - Taunton service on to Norton Fitzwarren, to Bishops Lydeard, or all the way to Minhead.  With changes at Norton Fitzwarren or Bishops Lydeard in the first two cases.   I find myself suspecting that's due to the convenient service from Cardiff terminating at Taunton from the east and so it become natural for it to go through to the west ... but would Minehead passengers really come from Bridgwater, Weston, and intermediate stations?  Perhaps the train would be an everyone off - everyone on at Taunton, and what a pity if they have another change at Norton Fitzwarren!

Logic follows that serious thought be given (but the option may later be ruled out) to running from the bay to the north west of the station.  I'm aware of the paradox of me putting forward that option when I'm so keen to link Swindon - Westbury to Westbury - Warminster and beyond, but as a wild guess traffic to Minehead would originate from Taunton itself, from London line services, and from Cross Country services - Bristol and beyond - way in excess of through journeys on the Cardiff stopper.





Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 08, 2018, 16:43:22
IMHO, an ideal service would be a regular service between Minehead and Taunton, with some services to/from more distant places
Something like
07-00 Minehead to London
08-30 Minehead to Bristol
10-00 Minehead to Cardiff
11-30 Minehead to Taunton
13-00 Minehead to London
14-30 Minehead to Bristol
16-00 Minehead to Taunton
17-30 Minehead to Cardiff
19-00  Minehead to Taunton

With a similar service in the other direction.
Trains running beyond Taunton would have to be something modern but not too expensive. Voyagers or HSTs seem possibilities. IETs seem unlikely due to clearance issues and the great costs.
Hopefully TPTB will allow heritage traction for the Taunton trains, this needs to be something cheap and easy to run but reliable and operable from either end without running a loco around. A heritage DMU or a few coaches with a small loco (class 20 ?) at each end might be reasonable.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 08, 2018, 17:58:41
The up bay at the country end of Taunton station can't accommodate a steam/diesel loco and any more than two carriages if there is to be a run round loop. Otherwise it's WSR's heritage DMU only. Is that an attractive enough proposal to extend the WSR into Taunton?

I think WSR would do better to explore developing a station and transport hub at Norton Fitzwarren, utilising the land they have there around the rail triangle. With an extension of Great Western Way to this new station site.

Not certain that I agree with the Norton Fitzwarren idea. This would still entail a change from rail onto a bus, or more likely into private cars.

My idea for a transport hub would include reinstating a Norton Fitzwarren national rail station. Not only do you have connections to the WSR, but you provide a station to a growing area of west Taunton. Interchange there for WSR rather than Taunton where capacity would be constrained.

Dismissing out of hand vehicular access to such a site fails to understand the realities of transport use.

None of that precludes direct specials and/or high season through trains.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 09, 2018, 11:52:32
Car parking provision is indeed needed at railway stations in general.
However consider Norton Fitzwaren in particular I would be opposed to car parking. Providing same would be seen as a significant betrayal by the local community who were reassured that the Norton site would not add to parking or traffic.

Many locals feared that the Norton site would be the "thin end of the wedge" and a precursor to "out of town shopping, new housing estates, and car parks"

Those who wish to drive to the station could reasonably use Taunton.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on October 09, 2018, 16:05:58
In 1976, I left BR and became involved on a professional basis in the re-opening of the WSR in stages from Minehead.  Firstly to Blue Anchor, then Williton, in 1976.  Then to Stogumber in 1978.  And Bishops Lydeard in 1979.  The intention was at that time to run an all-year public transport service, using a Running Powers Agreement over the former Up Relief line into the Up Bay Platform at Taunton.  It was intended that this service would be provided with DMUs.  There was provision for loco-hauled stock to travel from the branch into Taunton, and a run-round loop would have been provided between what had been Taunton West Junction and Taunton West Station.  All stock running over the BR part of the line would have had to have been maintained, inspected and approved by BR, as would all staff.  Which is why we operated to the BR Rule Book in those days, and crews were passed-out by BR Traction Inspectors.

The Light Railway Order gave permission for a line speed of 40 mph for DMU trains, subject to the same inspection and maintenance provisions as for running on BR.  As we automated the level crossings, they were laid out with the higher line speed in mind (although the crossings themselves had various lower speed restrictions over them)

The (what we then called) "tourist" steam trains were envisaged to run only over part of the line - probably Norton Fitzwarren to Bishops Lydeard only - and would provide sufficient revenue (the directors reckoned) to subsidise the all-year DMU service.

It's well known that the intervention of the NUR on behalf of their bus driver members, and a craven attitude towards this by BR, were causes for the Taunton service not to materialise back then.  Active discouragement towards the new enterprise came from BR(WR) Bristol divisional management, who did not, in my opinion, wish to see a line they had closed on loss-making grounds turn into a financial success.  The costs required for the Running Powers Agreement were escalated in Saturn V rocket style at each meeting.  Eventually, the WSR had to throw-in the towel.  There was no negotiation with these people.

Whether the provisions of the original LRO still have full effect, or not, I can see that it would be problematic for today's WSR to operate public trainsport sevices interspersed with 25 mph steam trains.  The single line sections operate at full capacity already during daytimes in the summer months.  So investment in infrastructure (particularly for crossing loops where they used to exist at Leigh Wood and at Kentsford, and possible re-doubling between Dunster and Minehead) to improve capacity would be a minimum requirement.  And then the line would have to be staffed.  If the present heritage style signalling were retained, this would mean an absolute minimum of four signalboxes, open two shifts.  And crews for these public transport service trains would have to be found.

All these things are possible.  My question is: "where's the money coming from".  I don't imagine the present day WSR plc has any ability, let alone desire, to fund this idea.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 09, 2018, 16:30:22
Thanks for the interesting first hand insight.
Re-doubling between Minehead and Dunster looks, IMHO more achievable than some of the other upgrades.

It seems to me some that at least of the trains between Minehead and Taunton should be operated by heritage stock, in order that the same train can serve both the heritage market AND those seeking a public transport link.
A preserved DMU would serve in the off season, with steam warranted in the summer season.

HSTs should also be considered as they ARE borderline heritage.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 09, 2018, 17:22:13
In 1976, I left BR and became involved on a professional basis in the re-opening of the WSR in stages from Minehead.  ...


... All these things are possible.  My question is: "where's the money coming from".  I don't imagine the present day WSR plc has any ability, let alone desire, to fund this idea.

That is a fantastically useful summary and look to where we stand.  Thank you.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 09, 2018, 20:32:44
Thanks for the interesting first hand insight.
Re-doubling between Minehead and Dunster looks, IMHO more achievable than some of the other upgrades.

It seems to me some that at least of the trains between Minehead and Taunton should be operated by heritage stock, in order that the same train can serve both the heritage market AND those seeking a public transport link.
A preserved DMU would serve in the off season, with steam warranted in the summer season.

HSTs should also be considered as they ARE borderline heritage.

How do you run a regular summer season steam service into and out of Taunton station? The west facing bay on the up side isn't long enough for a run round loop for a train with more than two carriages. Nor is there the land to widen and extend the bay for a longer run round. Do you instead run the steam services into a through platform and run round there? I don't think Network Rail would ever countenance tying up the main lines and platforms for such movements. Nor would they pay for the associated track and signalling work.

You are realistically only ever going to have room and operational flexibility for a DMU into and out of Taunton. WSR have rolling stock for just one 3/4 car heritage DMU. That would, at best, only manage two round trips per day based on current speed limits and staffing levels.

However you look at it, running heritage services into and out of Taunton requires a lot of work, and a lot of cost. For what return? Additional revenue from a couple through trains per day, limited in passenger capacity due to infrastructure constraints, is very unlikely to cover capital and operational costs. WSR would baulk at the access charges and penalty payments when there are train failures.

Organic growth at WSR's Norton Fitzwarren site, coupled with a concerted campaign for a west Taunton mainline Station close by, which would serve a large and growing catchment, and with a 'Parkway' style transport interchange for car, bus and bike would, I believe, be better all round.

Housing development in that area will continue, plans for more housing in Norton Fitzwarren and Bishops Hull/Silk Mills are in the pipeline. Providing those residents (and those living in Staplegrove, Galmington, Comeytrowe and further afield to Milverton and Wiveliscombe) with an alternative to driving into Taunton for rail access would surely be beneficial. Traffic from west of Taunton into the Station Road area is already bad.

Far better than misty-eyed plans to see a regular steam train service at Taunton again. That ship has sailed train has long since departed. Running a couple of steam trains/heritage DMUs a day, and occasional specials from further afield, does nothing for local transport needs. All it does is offer the rose tinted spectacle brigade a bit more track bashing mileage.

It's worth noting that West Somerset Railway themselves are not actively persuing extending into Taunton. Nor are they, at this time, affiliated with or supporting the Minehead Rail Link Group.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on October 10, 2018, 09:05:51

How do you run a regular summer season steam service into and out of Taunton station? The west facing bay on the up side isn't long enough for a run round loop for a train with more than two carriages. Nor is there the land to widen and extend the bay for a longer run round. Do you instead run the steam services into a through platform and run round there? I don't think Network Rail would ever countenance tying up the main lines and platforms for such movements. Nor would they pay for the associated track and signalling work.

I'm not aware of the land available at the present-day Taunton Station.  But back in the day when I was involved there was sufficient land to provide a run-round at the site of the old carriage sidings which ran alongside the former Up Relief line.  There was no intention to run regular steam trains onto BR tracks, but it was believed the facility would have been useful.  The maintenance and inspection clauses in the proposed Running Powers Agreement killed any real prospect of anything other than DMUs running along the two miles or so from Norton Fitzwarren into Taunton Station.

All a bit hypothetical now, anyway.  There's no money available - WSR plc and Somerset County Council are not known for being flush with cash.

I'm afraid that the dreams of starry-eyed twenty something me are not about to turn into reality


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 10, 2018, 19:36:14
Somerset County Council would find it far easier to fund my idea at Norton Fitzwarren. Development levies and govt. grants for transport infrastructure could be gotten. Possibly. Or pigs might fly...

But who knows? Taunton could have a Parkway station linked to a heritage line. Wouldn't that be attractive?!


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 11, 2018, 22:58:13
Somerset County Council would find it far easier to fund my idea at Norton Fitzwarren. Development levies and govt. grants for transport infrastructure could be gotten. Possibly. Or pigs might fly...

But who knows? Taunton could have a Parkway station linked to a heritage line. Wouldn't that be attractive?!

I largely agree, but remain concerned at the NIMBY factor around Norton Fitwarren. The obsession about house prices seems particularly strong in that area.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on October 12, 2018, 16:59:08
...the NIMBY factor...

Intrigued by that. Generally one would expect plans for a new railway station to drive house prices upwards...


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 14, 2018, 04:42:11
To throw more spanners into the works of running into Taunton on a dedicated line...

The railway was once four track from Norton Fitzwarren to Taunton. From north to south they were Up Relief, Up Main, Down Main, Down Relief. When the area was resignalled by BR in the 1980s the Up Relief was removed. Today there are three lines between Norton Fitzwarren Junction and just west of Taunton Station. Again north to south, Up Main, Down Main and a bidirectional Down/Up Relief.

To give WSR access to Taunton's defunct west facing bay on the up side just means relaying the Up Relief for their dedicated use, yes? Sadly not. When BR resignalled the area and removed the Up Relief, they also slewed and spread the main lines. The Up Main now middles the formation where there was once Up Relief and Up Main. Oh, and the signalling cable runs are in the remaining space between Up Main and the north side boundary.

Yes the tracks could probably* be slewed back to reintroduce four lines. At what price and at what disruption though? WSR couldn't afford to pay for it. Network Rail and national rail TOCs would baulk at the disruption. And for what benefit? A few heritage DMU services into and out of Taunton per day, and only on WSR operational days.

   *I've said "probably" above because there is doubt that there's even
     room for a reinstated fourth track under the modern Silk Mills road
     bridge. Said bridge replaced Silk Mills level crossing in 2005.

All that realistically just leaves having WSR services cross over the Up and Down Main to the Down/Up Relief at Norton Fitzwarren Junction. Then running into the west facing bay on the down side of Taunton Station. There's more space here for a dedicated WSR station, along with a release head shunt and run round loop. There would also have been the possibility of seperate access to potential WSR facilities from the Inner Relief Road. Unfortunately the derelict railway land on the down side at the west end of the station is now earmarked for housing development. It may already have been sold by Network Rail.

This option has its problems too though. It means Network Rail giving up the west facing down bay, along with any potential national rail passenger use of it in the future. It means having heritage trains regularly crossing the main lines at Norton Fitzwarren Junction. And it also means said trains would have to be operated by Network Rail accredited staff across said junction and along the Down/Up Relief. That means WSR either paying to train their staff to run on NR metals or hiring pilots. WSR would also have to pay track access charges and sign contracts covering delay compensation. Imagine a WSR kettle failing as it crossed the main lines.

A few summer special heritage services from the national network to Minehead is fine. Running national network DMUs onto the WSR, in the same vein as SWR/Swanage Railway did this summer, is also fine.

But if you want regular interchange between WSR and the national network, then that would be done best at a new Norton Fitzwarren national rail station, linked to expanded WSR facilities on their land there. There are too many problems, some insurmountable, to do such interchange at Taunton.

Or Network Rail could buy out WSR (and its landlords Somerset County Council) and reinstate regular scheduled national rail passenger services to Minehead. That means shutting down, or drastically reducing, the heritage operation. Interworking both on a 23 mile single line would be fraught with problems.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 14, 2018, 07:45:14
To throw more spanners into the works of running into Taunton on a dedicated line...

Thank you for those spanners ...

To the mind of a none-resident it seems insane that some of the changes happened in such a way that passive provision or protection of resources didn't happen.   How long was the interval between the BR line closing and the very first service under a preservation / heritage banner?   About five years I believe, and much of that time would have been spent with significant local activity getting ducks in a row - it wasn't a question of closing in 1971 the waving a wand in March 1976!

However - the 1970s were a different age.   


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 14, 2018, 08:41:43
Passive provision to reinstate a four track railway from Cogload Junction to Norton Fitzwarren Junction may have been in the back of the minds of some at BR.

What wouldn't have entered their minds though would have been making that passive provision for the future aspirations of a private heritage railway.

The 1970s were indeed a different country in this regard. There was strong transport union opposition to the nascent West Somerset Railway. Western National busmen in the area were, at the time, in the National Union of Railwaymen (NUR), alongside their British Rail Western Region brothers. An accident of history going back to the days of Great Western Railway bus services. These heavily unionised, and by contemporary accounts quite militant, bus and rail staff were deeply opposed to the West Somerset Railway ever running back into Taunton. There was a fear, probably misplaced, that the WSR were a threat to the parallel Taunton - Minehead buses.

Add to that the idea of a private operator making a success of a line closed by BR, and you can understand why BR were reluctant to assist the WSR's (and Somerset County Council who actually purchased the line) early aims to run what would have been commercial services into and out of Taunton.

So the opportunity to keep Minehead connected to Taunton by rail, for regular services, was lost in the 1970s. Subsequent rationalisation by BR, and renewal works into the 21st century by Network Rail, have focused solely on the infrastructure for national rail services. It's actually a small miracle that the physical link to the WSR at Norton Fitzwarren wasn't cut when the Taunton Cider factory closed (I do miss Autumn Gold, Natch, Exhibition..), along with its Speedlink freight siding.

The passive provision we have today is the land acquired at Norton Fitzwarren by WSR, and a 'Core Strategy' plan from Taunton Deane Borough Council that includes access to this land. A new main road already runs right up to the former site of Norton Fitzwarren Station. This road abruptly ends here, but it's clear the intention is to link it to the WSR site. This land, known as Ford's Farm, is earmarked for as a 'potential use for mixed development' site*. All that'd be needed then is to get Network Rail (and by extension HMG) onside to plan a mainline station here too. Three platforms. Up and Down Main and the third for WSR services. And with the land that's available you have room for 'Parkway' style provison, with bus, cycle and pedestrian facilities for a large and growing catchment. Add in the recent new build and future planned housing and you have a very attractive proposition. One that's far easier to plan and fund than trying to square the circle of running heritage trains into and out of Taunton.

* http://consultldf.tauntondeane.gov.uk/portal/corestrat/adoptedcs?pointId=1342694080913


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 14, 2018, 09:11:31
(http://www.wellho.net/pix/minehead_timeline.jpg)

Reading in .. much useful stuff thanks.  I put a timeline together - top line showing end of service in 1971 and a single run (a class 25) in 1975 to extract a steam loco from Butlins.   Bottom line - formation of Minehead group a few weeks after closure, purchase by the council in 1973 and services starting from Minehead to Blue Anchor in 1976 and to Williton later that year.  Had extended as far as Bishop's Lydeard by the end of the decade.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on October 14, 2018, 13:24:09
A quote from my third-ever post on this forum:

...isn't the operating model of these railways going to have to change, as the supply of volunteers dries up and the kit gets older?

I'm just playing with ideas here, trying to imagine what a 'conservation railway' (akin to a 'conservation area' in planning terms) might look like and how it might be organised and run.

I still think this idea has legs...



Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 14, 2018, 14:49:37
Passive provision to reinstate a four track railway from Cogload Junction to Norton Fitzwarren Junction may have been in the back of the minds of some at BR.

What wouldn't have entered their minds though would have been making that passive provision for the future aspirations of a private heritage railway.

The 1970s were indeed a different country in this regard. There was strong transport union opposition to the nascent West Somerset Railway. Western National busmen in the area were, at the time, in the National Union of Railwaymen (NUR), alongside their British Rail Western Region brothers. An accident of history going back to the days of Great Western Railway bus services. These heavily unionised, and by contemporary accounts quite militant, bus and rail staff were deeply opposed to the West Somerset Railway ever running back into Taunton. There was a fear, probably misplaced, that the WSR were a threat to the parallel Taunton - Minehead buses.

Add to that the idea of a private operator making a success of a line closed by BR, and you can understand why BR were reluctant to assist the WSR's (and Somerset County Council who actually purchased the line) early aims to run what would have been commercial services into and out of Taunton.

So the opportunity to keep Minehead connected to Taunton by rail, for regular services, was lost in the 1970s. Subsequent rationalisation by BR, and renewal works into the 21st century by Network Rail, have focused solely on the infrastructure for national rail services. It's actually a small miracle that the physical link to the WSR at Norton Fitzwarren wasn't cut when the Taunton Cider factory closed (I do miss Autumn Gold, Natch, Exhibition..), along with its Speedlink freight siding.

The passive provision we have today is the land acquired at Norton Fitzwarren by WSR, and a 'Core Strategy' plan from Taunton Deane Borough Council that includes access to this land. A new main road already runs right up to the former site of Norton Fitzwarren Station. This road abruptly ends here, but it's clear the intention is to link it to the WSR site. This land, known as Ford's Farm, is earmarked for as a 'potential use for mixed development' site*. All that'd be needed then is to get Network Rail (and by extension HMG) onside to plan a mainline station here too. Three platforms. Up and Down Main and the third for WSR services. And with the land that's available you have room for 'Parkway' style provison, with bus, cycle and pedestrian facilities for a large and growing catchment. Add in the recent new build and future planned housing and you have a very attractive proposition. One that's far easier to plan and fund than trying to square the circle of running heritage trains into and out of Taunton.

* http://consultldf.tauntondeane.gov.uk/portal/corestrat/adoptedcs?pointId=1342694080913


I very largely agree, but remain  concerned at the NIMBY factor.
Objections to car parking and extra traffic could perhaps be handled by not providing any public parking and by branding the new station "Norton Interchange" or some other wording not including parkway.

I fully appreciate that car parking is a general requirement at rail stations, but in this particular case, it might be reasonable to suggest that car drivers could use the existing Taunton station.

Presumably under this proposal, a regular service between Norton Interchange and Taunton would be operated by GWR, whilst a regular service between Norton Interchange and Minehead would be operated the WSR.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on October 14, 2018, 16:04:38
It will be bad enough with "fire breathing, spark snorting iron monsters roaming the countryside at will ! crops will be destroyed by fire, horses be frightened before becoming extinct, the hovels of the poor be tumbled down, hens will stop laying, cows dry up, and the district be covered in smoke, dirt and misery"

"The afternoon will be mainly cloudy, with light showers and occasional sunny spells, see the BBC Weather website for more details"


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on October 14, 2018, 16:32:24
The passive provision we have today is the land acquired at Norton Fitzwarren by WSR, and a 'Core Strategy' plan from Taunton Deane Borough Council that includes access to this land. A new main road already runs right up to the former site of Norton Fitzwarren Station. This road abruptly ends here, but it's clear the intention is to link it to the WSR site. This land, known as Ford's Farm, is earmarked for as a 'potential use for mixed development' site*. All that'd be needed then is to get Network Rail (and by extension HMG) onside to plan a mainline station here too. Three platforms. Up and Down Main and the third for WSR services. And with the land that's available you have room for 'Parkway' style provison, with bus, cycle and pedestrian facilities for a large and growing catchment. Add in the recent new build and future planned housing and you have a very attractive proposition. One that's far easier to plan and fund than trying to square the circle of running heritage trains into and out of Taunton.

* http://consultldf.tauntondeane.gov.uk/portal/corestrat/adoptedcs?pointId=1342694080913


bignosemac - Can you walk me through what a typical mainline rail timetable at your proposed Norton Fitzwarren station would look like? I'm intrigued to see what you feel would be viable and desirable service-wise.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on October 14, 2018, 17:08:48
We don't yet know what the future timetables will look like on the existing infrastructure. It'd be a futile exercise to plan services for a new station with such unknowns.

Broadly though, I'd expect at least hourly regional services, and then calls by long distance services every other hour.


Title: Re: 30th October 2018 - Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 28, 2018, 14:17:57
Full meeting details at http://www.mineheadraillinkgroup.org.uk/component/content/article/105-news/327-rail-link-group-to-hold-public-meeting-in-minehead?Itemid=1395

Quote
West Somerset Railway (WSR)’s Chris Austin has announced he will meet the Minehead Rail Link campaign at their public meeting in Minehead.  Mr Austin will represent the WSR’s view and answer questions from the public.

The meeting, to be held at the Old Hospital at 7pm on 30 October, promises to be an interesting discussion. “We intend to work with the West Somerset Railway, not against them, to give the best of both worlds - the steam trains that Minehead is famous for, and the rail service that the town and its visitors need.” said Councillor Benet Allen, a key member of the Rail Link Group.

Previously, at public events - and in the letters section of local newspapers - there has been controversy over restarting a train service between Minehead and Taunton. Objectors have claimed that the Rail Link group haven’t made a fully costed plan.  But, says campaign leader Alex Mendoza, “No questions are off the table - but we don’t have all the answers yet.  We’re here to build a campaign - this is the start of the journey.  Like the old British Rail advert said - we’re getting there."



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Puffing Billy on October 30, 2018, 22:08:02
A very well attended meeting in Minehead this evening. Chris Austin from the WSR was, in my opinion, the most lucid and diplomatic voice among those speaking - I hope his involvement in the negotiations to run a trial service between Taunton and Bishop's Lydeard next year are productive. Alex de Mendoza remains unconvincing in his attempts to persuade the less gullible among us of the ease with which the WSR can co-exist with through trains from Taunton to Minehead, repeating the glib assurance he made in the press some time ago that the line is only running at 30% capacity (probably true in strictly mathematical terms if you are basing your calculations on a 24/7 target, but meaningless otherwise). He also won no friends among WSR supporters with his observation that the typical age of volunteers is rising (I myself see plenty of youngsters among their staff). David Latimer (chairman of the group) assured us that they had been running train planning projections, but did not actual offer a sample timetable. The local councillor who chaired the meeting seemed very much to be Mendoza's yes-man, chasing a few votes. Grahame Ellis gave us some thoughtful encouragement with the success story of the Trans-Wilts link, but, with all respect, I found the relevance to the Minehead line somewhat limited, as the Trans-Wilts does not have to co-exist with a heritage line, nor does it have to worry about infrastructure or maintenance.

No doubt the Group's press office will make sure that the meeting will be reported in the local press; will be interesting to see how the account compares with the experience of being there!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 31, 2018, 05:34:43
A very well attended meeting in Minehead this evening. ....

Many thanks for that report, Puffing Billy ... I came on to file a brief report, but you have noted many of the key points well and I can't disagree with them. 

Key to the meeting - despite differences, ruffled feathers and irrelevance of some of what was said to some of the audience - was that everyone should work towards a first step linking Taunton to Bishop's Lydeard during the heritage train season and time of day.  View would be to extend that on to Minehead during times (of year and of day) that the heritage service is not running in due course. Plenty of unknowns along the way, plenty of elephants to be dealt with, plenty more to be said and presented that couldn't be done in 90 minutes last night.   

With doubt and lack of knowledge of the great things possible from the other side, there's a natural fear and reticence on one hand, and an ability not to appreciate what's already been achieved and how it can be nurtured for the common good.  Also in a specific situation there are so many variables that lessons from elsewhere can only be guidance that's cherry picked rather than providing a total recipe of how it was done in [anywhere].


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 31, 2018, 18:26:19
No doubt the Group's press office will make sure that the meeting will be reported in the local press; will be interesting to see how the account compares with the experience of being there!

Here's their press release ...

Quote
Minehead Rail Link Group’s meeting in the Old Hospital last night (Tuesday) was described as an ‘overwhelming success’ by the Group’s Secretary, Councillor Benet Allen.  About sixty seats were available in the meeting room, which was standing room only, and many speakers were met with applause.

West Somerset Railway (WSR)’s Chris Austin announced that the railway was seeking funding for a trial 60-day period next summer for a conection from Taunton to Bishop’s Lydeard.   The Rail Link Group supported the move as a ‘useful first step’ towards an end-to-end service between Minehead and Taunton, said Alex Mendoza, the chairman of the group.

Consultant Graham Ellis gave a talk on his experience with the Swindon-Westbruy route, where passenger journeys were well above the planned figure.  The original single-car train has been replaced by a three-car service.

Volunteers from the WSR were worried that the Rail Link group haven’t made a fully costed plan.  But, says Alex Mendoza, “We don’t have all the answers yet.  We’re here to build a campaign - this is the start of the journey."

Councillor Allen said, “The new service would have the support of the 20,000 people who live down the line - and the 70,000 people who live at the other end. And a thousand times more across the country who will be able, finally, to get to Minehead by train.”

Not sure how on earth they came up with my job / title - probably because of my "Well House Consultants" tag line - which is IT consultancy and training ... never mind, I guess I am a sort of consultant, even if it's like asking someone with a doctorate in ancient greek to diagnose your medical symptoms!

My reply to the press release:

Quote
Many thanks for inviting me to the Minehead Rail Link meeting last night, and giving me the opportunity to speak / confirm by example that event the most difficult-looking transport  campaigns can be won;  not everyone found my contribution entirely relevant (see http://gwr.passenger.chat/17237, reply no. 45 ) but then I think your objective in inviting me was to help shine a beacon of possibility, when there is actually nowhere else quite like Minehead!

The presentation I used is online at
   http://www.passenger.chat/TFNH_oct18.pdf
and the support documents I drew up to help inform me prior to the meeting (in addition to the forum chat above) are at
   http://gwr.passenger.chat/minehead_thoughts.pdf
   http://gwr.passenger.chat/heritagevnational.pdf
They’re my own notes - but you may find them useful

This morning, I left Minehead by train at 10:15 … arrived at Bishop’s Lydeard at 11:40.  Walking across the the bus stop, a couple seated there told me I had just missed the Taunton bus … and indeed I had to wait until 12:04 for a bus which then got stuck in traffic and didn’t drop me off until 12:39 …. for the 12:46 train which - thank goodness - I caught, bearing in mind that I had a further connection at Westbury that would have meant I wouldn’t have been home until nearly 5 p.m. had I missed it.    And that’s just 10 miles beyond Somerset … hardly a “long distance” journey.    Certainly confirms the case that there should be a better way;  that bus I connected into had actually left Minehead at 11:00 and had I wished for speed rather than a learning experience I would have taken it.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on October 31, 2018, 19:42:57
It was indeed a most interesting evening and well attended.

It is beginning to look as though action might be forthcoming after a great many years of talking. No mention of Norton Fitzwarren as an interchange facility.

The discussion centered around GWR running to Bishops Lydeard, with a connecting WSR service onwards to Minehead, or in the longer term through GWR trains to Minehead.

It is to be hoped that the proposed trial next summer does proceed. I can foresee one near term problem, and other longer term issues.

In the near term, from where are GWR going to obtain the rolling stock to run from Taunton onto the WSR ? For most of the last summer GWR have routinely been short forming existing services for want of rolling stock. I refer here NOT to the IETs which are irrelevant in this case, but to the repeated short formation of branch line services, throughout the recent summer.
A Taunton/bishops Lydeard shuttle should only need a single unit, but will GWR have even one to spare ? Observation recently suggests they need at least two or three more units to run the existing branch line services properly.

The longer term issue, IMHO,  is how are the commuters/shoppers/through customers to be conveyed onwards to Minehead ?
In the "off season" it would seem relatively simple to run a heritage (or modern? DMU.)

In the "high season" the West Somerset is effectively full with no spare paths for extra services for most* of the day*. The obvious solution would be to convey the through passengers on the existing steam hauled trains. This is entirely doable, but raises a problem regarding fares.
If these connecting services are to be affordable and therefore popular, then the fares need to be broadly similar to GWR fares for similar length journeys, or similar to the fares on the existing bus route (and preferably be interavailable between train and bus)
The present WSR fares are appreciably higher per mile than most national rail fares. This is reasonable, and gladly paid by enthusiasts and leisure travellers.
I doubt however that ordinary passengers simply getting from A to B would pay these premium fares.

Various options could be considered, but some means needs to be devised to prevent steam enthusiasts enjoying an expensive to operate heritage line at local bus fare prices, but also ensuring that through tickets are reasonable in price.

*Extra trains could be run before the start of heritage services, and after the end thereof, even in the high season. The problem is during the day.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Puffing Billy on October 31, 2018, 20:37:10
I am sorry if you think I was disparaging your contribution to the meeting, Grahame - I absolutely recognize and applaud your achievements in getting a train operator to revolutionise its services; but I thought it was important to emphasize the ways in which running services on a heritage line is different from doing so on the national network. I have a couple of friends who work on the WSR, and take a keen interest in it myself, but am conscious that many people I talk to have only a partial picture of what is involved in the operation of the railway - they may glance at the timetable as they walk past the station and observe that there are typically 4-6 scheduled departures, but they are as likely as not unaware of the Quantock Belle services, Driver Experience courses, visiting charters and empty stock movements, and think that maintenance is something that magically happans overnight like on the "real" railway. It is not the fact that the MRLC group think that these operations may have to be compromised in the interest of providing a service for visitors/commuters that irks me - their interest is as valid as mine; it is the way that their publicity conveniently avoids enlightening would-be supporters on the issues I have raised. Their website makes fantastical claims like the aforementioned "30% capacity" figure, and the assurance that the journey from Minehead to Taunton can be covered in an hour (no mention of the signalling changes and level crossing upgrades that this would necessitate).

I stress that I am 100% behind the Taunton-Lydeard link and/or Lydeard/Norton parkway idea (as well expounded by Bignosemac) - not only will this be good for visitors; it could also be really useful for people like me desperate for better access to the wild lands beyond Taunton. For visitors, surely a change of trains at Bishop's Lydeard would be no great hardship? A bit of clever marketing on the idea of through tickets could perhaps be beneficial to both WSR and GWR? I believe that a bit of work has been done in this area already. I have a slightly different slant from you, Grahame, on the idea of through trains; rather than running them when the WSR is closed, run them Mondays-Fridays at times when it is open - then the necessary staff will already be there. I do not think it is unreasonable for the powers-that-be to mandate that one or two paths in either direction should be made available to an operator other than WSR. For reasons (capacity) I gave earlier, I do not think this would be possible at weekends.

I am sorry that your journey into Taunton was a little fraught - this may be because of roadworks near Taunton, about which warning has been given recently. I not infrequently catch the bus into Taunton (as a change from the train or the automobile!), and have rarely found it to be delayed. More generally, I expressed opne or two thoughts on the bus service in a previous post, so I will not repeat them again.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 31, 2018, 21:09:29
I am sorry if you think I was disparaging your contribution to the meeting, Grahame

I didn't think that ...

Many thanks for that report, Puffing Billy ... I came on to file a brief report, but you have noted many of the key points well and I can't disagree with them.

For forum members who have probably been over-immersed in TransWilts over the years, little of what I said would have been any surprise.  But I suspect there were only three or four such members in the audience, and for the others a little of the background to how "it" can be done and that "it" can be done was there to encourage.    Totally agree that WSR is not TransWilts ... every line different.  "You" have a vibrant heritage operation ... "we" had a vibrant freight and diversion operation.  "You" have a branch to a terminus ...."we" have interchange junctions at both ends.  Etc ... need to go back to first principle, not assume we can compare from second base.

So, so good to be discussing onwards and looking at what can be done, and how costs / staff / etc can be shared.  I sensed that the WSR is not flush with money and there could be real benefits for everyone (and, yes, real fears, real risks).  I sensed that there's such a breadth of elements that need to come together that few if any of us appreciate them all, or even the existence of them all ... and that leads to worry, and at times comments that are wrong and hurtful ...


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 01, 2018, 12:36:37
The statement by Mr Alex Mendoza that the WSR is "only 30% utilised" was undoubtedly misleading and may have lost the support of SOME WSR  volunteers and supporters.

Taken as a year round average it might well be factually correct that the WSR is only 30% utilised, but averages are of little relevance in such cases.
The fact that there is undoubtedly a lot of unused capacity on a Monday in mid January, does not alter the fact that the WSR is largely full during the high season.
To provide a more frequent service than that in the present "gold" or high season timetable would require infrastructure works such as double tracking portions, extra passing loops, and the re-instatement of the second platform at some stations.
All this is entirely possible, and might well be justified in the future but looks unaffordable in the near term.


Passenger capacity could be somewhat increased by longer trains to the same timetable, the extra passengers conveyed thus could justify the expense or running a larger engine, or double heading some trains. (both of which would also enhance the appeal to enthusiasts.)















Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on November 01, 2018, 17:46:10
It's not just infrastructure costs though. Additional trains require more staff. Signal boxes have to stay open longer. Increase train numbers and you start getting into the realm of needing to find/train more volunteers or start paying for qualified staff. Making the line attractive to those wanting to get to and from Taunton means manning from at least 7am until late evening. Getting volunteers to cover what would be two 7-8 hour shifts is not going to be easy.

Just one late running steam special off the network last year caused no end of problems for WSR. I was at one intermediate station photographing this train and got chatting to the station master. He wasn't particularly happy having had to stay on for an additonal two hours after the last WSR service. He also told me that the signalman at Bishops Lydeard had to close his box immediately after the special left BL, then drive to Blue Anchor to open the box there to pass the special on.

It may be the start of the journey according to Alex Mendoza, but if they want their plans to get anywhere then they need to start looking at costs and a drawing up professional business plan. Merely saying that the line has capacity for scheduled services between Taunton and Minehead is not enough.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 01, 2018, 19:42:31
It's not just infrastructure costs though. Additional trains require more staff. Signal boxes have to stay open longer. Increase train numbers and you start getting into the realm of needing ....

Totally agree.

Before I let myself say anything the other evening, I had done a whole lot of calculations.  My figures may need significant update being based on nothing better than educated guesses, but in some elements (not others) I am actually quite well educated.

Quote
It may be the start of the journey according to Alex Mendoza, but if they want their plans to get anywhere then they need to start looking at costs and a drawing up professional business plan. Merely saying that the line has capacity for scheduled services between Taunton and Minehead is not enough.

Yes.  Agree there too.  There were timetable /path diagrams around (though not shown or shared - I noted them within people's folders of papers) and there might have been some costings around ... but I was the only one to wave a piece of paper with figures on and say "you need to do the sums" (no-one came back with "we have done", I noted!)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Puffing Billy on November 02, 2018, 15:21:21
From today's West Somerset Free Press :

"A packed meeting overwhelmingly backed a Minehead-Taunton rail-link proposal and welcomed a possible trial shuttle service which could be the forerunner of a major commuter scheme ..."

and so it goes on with a lengthy, and pretty accurate report of the proceedings. The one particularly questionable aspect of the meeting, and the reporting of it, was the vote which gives credence to this "overwhelming backing". Although at a couple of points in the meeting it was emphasized that the LYDEARD-Taunton link was something that we could all get behind, whatever else happens, this was something that we were NOT asked to vote on. If I remember correctly, we were simply asked if we wanted a MINEHEAD-Taunton service with no elaboration on whether this meant the availability of a connection at Bishop's Lydeard, or a direct service. I believe, especially given previous publicity from the MRLG, that most people present took it to be the latter, and wonder if Mr Mendoza's support will continue to thrive when people realise that, at least in the short-to-medium term the reality will prove to be short of the dream that they are being sold.

I believe that the Lydeard-Taunton link is a no-brainer, and that, once the dust from the trial service has settled, it would be right and proper to offer a limited number of weekday paths, within WSR operating hours, to another operator to give them a chance to show what they can do. This could benefit leisure travel both into, and, to a lesser extent, out of, Minehead. However, the opening sentence of the Free Press article, together with some of the pronouncements during, and prior to, the meeting, put an emphasis on COMMUTER travel, and this opens quite a different can of worms...

If the group want to pursue this latter aim, they have to identify their commuter market: journeys as far as Taunton might be popular, but it is difficult to see how they could be run economically at an affordable fare. Journeys to Bristol, London, Birmingham etc. might be more attractive, because you can factor in the saving made by not having to pay for daily parking at Taunton. But at the times of day when such commuters would have to depart from Minehead, traffic is not an issue, so people would probably still drive to Taunton anyway! You would have to be pretty confident, also, of getting back to Taunton on time in the evening (remember that the last bus departs at 8.00 p.m., so there is no back-up there). I could see GWR quickly racking up the bus/taxi bills for missed last connections. There is also the consideration that a service for Bristol commuters would have to depart Minehead at 7.00 a.m., and for London commuters at 6.00 a.m., bring with it the widely-discussed problem of keeping the WSR open for such long hours (perhaps it would be feasible and helpful if all the intermediate signalboxes could be "switched out" during the extended hours to save some staff). And, unless it would be practical to stable GWR units at Minehead overnight, there is the cost of empty-stock workings to and from Minehead to consider.

However, there is one solution that seems to me to be screamingly obvious :

First Group do not only run the trains in Somerset - they run the buses as well. Furthermore, they have a depot in Minehead where they stable a number of buses overnight. One of these buses, departing at 6.00 a.m or 7.00 a.m. when traffic is light, and travelling directly down the main road with a limited number of stops, could comfortably reach Taunton station in 45 minutes, and in the evening could wait for late connections with fewer logistical problems than sometimes is involved with holding train connections. As an afterthought, commuters are unlikely to have the bulky luggage which can be a nuisance on buses.

I am sure that there is flaw in my reasoning somewhere down the line (or road), but perhaps there is some food for thought. 




Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 03, 2018, 17:54:08
The only flaw in your reasoning that I can see, is that a through train service, or at least a connecting train service, is being increasingly demanded, rather than an improvement to the bus service.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 04, 2018, 12:10:33
Having had a few days to settle (and deal with other matters), my thoughts have returned to the Minehead.  Always had a fondness for the place, and the excellent company and food last Tuesday / Wednesday as well as the envigourating meeting won't be quickly forgotten.

It seems to me - and I've seen much agreement - that there's so much of great benefit already being done, and so much addiitonal that could be done.  But there are already so may ideas about what should and shouldn't be in that additional stuff and what it should be setting out to achieve, and individuals or groups with even moderate insight into the total picture are few and far between.  And those rare people are perceived as having a foot in one camp or another. While that fragmentation and feeling remains, few high ranking civil servants, politicians, or rail industry folks are going to risk getting too involved / being too supportive.  And for things to change, political goodwill and support are going to be needed.

So is the likely route forward the steady state, do nothing one?  Perhaps it is, or perhaps it's the steady state with a few seeds thrown toward some sort of change - but whether those seeds are enough to germinate and grow, or sewn too thinly to do any good, is an interesting question. And if the seeds are thown but don't grow, what an excellent "proof" that things won't work ... except that maybe the way they weres sewn was flawed.

So - steady state forward?   Maybe.  But even there, there are clouds on the horizon.  At the meeting, the high cost of maintaining the line was raised, and the econimic are not brilliant.  What if the balance tips from profit to loss?  What then any form of railed transport at Minehead?  Let's say there's a 300k recurring cost for the permanent way of the current operation.   And that there would be a 400k recurring cost for a regular national network line.  If the services can share / co-exist, perhaps the total permanent way bill would be only 500k rather than the 700k sum of the two parts.   And you start to geneate an economic case stronger than either of its two components.  Even better than that, with crossticketing sorted, return trip opportunities - so traffic - will be much higher than either individual operation, or even the sum of the operations.  Then apply the same algorithms / approach to volunteers and staffing ...

Sadly, it seems to fall back to having too many people fighting their corners at the moment, and too few people promoting partnership. There is the odd ray of light around - a few people - and what's neeeded, IMHO, is for someone who's not widely viewed with deep suspicion to map out a long term strategy, and start to develop the tactics to move towards it. Such an approach, with wide principled endorsement of the outcome even if things remain to be sorted, will then start to attract the political and industry goodwill which no doubt is very much there under the surface, but dare not yet be risked in the current atmosphere of mistrust.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 04, 2018, 14:49:33
On a relatively lightly used railway, a fair part of the maintenance costs are fixed or largely fixed and not related to the amount of traffic.
For example, timber sleepers rot and need replacement after a number of years, and not after a certain number of trains.
Rust attacks steel parts of signaling and level crossing equipment at a roughly constant rate.
Buildings suffer from weather, storms, rot and rust, and not primarily from the passage of trains.
Boundary fences suffer also from rot of the posts, rusting of the wire, and animals, not from the passage of trains.
Vegetation grows continually and requires labour intensive cutting back, but it does not grow any quicker with more trains !

2000 trains a year wont double infrastructure costs if compared to 1000 trains a year.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: ellendune on November 04, 2018, 19:45:01
Even then those costs that do relate to the loading (mainly maintaining track alignment (both vertical and horizontal) will depend on the axle load so the odd steam locomotive is likely to do more damage than a modern dmu.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 05, 2018, 08:16:42
Silly question - on the occasional days that Taunton to Bishop's Lydeard shuttle services have been run by GWR, how is the interchange to the West Somerset Railway handled?   Does the shuttle use one side of the loop and the Minehead train the other, with passengers crossing the road bridge or barrow crossing, or is there a way for the shuttle to arrive into the Taunton facing bay?  Or does the shuttle arrive at leave at the main platform at a time that it's not occupied by a Minehead service?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on November 05, 2018, 13:24:14
Silly question - on the occasional days that Taunton to Bishop's Lydeard shuttle services have been run by GWR, how is the interchange to the West Somerset Railway handled?   Does the shuttle use one side of the loop and the Minehead train the other, with passengers crossing the road bridge or barrow crossing, or is there a way for the shuttle to arrive into the Taunton facing bay?  Or does the shuttle arrive at leave at the main platform at a time that it's not occupied by a Minehead service?

Bishops Lydeard is a 2 platform station as far as passenger trains are concerned.  Both platforms have the facilities of bi-directional use, and of allowing a train into an already occupied platform in either direction.  So it's just about as flexible as any such layout could be.

When I travelled on to the WSR from Taunton and return, via GWR DMU service, the train used what I'll call the Down platform to both arrive and depart.  The Down Platform Line was occupied by a locomotive waiting to go across to head a Down train in the Up Platform - which train had just arrived from the Minehead direction.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 05, 2018, 13:36:50
Bishops Lydeard is a 2 platform station as far as passenger trains are concerned.  Both platforms have the facilities of bio-directional use, and of allowing a train into an already occupied platform in either direction.  So it's just about as flexible as any such layout could be.

So if I'm reading you right, a train from Minehead could arrive at what we're calling the up platform ... already occupied at the Taunton end.  Passengers could then walk up the platform and join the train that's standing there which leaves for (or via) Taunton.  Minehead train runs round, loco serviced on the way, and in due course train arrives from (or via) Taunton behind it ... passengers walk down the platform to join their onward service to Minehead.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Puffing Billy on November 05, 2018, 14:27:36
Bishops Lydeard is a 2 platform station

Just for information, the "down" platform is much shorter - I think you could only fit a locomotive and four coaches into it. The "up" platform could hold maybe a locomotive and nine coaches - no doubt someone from the WSR could tell you exactly.  The "bay" is never, to my knowledge, used for trains in service - the Quantock Belle ususally lives there in between duties.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on November 05, 2018, 15:14:36
Bishops Lydeard is a 2 platform station as far as passenger trains are concerned.  Both platforms have the facilities of bio-directional use, and of allowing a train into an already occupied platform in either direction.  So it's just about as flexible as any such layout could be.

So if I'm reading you right, a train from Minehead could arrive at what we're calling the up platform ... already occupied at the Taunton end.  Passengers could then walk up the platform and join the train that's standing there which leaves for (or via) Taunton.  Minehead train runs round, loco serviced on the way, and in due course train arrives from (or via) Taunton behind it ... passengers walk down the platform to join their onward service to Minehead.

Don't forget that any idea of (new) platform sharing by loaded passenger services is frowned upon by ORR/RAIB.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 08, 2018, 11:54:08
I find it somewhat concerning that a recent ORR inspection has reportedly found certain deficiencies on the WSR, and that the usual winter shutdown is to be considerably extended to allow rectification of said deficiencies which are reported to relate to track condition and staff training.

The infrastructure appears to me to be in good condition, though of course subjective impressions do not tell the whole story.

One hopes that the inspection was genuinely independent, and that the report was not politically motivated with the purpose of preventing through running. Or least rendering it unduly expensive.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: JayMac on November 08, 2018, 19:38:53
Seeing as the WSR are not actively seeking through running (it's an aspiration of an unincorporated group), then I think suggesting the ORR are pre-emptively nixing outside aspirations is nothing but conspiracy theory.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 08, 2018, 22:28:20
Seeing as the WSR are not actively seeking through running (it's an aspiration of an unincorporated group), then I think suggesting the ORR are pre-emptively nixing outside aspirations is nothing but conspiracy theory.

I think that you are PROBABLY right, I just find the timing a little odd, but it is probably just chance.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: ChrisB on November 13, 2018, 15:28:11
From the Somerset County Gazette (https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/17210076.west-somerset-railway-to-close-from-january-to-april-after-safety-inspection/)

Quote
EVENTS have been cancelled and a three-month closure announced after a safety inspection at West Somerset Railway.

The Office of Rail and Road, the government body responsible for maintaining and monitoring safety standards, visited the railway and highlighted a 'significant' number of 'improvements' to be made.

It has been announced the railway will be closed from January 2 until April 1 next year, and two events will be cancelled, while work is carried out to improve the service.

Chairman of West Somerset Railway PLC, Jonathan Jones-Pratt, said work is being done to ensure its 'long-term' future.

He said: "We have now received a letter which outlines the steps it requires us to take.

"The ORR will be publishing its own public statement about the visit, so it would not be appropriate to pre-empt that.

"However, we can say that while we have been allowed to retain our licence to operate we have a significant number of important actions to take. "

The chairman said the closure is viewed as 'essential' - but it will mean two events are cancelled and trains won't run during February half-term.

He added: "The board has taken the view the railway should close completely from January 2 until April 1 next year.

"This will mean the spring gala and the proposed ACE event will now not take place.

"There will also be no trains during the spring (February) half terms.

"The board consider this short period of closure as essential, both to give infrastructure teams additional time to undertake maintenance but also to allow paid and volunteer staff to focus on qualifications and effective record keeping.

"It is also clear that from a commercial point of view we need to refocus our operation and business processes. We have already begun discussions on the way forward."

It is currently not clear what aspects of the railway require improvements, but changes are needed in 'several' fields.

Mr Jones-Pratt said: "Changes are needed in several fields and the board is committed to undertake this in the most sensitive and constructive way possible.

"The directors are determined to ensure the long-term future viability of the railway, and all the actions we will be taking are focussed on that objective."

A follow-up visit will take place in March to ensure the changes have been made.

It's pretty serious.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 13, 2018, 16:37:14
It's pretty serious.

Indeed. The Somerset County Gazette is pretty much quoting the press release - so serious, but not yet fully defined nor anything new in this particular article.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 31, 2019, 09:02:04
From the Somerset County Gazette (https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/18002815.council-defer-decision-support-minehead-rail-link/)

Quote
Council defer decision on support for Minehead rail link

[snip - long text]

Cllr Slade said she had also done further reading into the matter and was concerned whether a rail link would be compatible with West Somerset’s heritage railway.

“I am ambivalent about supporting this. West Somerset Railway brings in 200,000 visitors a year which has a big impact on our economy,” Cllr Slade said.

Cllr Paul Bolton added if the council were to support the rail link, it must be on the proviso that it must not be financially detrimental to the West Somerset Railway.

Despite Cllr Harvey’s protestation that putting off a decision was ‘simply wasting time’, the councillors voted to defer the matter until its December meeting


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on November 05, 2019, 14:09:44
Any serious proposal to run a regular through service to the national rail network does seem to suffer from endless delays, of which this is but the latest.

I can understand the concerns that a regular through or connecting service could dilute the heritage aspect of the line.

Two answers to that !

Firstly on days when heritage trains do not run at present, I see no harm in running modern trains. Those who wish to savour the heritage aspects should visit on an operating day as at present.

On days when steam or other heritage trains do run, then it depends on exactly what is proposed. If only a connecting service between Bishops Lydeard and network rail is proposed, then I see little harm in use of modernish traction. The ONLY impact would be on photographic opportunities at Bishops Lydeard. If modern traction in the photograph is not wanted then the photographer would have to wait until the modern unit leaves, or be restricted in what viewpoint they select.

If through trains all the way to Minehead are proposed, then I believe that these should be at least somewhat heritage.
Slam door mark 2 coaches with vintage locomotives as widely used for railtours should be suitable. Or of course HSTs, these ARE borderline heritage, remembering that that the first ones ran only a few years after the end of main line steam. (and yes I know that HSTs are now out of gauge to Minehead, but they HAVE run thereto recently so presumably could do so again)

Anything that runs regulary onto the national network does IMHO need two engines to protect against hugely expensive failures.
Either a DMU, or an HST, or a set of coaches with a loco at each end.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 21, 2020, 07:42:06
From the Somerset County Gazette (https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/18246938.wsr-chairman-says-plans-taunton-minehead-rail-link-dont-stack/)

Quote
WSR chairman says plans for Taunton to Minehead rail link "don't stack up"

 PLANS to create a community rail service between Minehead and Taunton ‘do not stack up’ according the chairman of West Somerset Railway.

Jonathan Jones-Pratt, the WSR chairman, reacted after Minehead Rail Link Group sent a letter this week to Somerset County Council calling for a face-to-face meeting about progressing its goals in the wake of the government pledging money to ‘undo the Beeching railway cuts’ of the 1980s.

In the letter, Minehead Rail Link Group say they envisage a service operated under a revised franchise agreement, ‘using two or three car diesel multiple units’.

The letter, signed by Minehead Rail Link Group secretary and district councillor Benet Allen, suggests this service could be delivered by extending some of the current Cardiff to Taunton services through to Minehead, ‘providing a roughly two-hourly service’.

[article continues]


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on February 21, 2020, 08:04:15
What is the current legal situation regarding the line? Assuming funding were forthcoming, could the WSR be forced to accept these plans, or do they have an effective veto?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Timmer on February 21, 2020, 08:38:21
What is the current legal situation regarding the line? Assuming funding were forthcoming, could the WSR be forced to accept these plans, or do they have an effective veto?
Bearing in mind that Somerset has declared a 'Climate Emergency', this is the sort of thing that should go ahead getting people out of cars and onto rail to get from Taunton to Minehead. No point in declaring such a thing and not putting into place 'easy wins'. Oooooozzzzz gonna pay for it can no longer be used as an excuse if you've declared an emergency.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on February 21, 2020, 09:35:36
The line is owned by the Somerset County Council and leased to the WSR plc on a 99 year lease which has a long time to run.  I don't think that, as the legal operators of the line, the WSRplc can be compelled to run any particular service on it.  They may wish to please their landlord, but that's not a given.

The present management and directors of the WSR seem to be asserting their authority now in a way not seen before.  I'm not convinced this is for the better.  But they do have the laws of finance to contend with, and this may have concentrated their minds somewhat.  The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust, who have been sub-leesees of the site at Washford Station since the 1970's, have been given a year's notice to quit very recently


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 21, 2020, 09:50:01
Three comments added to the article by members of the public illustrate the differing views, and just how hard it is to knit heritage and national rail services.

Quote
Fireboxchaser

This Taunton-Minehead shuttle is a pipe dream. Firstly there have not nor will there ever be the numbers to support it financially, plus IF it did EVER happen it would be in direct competition with the bus service which actually does call at all the villages, whereas most if not all the stations are nowhere near thevillages at all

Getting back to reality, if this was to happen the WSR as a Heritage Railway and very large tourist attraction would cease to exist as track would need to be brought up to Network standards. all the current heritage semaphore signals and boxes would be ripped out to make way for modern coloured light signalling. That would be the death knell for the steam and Heritage experience altogether. The WSR as the Chairman says has come through a difficult period in its history and everyone who volunteers and works on the railway is right behind the board as it moves forward into the start of this year and beyond. WSR is a HERITAGE railway with all that means.We don;t want nor will we have modern trains running through to Minhead for which there is no requirement. The shuttles last summer were a great success and this year will see them utilised again to bring people from all over the country to Bishops Lydeard where they will board Mk1 coaches with steam on the front for their journey to Minehead and that is how it should stay!

Quote
TheSomersetExile

Absolute tosh. Xenophobic clap trap.

All you want is to have the line all to yourself, you'd be quiet happy if the link to the mainline didn't exist.

Just remember that Mk1 stock is not in great condition and it will inevitably need to be replaced like it or not. You may have to fit it with tanks for toilet waste too.

Signalling can stay as it is, semaphores inclusive just like certain enclaves in Cornwall, full AWS maybe required if you ever wanted to increase the line speed from the LRO 25mph limit to a more realistic 50 for mainline trains with superior braking capabilities it can also be done by using differential speed limits just as there are on the mainline and the WSR already has several AWS magnets on it.

The WSR used to be the best heritage line, but that status has long since gone, by a country mile. Personally I think that the WSR is dying a slow and lingering death, I'll be coming down a couple of times this year for events, but this will probably be my last as other heritage lines are more welcoming and better in many ways including the variety of traction and they don't try being something that they're not, like the S&D (pathetic that was).

Over the past few years, there has been a bad atmosphere on the line, a real air of malaise, probably down to the infighting of several factions within the railway itself.

All I can say is thank goodness for the good folk of DEPG at Williton who seem to raise the spirits of diesel engine enthusiasts. Still if it goes out of business at least NR won't have too much work to do, to bring it up to scratch and West Somerset can have a commuter service and there can be extra services for some of the music and sports events at Minehead and Watchet.

Quote
Just One

I believe the chairman is absolutely correct. If the Taunton to Minehead line is to be resurrected from the Beeching cuts then it will have to be run as part of the National Rail Network with infrastructure and timetables to suit. That will leave little or no provision for continuing heritage railway practices and restrictions. That is not to say that the WSR should not be extended with a permanent link to Taunton station, but this will need to be set up and operated by the WSR - difficult but not unachievable if minds are really put to resolving problems and potential conflicts. Despite its current difficulties, the WSR has proved to be a successful and beneficial attraction and can continue to do so. A WSR link to Taunton station can only serve to enhance and improve the line and its services with direct links from the National Rail Network and a wide variety of bus services. Passenger who wish to travel through to Minehead can have the choice between a bus service or the WSR as best suits their needs.

If I were the one responsible for allocating the £500 million - and noting that much of it is to be used to develop business cases - the significant difference of (local (?)) views would make me very wary of a lot of funding for Minehead. Mind you, I would like to see a professional expert outside view of the case so that we know if there are real issues that rule out an everyday train service from Minehead to Taunton (and beyond?) - that tells us if the case against is correct and insoluble, or if it is based on fear of change and what that change might bring.  It would also need to look at the business case for that everyday service in various guises.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on February 21, 2020, 12:04:02
My 2nd and 3rd posts on this forum:

[...]

Yes, I'd like to see the West Somerset running through to Taunton, but I was talking about fully re-incorporating heritage lines into the national network.

Potentially this could be a legal and organisational minefield, but perhaps it need only be a variation on the sort of operation that Northern Rail and the North Yorkshire Moors Railway have between Grosmont and Whitby. I am sure there are huge holes in this theory, but here's an example based on the WSR:

1. NR takes ownership of the track and (heritage) signalling between Norton Fitzwarren and Minehead and upgrades it to allow (say) 50mph running of modern trains;
2. WSR continue to maintain other heritage assets (stations, signal boxes, vintage rolling stock etc);
3. Most trains operated by FGW (or successor) DMUs, with WSR 'heritage' trains working special turns (with potential for 'plandampf' events and galas).

I do wonder what other future there is for these lines - the average age of volunteers is trending northwards.

Maybe you could call it a 'conservation railway'...

I wouldn't dream of floating this suggestion anywhere near Bishop's Lydeard, swrural; to be honest I think it's pretty amazing that the various bodies that make up or contribute to the WSR (WSR Co, WSRA, WSSRT, D&EG, S&DRT, Somerset CC etc) manage to pull together and put on such a good show.

But isn't the operating model of these railways going to have to change, as the supply of volunteers dries up and the kit gets older?

I'm just playing with ideas here, trying to imagine what a 'conservation railway' (akin to a 'conservation area' in planning terms) might look like and how it might be organised and run.

I still think there is mileage in the concept of a conserved (rather than preserved) railway.

How much heritage would you have to alter to make the WSR into an efficient 80km/h railway? The stations could stay pretty much as they are, and the scenery won't change that much.

One by one the heritage railways are swapping out bullhead rail on wooden sleepers for flat-bottomed CWR on concrete.

How much difference would it make to the average punter if the semaphore signals were kept for decoration only? Is there a safe way to do this?

Would it be possible to keep the old level crossing gates, locked open, for decoration? Is it really necessary to rip all the old stuff out and salt the ground it stood on when installing half-barriers?

There are safety issues here, of course, which is why I pose these ideas as questions...


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on February 21, 2020, 12:20:31
There is a huge difference in the ORR requirements between a Heritage Railway and a Main Line Railway.  You would end up with nothing like exists today (level crossings being one of the more significant issues).


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on February 21, 2020, 13:36:37
Three comments added to the article by members of the public illustrate the differing views, and just how hard it is to knit heritage and national rail services.

I read the various comments in Another Place, and came to the same conclusions, grahame. The aims of the two groups seem similar at first glance, but are mutually exclusive in large parts.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 21, 2020, 13:44:43
The present management and directors of the WSR seem to be asserting their authority now in a way not seen before.  I'm not convinced this is for the better.  But they do have the laws of finance to contend with, and this may have concentrated their minds somewhat.  The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust, who have been sub-leesees of the site at Washford Station since the 1970's, have been given a year's notice to quit very recently

From Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2020/02/somerset-and-dorset-railway-trust-asked-to-leave-wsr-washford-site.html) posted earlier today

Quote
The Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (S&DRT) have posted the sad news they have been asked to leave the Washford site.

The S&DRT received a letter from solicitors on behalf of the West Somerset Railway PLC, owners of the Washford site, with a Notice to Terminate on the agreement allowing S&DRT to use the Washford site, giving the S&DRT a years notice.

The one reason the WSR PLC have stated so far for asking the S&DRT to leave is to allow the WSR PLC to use the site for its own purposes, but no further details have been added. The S&DRT have sent a response and are now seeking legal advice.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on February 21, 2020, 16:20:24
My 2nd and 3rd posts on this forum:

[...]

Yes, I'd like to see the West Somerset running through to Taunton, but I was talking about fully re-incorporating heritage lines into the national network.

Potentially this could be a legal and organisational minefield, but perhaps it need only be a variation on the sort of operation that Northern Rail and the North Yorkshire Moors Railway have between Grosmont and Whitby. I am sure there are huge holes in this theory, but here's an example based on the WSR:

1. NR takes ownership of the track and (heritage) signalling between Norton Fitzwarren and Minehead and upgrades it to allow (say) 50mph running of modern trains;
2. WSR continue to maintain other heritage assets (stations, signal boxes, vintage rolling stock etc);
3. Most trains operated by FGW (or successor) DMUs, with WSR 'heritage' trains working special turns (with potential for 'plandampf' events and galas).

I do wonder what other future there is for these lines - the average age of volunteers is trending northwards.

Maybe you could call it a 'conservation railway'...

I wouldn't dream of floating this suggestion anywhere near Bishop's Lydeard, swrural; to be honest I think it's pretty amazing that the various bodies that make up or contribute to the WSR (WSR Co, WSRA, WSSRT, D&EG, S&DRT, Somerset CC etc) manage to pull together and put on such a good show.

But isn't the operating model of these railways going to have to change, as the supply of volunteers dries up and the kit gets older?

I'm just playing with ideas here, trying to imagine what a 'conservation railway' (akin to a 'conservation area' in planning terms) might look like and how it might be organised and run.

I still think there is mileage in the concept of a conserved (rather than preserved) railway.

How much heritage would you have to alter to make the WSR into an efficient 80km/h railway? The stations could stay pretty much as they are, and the scenery won't change that much.

One by one the heritage railways are swapping out bullhead rail on wooden sleepers for flat-bottomed CWR on concrete.

How much difference would it make to the average punter if the semaphore signals were kept for decoration only? Is there a safe way to do this?

Would it be possible to keep the old level crossing gates, locked open, for decoration? Is it really necessary to rip all the old stuff out and salt the ground it stood on when installing half-barriers?

There are safety issues here, of course, which is why I pose these ideas as questions...

I don't see how the old level crossing gates could be retained "locked open" When the gates are open to rail traffic they block the road. If half way they block the road AND the railway line.
Semaphore signals retained for decoration might be misleading. I see no reason why semaphores cant be kept in working order and used to control the trains. There are still a few semaphores on the national network.

The curves and gradients would rule out high speeds, but I don't see why the Minehead Branch if re-instated as part of the national network, could not have line speeds similar to those in force in BR days.
It might be possible to slightly increase speed limits.
Doubling the track between Minehead and Dunster would improve capacity and flexibility. In particular by allowing an up and a down train to pass just outside the terminus.

The tourist and enthusiast markets expect steam or heritage diesel services. Battery trains sound a good idea for non heritage services.
HST trailers hauled by a battery loco ?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on February 21, 2020, 16:47:19
I don't see how the old level crossing gates could be retained "locked open" When the gates are open to rail traffic they block the road. If half way they block the road AND the railway line.

I wasn't very clear. A typical conservation solution might be to re-hang the gates 'backwards' so that they block neither road nor rail. Basically you'd be propping them up near the crossing as an ornament.

There are a couple of crossings - Blue Anchor being the main one - where you'd really want to retain what was there in working order. There would be a cost associated with this, but probably one worth paying.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Andy on February 21, 2020, 21:37:46
Apologies in advance for any ignorance and/or naivety on my part but why aren't these two groups working together? Aren't there ways in which better connectivity between the WSR and the Big Railway for residents and visitors alike could be achieved without compromising the existing set-up? Charters/specials already run through to Minehead and a shuttle to BL. has already been trialled. WSR operations are from 10-5.30pm, mainly. Could a 'chartered' service out and back for morning/evening commuters/day trippers/shoppers work alongside a daytime Taunton-BL shuttle in the summer months? Might a summer timetable experiment along those lines à la Okehampton be a first step? I see that this is not achieving a 365-day railway connection for the townsfolk of Minehead, of course.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Rhydgaled on February 21, 2020, 22:13:08
I still think there is mileage in the concept of a conserved (rather than preserved) railway.

How much heritage would you have to alter to make the WSR into an efficient 80km/h railway? The stations could stay pretty much as they are, and the scenery won't change that much.

One by one the heritage railways are swapping out bullhead rail on wooden sleepers for flat-bottomed CWR on concrete.

How much difference would it make to the average punter if the semaphore signals were kept for decoration only? Is there a safe way to do this?

Would it be possible to keep the old level crossing gates, locked open, for decoration? Is it really necessary to rip all the old stuff out and salt the ground it stood on when installing half-barriers?
Semaphore signals are still in use on the national network, Shrewsbury for example, and I seem to recall that not all that many years ago brand new semaphore signals were installed somewhere (Banbury perhaps) to facilitate diversions of passenger services over a little used freight connection. The only reason I can think of for wanting to replace semaphore signals with colour lights is to reduce staffing costs by allowing signal box closures. Other lines still use tokens (eg. Pembroke Dock and Heart Of Wales) and have very few signals, so if you want to close signal boxes without making the route look modern by putting in colour lights you could remove the signals and rely on tokens. As for level crossings, on holiday a few years ago I discovered that at least one on the line between Oakham and Melton Mowbray (Wyfordby I think) had a manual gate with a red circle on it much the same as heritage ones.

What is the current legal situation regarding the line? Assuming funding were forthcoming, could the WSR be forced to accept these plans, or do they have an effective veto?
Bearing in mind that Somerset has declared a 'Climate Emergency', this is the sort of thing that should go ahead getting people out of cars and onto rail to get from Taunton to Minehead. No point in declaring such a thing and not putting into place 'easy wins'. Oooooozzzzz gonna pay for it can no longer be used as an excuse if you've declared an emergency.
I wouldn't expect too much; the Welsh government and (I think) Pembrokeshire County Council have both declared a 'Climate Emergency', yet both support 'improvements' to the A40 which the Welsh government freely admits will increase greenhouse gas emmissions!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on February 21, 2020, 22:39:02
The only reason I can think of for wanting to replace semaphore signals with colour lights is to reduce staffing costs by allowing signal box closures.

That was the reason I had in mind.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on February 22, 2020, 21:34:38
Semaphore signals are normally operated by rodding from the signal box, which must be within a reasonable distance.
Remote operation is however possible, and has been done in the past.
With a semaphore signal out of sight of the signaller, then some means is required to prove correct operation and to prove that the lamp is lit.

An oil lamp can be remotely proved to be lit, by means of a temperature sensor, this was done decades ago.
An incandescent lamp can be remotely proved to be lit by a current sensor, also a mature technology.
LEDs are more difficult, but might be judged reliable enough that no remote proving is needed.

Out of sight from stations, colour light signals would IMO be acceptable.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on February 22, 2020, 23:50:08
...I wouldn't expect too much; the Welsh government and (I think) Pembrokeshire County Council have both declared a 'Climate Emergency', yet both support 'improvements' to the A40 which the Welsh government freely admits will increase greenhouse gas emmissions!

This is the same throughout England. Road schemes just have to connect up to the Highways England funding firehose, whilst sustainable transport has to scrat around like Bear Grylls looking for patches off moss to wring a few drops from. Something has to change!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on February 23, 2020, 00:29:30
Bearing in mind that Somerset has declared a 'Climate Emergency', this is the sort of thing that should go ahead getting people out of cars and onto rail to get from Taunton to Minehead. No point in declaring such a thing and not putting into place 'easy wins'. Oooooozzzzz gonna pay for it can no longer be used as an excuse if you've declared an emergency.
Quote
I wouldn't expect too much; the Welsh government and (I think) Pembrokeshire County Council have both declared a 'Climate Emergency', yet both support 'improvements' to the A40 which the Welsh government freely admits will increase greenhouse gas emmissions!

It would seem from these, and other, examples that we are missing the point about councils declaring climate emergencies. Bristol did likewise, then carried on with the delivery of new diesel vehicles for their fleet. One could be excused that it is the latest box-ticking thing, and that some councils will do it just to get the hordes of protesters away from their meetings so that they can get on with some business, and without added pressure on their prospects of re-election. I think even my local parish council may have said something about it, but not too loudly in case nothing changed, although with unfilled vacancies for a few years, the fear of the ballot box is not with them. Others want something done, but not by them. A few still hold out to the notion that all is well with our climate, but not so many these days.

It would be nice if someone actually got around to doing something positive, but I hold out little hope.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 23, 2020, 06:13:48
Semaphore signals are normally operated by rodding from the signal box, which must be within a reasonable distance.
Remote operation is however possible, and has been done in the past.

Pedant mode - wires for signals, rods for points as I recall. The weight of signals returns them to danger when the pull on the wire is released or if the wire breaks.

This thread has set me thinking - putting myself in the shoes of the General Manager of a "heritage" railway, and with it the various decisions about what to keep the old way, and what to modernise.   I came up with a long list to consider - perhaps members would like to have a go - poll at http://www.passenger.chat/22949 .  Open until 1st March 2020; if you're not a member here yet, please register to take part via http://www.passenger.chat/register


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on February 23, 2020, 08:24:25
Must be a bit dim this morning.  What does the * mean in the poll and how do you choose between the two options in each question in the poll?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 23, 2020, 08:45:10
Must be a bit dim this morning.  What does the * mean in the poll and how do you choose between the two options in each question in the poll?

Click the box if you want things "as they were in the past" which is the option marked with (*), please.   I have duplicated that instruction into the question rather than having it just in the descriptive post with the poll.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on February 23, 2020, 08:56:03
Must be a bit dim this morning.  What does the * mean in the poll and how do you choose between the two options in each question in the poll?

Click the box if you want things "as they were in the past" which is the option marked with (*), please.   I have duplicated that instruction into the question rather than having it just in the descriptive post with the poll.

Thanks for clarifying that Grahame. Need to drink some more coffee when I wake up on a Sunday morning :P


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 25, 2020, 16:07:43
The present management and directors of the WSR seem to be asserting their authority now in a way not seen before.  I'm not convinced this is for the better.  But they do have the laws of finance to contend with, and this may have concentrated their minds somewhat.  The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust, who have been sub-leesees of the site at Washford Station since the 1970's, have been given a year's notice to quit very recently

From Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2020/02/somerset-and-dorset-railway-trust-asked-to-leave-wsr-washford-site.html) posted earlier today

Quote
The Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (S&DRT) have posted the sad news they have been asked to leave the Washford site.

The S&DRT received a letter from solicitors on behalf of the West Somerset Railway PLC, owners of the Washford site, with a Notice to Terminate on the agreement allowing S&DRT to use the Washford site, giving the S&DRT a years notice.

The one reason the WSR PLC have stated so far for asking the S&DRT to leave is to allow the WSR PLC to use the site for its own purposes, but no further details have been added. The S&DRT have sent a response and are now seeking legal advice.

The West Somerset Railway has issued a statement over them giving the Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway notice to leave their Washford site says Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2020/02/west-somerset-railway-board-statement-regarding-washford.html)

Quote
The West Somerset Railway has said that ‘The Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway Trust seems governed in such a way that it meant they felt unable to assist us financially other than allowing the WSR to hold and retain the modest profits from the Real Ale Festival last year’

The West Somerset Railway has also said that the SDJRT acted like a ‘cuckoo in the nest’ during their crisis period, which the PLC found unacceptable.

As a result of this, they have given the railway a year’s notice to remove themselves from the Washford site.

Currently, the Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust occupies some of the land adjacent to Washford railway station, and have done so for many years.

However, the West Somerset Railway has said that the rent the SDJRT pays is far lower than any other organisation occupying space elsewhere on the railway.

The WSR has a plan to develop the Washford site to meet their needs which will include P-Way vehicle and equipment storage, workshops and covered winter accommodation.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: johnneyw on February 27, 2020, 22:23:22
At least prospects look rosier for the West Somerset Railway according to this BBC report.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-51630832?fbclid=IwAR0ccRlaXRMMMJG68vSmJ1F-jzZtg9-AZc-nb1G9eRqY83JI-KEs2q-uky0

Good to read about their aims and successes with getting younger people involved as well as new revenue streams.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on February 28, 2020, 09:58:53
At least prospects look rosier for the West Somerset Railway according to this BBC report.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-51630832?fbclid=IwAR0ccRlaXRMMMJG68vSmJ1F-jzZtg9-AZc-nb1G9eRqY83JI-KEs2q-uky0

Good to read about their aims and successes with getting younger people involved as well as new revenue streams.

Harsh reality meets heritage railway operation. It is very good to read that a plan is in place, with what looks like a very good chance of success. The WSR is a very large business in terms of a lot of things, and needs some of the practices of a business to keep going, even if that wasn't the intention at the outset. That holiday cottage will be popular, turning a liability into an asset.

Apprentices are a good idea, giving skills in exchange for labour. The BBC could benefit from that - the article is one of the worst written or edited that I have seen from the Beeb.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on February 28, 2020, 14:14:57
Harsh reality meets heritage railway operation. It is very good to read that a plan is in place, with what looks like a very good chance of success. The WSR is a very large business in terms of a lot of things, and needs some of the practices of a business to keep going, even if that wasn't the intention at the outset. That holiday cottage will be popular, turning a liability into an asset.

Apprentices are a good idea, giving skills in exchange for labour. The BBC could benefit from that - the article is one of the worst written or edited that I have seen from the Beeb.

The intention at the start was for the WSR to run a year-round service of DMU trains between Minehead and Taunton, six round trips per day.  It was intended, and costed, as a public transport service, replacing what BR(WR) had removed.  The year round service would have been subsidised by seasonal steam train services at both ends of the line.  Somewhere in my loft are all the plans from 1974 onwards.

And we'd have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those pesky kids at Bristol Divisional HQ, aided and abbetted by the NUR


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on February 28, 2020, 16:07:27
Yes.
Todays supporters, friends, volunteers, and paid staff on the WSR often forget, or are unaware, that the original intent of the WSR back in the 1970s was to run to run a year round public transport service.
Over the years, this has been gradually forgotten in favour of a heritage railway with a limited operating season.

I would hope that a year round public transport service could co-exist with the heritage operation.
If that cant be achieved, then I would prefer a year round public transport service, preferably with a new loop or branch into the holiday camp, so as to reduce road traffic, and the carbon emissions thereof.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on February 28, 2020, 21:09:45
I am indebted! At last, I can stop learning. The emphasis has changed somewhat over the years.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: SandTEngineer on February 28, 2020, 23:03:14
This bit in that BBC report made me chuckle a little bit...... ;D

Quote
He added that loaning the Odney Manor engine to create a £200,000 overdraft, as a buffer if needed.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on February 29, 2020, 08:27:38
This bit in that BBC report made me chuckle a little bit...... ;D

Quote
He added that loaning the Odney Manor engine to create a £200,000 overdraft, as a buffer if needed.

#MeToo! At firsdt, I thought it sounded expensive, but this is railway after all...


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on February 29, 2020, 10:38:16

The intention at the start was for the WSR to run a year-round service of DMU trains between Minehead and Taunton, six round trips per day.  It was intended, and costed, as a public transport service, replacing what BR(WR) had removed.  The year round service would have been subsidised by seasonal steam train services at both ends of the line.  Somewhere in my loft are all the plans from 1974 onwards.

And we'd have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those pesky kids at Bristol Divisional HQ, aided and abbetted by the NUR

From my observations (from afar) at the time, the year round DMU service was an integral part of the scheme.  Noting that the landlord of the railway is Somerset Council, would I be right in thinking that they bought it in order to help the provision of a public rail service linking Minehead to the main national network for daily use, and not just for a heritage service to Bishop's Lydeard?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Southernman on February 29, 2020, 11:51:49
I would suggest that the way things have evolved, that the current set up of heritage steam & diesel is worth far more to the local economy than trying to compete with a frequent, faster and free to seniors (after 9.30am?) bus service could ever be! It is impossible to run a realistic heritage and DMU service as the infrastructure is set up currently - indeed what would be the purpose?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: johnneyw on February 29, 2020, 13:02:55
If it came to one or the other I would favour a heritage WSR as it would have greater benefit to the local economies and , selfishly, it would be of more benefit to me as a visitor/tourist.  Even better IMO if there could be access to the national rail network at Taunton but I know that is difficult.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: RichardB on February 29, 2020, 13:39:50
I would suggest that the way things have evolved, that the current set up of heritage steam & diesel is worth far more to the local economy than trying to compete with a frequent, faster and free to seniors (after 9.30am?) bus service could ever be! It is impossible to run a realistic heritage and DMU service as the infrastructure is set up currently - indeed what would be the purpose?

If I were a local, I'd certainly want someone to look seriously at how the railway could be modified to allow a reasonable year round local service to Taunton and keep a really strong heritage steam tourist operation - and also what likely usage and benefits a regular service would have.  Just what this Beeching Reversal Fund is there for - I wonder if the local MP has put an expression of interest in.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on February 29, 2020, 21:10:40
The ideal outcome IMHO would be to offer a regular timetable, all year round. But to vary the type of train used according to the season.
High tourist season=heritage coaches hauled by a steamer.
Shoulder season=Alternate heritage and modern DMUs.
Off season=modern DMU, with a battery train as a longer term ambition.

The occasional local traveller would simply need to know that a train leaves at say 09-30, it might be heritage or modern according to the season.
I would charge higher "turn up and go fares" for the expensive to run heritage trains. to avoid hardship to local customers, season tickets would be based on the DMU fares. Tickets purchased 10 days or more in advance would be also be at the lower rate.

Some form of derogation would be needed to allow heritage trains on the short bit of main line to Taunton.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Robin Summerhill on March 01, 2020, 18:03:23
You can have all the derogations you like, but the line currently operates under a Lightt Railway Order with a maximum speed of 25mph

I'm not sure how many commuters would give up their cars fir that.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on March 02, 2020, 10:10:59
You can have all the derogations you like, but the line currently operates under a Lightt Railway Order with a maximum speed of 25mph

I'm not sure how many commuters would give up their cars fir that.

In fact, the 1975 Light Railway (Transfer) Order, which gave the present WSR the right to operate the railway under lease from SCC gives permission for DMU type trains to run at up to 40mph.  In 1976, we learned from HMRI that for them to permit this, the DMU trains would have to be subject to main-line safety inspections and maintenance regimes overseen by BR.

At the time, new installations, such as the AOCL level crossings at Dunster Sea Lane, Leigh Wood and Roebuck Gate, were laid out with 40mph in mind

The exorbitant cost of BR inspections of the rolling stock was one of the project's killers, in the 1970s.

I have to say that I'm not fully aware of the impact of more recent legislation on the limits set out in the 1975 Order


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on March 02, 2020, 20:28:07
I certainly hope that 40 MPH could be permitted, that would be competitive with road transport.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on May 05, 2020, 15:26:36
A Joint position statement ((here)) (https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/joint-position-statement-regarding-somerset-dorset-railway-trust) has been published ...
Quote
Following discussion, the WSRA and the WSRST expressed their support for the PLC, while regretting the concern caused to the members of the S & D Trust

I find myself getting lost ...

Here are the main actors:
WSRA- West Somerset Railway Association
WSRST - West Somerset Railway Steam Trust
WSRPLC - West Somerset Railway PLC
SDRT - Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust

Bit parts :
ORR - Office of Rail and Road
HRA - Heritage Railway Association

Characters appearing in other episodes:
SC - Somerset Council - owners of the railway
Minehead Rail Link Group - looking for a return of general daily services connecting at Taunton
GWR - Great Western Railway - operator or trial service to Bishops Lydeard last year and further potential there
NR - Network Rail - organisation to interface to at Norton Fitzwarren / Taunton



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on May 05, 2020, 15:42:43
...and a response:

Quote
Chairman's response to WSR plc, WSRA and WSSRT joint statement

The S&DRT notes the helpful joint statement by the WSR plc, WSRA and WSSRT issued on 1 May.  Whereas we might take some issue with the suggestion that, hitherto, we were not minded to enter into any discussions, we are grateful nevertheless to the WSRA and WSSRT for bringing about that discussion now.

We also note the position statement provided at the same time by the WSR plc.  There are a number of matters in that statement with which we might take even greater issue or of which we might question the relevance but we do not think it helpful to do so publicly at this time.

We welcome the involvement of the Heritage Railway Association and look forward to engaging in discussions via that body.

Ian Young, 3 May 2020
Source: Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (https://www.sdrt.org/)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Rhydgaled on August 21, 2020, 18:51:40
The ideal outcome IMHO would be to offer a regular timetable, all year round. But to vary the type of train used according to the season.
High tourist season=heritage coaches hauled by a steamer.
Shoulder season=Alternate heritage and modern DMUs.
Off season=modern DMU, with a battery train as a longer term ambition.
I agree, with the slight variations that hydrogen might be more likely than a battery train over that distance and that the heritage trains in the shoulder season could be steam-hauled, heritiage DMU or a heritiage diesel loco hauling coaches depending on what the heritiage railway operator feels like running. Essentially there would be a base timetable year-round (with the possibility of extra services being added in the high season eg. on gala days) with the heritiage operator picking and choosing which services they want to operate and the remainder being covered by a modern train. This would benifit the operator of the modern train (assuming said operator is a large train operating company like the current FirstGWR or a reinstated British Rail) since it would release stock in the high season to strengthen services elsewhere without the problem of either having insufficient capacity in the high season or needing to store excess stock in the winter.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 21, 2020, 19:51:35
The ideal outcome IMHO would be to offer a regular timetable, all year round. But to vary the type of train used according to the season.
High tourist season=heritage coaches hauled by a steamer.
Shoulder season=Alternate heritage and modern DMUs.
Off season=modern DMU, with a battery train as a longer term ambition.
I agree, with the slight variations that hydrogen might be more likely than a battery train over that distance and that the heritage trains in the shoulder season could be steam-hauled, heritiage DMU or a heritiage diesel loco hauling coaches depending on what the heritiage railway operator feels like running. Essentially there would be a base timetable year-round (with the possibility of extra services being added in the high season eg. on gala days) with the heritiage operator picking and choosing which services they want to operate and the remainder being covered by a modern train. This would benifit the operator of the modern train (assuming said operator is a large train operating company like the current FirstGWR or a reinstated British Rail) since it would release stock in the high season to strengthen services elsewhere without the problem of either having insufficient capacity in the high season or needing to store excess stock in the winter.

What a load of out-of-comfort-level, off-the-board ideas as far as so many of the established people in the heritage operation, and established people in national network rail, will be concerned.  Which - perhaps - is exactly what is needed. 

Needed - a strong, respected charismatic visionary who says "we can do this" and pulls together all the various strands with their enthusiasm and expertise to harness the whole, and sits down and negotiates with all the wider parties.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 21, 2020, 20:45:47
Needed - a strong, respected charismatic visionary who says "we can do this" and pulls together all the various strands with their enthusiasm and expertise to harness the whole, and sits down and negotiates with all the wider parties.

Think I know just the man - But it may depend on whether there will be port and stilton...


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 22, 2020, 14:11:07
This is IMHO another example of the regrettably fragmented nature of the West Somerset Railway.
Getting all the groups that make up the WSR to agree is bad enough, without considering the challenges presented by network rail and GWR.

I can think of various possibilities as to what type of train to use, but in my view the important factor is to get an ALL YEAR round service operating at least between Taunton and Minehead.
Steam would be expected in the holiday season, but at other times almost anything that is safe, reliable, comfortable and of sufficient capacity would serve.

Most passengers would be satisfied by any of the following.
Class 159 or similar.
Preserved HST.
Heritage DMU.
Preserved diesel loco and coaches.
A new battery loco hauling heritage coaches.
A newly built battery train.
A battery train converted from existing stock.
Steam, too expensive for regular use in the off season, but a possibility if needed.

More important than rolling stock is persuading TPTB to allow 40/45 MPH running on the WSR, and to permit heritage stock on the short bit of network rail track to Taunton.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 22, 2020, 15:41:42
This is IMHO another example of the regrettably fragmented nature of the West Somerset Railway.

There is an irony in my suggestion of having a strong, charismatic, knowledgable, respected person added in. With an objective of getting people together, perhaps outside their comfort zones, to give of their very best for a railway that works for everyone - the leisure / heritage guest, the volunteer / enthusiast, the resident of the area, the holiday visitor, and the economy of the area served.

The irony is that we seem to have too many groups and perhaps factions involved already.

One of the organisations involved, and with a foot in both the local economy and the heritage operation, is Somerset Council.  They are the owners - landlords - of the trackbed, and they have a significant wider responsibilities to residents and the economy too.  The Council does not always get a good press on transport issues, and tends to be on an election cycle which may not be conducive to long term solution, but perhaps - just perhaps - it could be the sponsorship organisation that invests into our charismatic campaigner and partner described above, and provides him / her with a stable base, and a re-assurance of longevity of the role over a number of years.  Any similarity to Community Rail wasn't intentional - but it does provide those echoes from successes already in the South West in Devon and Cornwall, in the Severnside area, on the Heart of Wessex, and in the Three Rivers area around the Solent.  And haven't they been thoroughly supported by their county councils?

I have some specific operational type thoughts... which I will not yet share as I let the above thoughts sink in and be argued over.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 22, 2020, 16:34:11
This is IMHO another example of the regrettably fragmented nature of the West Somerset Railway.
Getting all the groups that make up the WSR to agree is bad enough, without considering the challenges presented by network rail and GWR.

I can think of various possibilities as to what type of train to use, but in my view the important factor is to get an ALL YEAR round service operating at least between Taunton and Minehead.
Steam would be expected in the holiday season, but at other times almost anything that is safe, reliable, comfortable and of sufficient capacity would serve.

Most passengers would be satisfied by any of the following.
Class 159 or similar.
Preserved HST.
Heritage DMU.
Preserved diesel loco and coaches.
A new battery loco hauling heritage coaches.
A newly built battery train.
A battery train converted from existing stock.
Steam, too expensive for regular use in the off season, but a possibility if needed.

More important than rolling stock is persuading TPTB to allow 40/45 MPH running on the WSR, and to permit heritage stock on the short bit of network rail track to Taunton.


Told you so  ;D

You've got my vote, sir.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Rhydgaled on August 22, 2020, 20:45:45
More important than rolling stock is persuading TPTB to allow 40/45 MPH running on the WSR, and to permit heritage stock on the short bit of network rail track to Taunton.
Rolling stock comes into the 40/45mph running issue though; in my previous post in this topic I was in agreement that a year-round timetable with the rolling stock in use being heritage at certain times of year would be the ideal outcome. I didn't suggest it was a realistic outcome, the additional cost of maintaining the heritage stock for 40/45mph in order to keep to the same timetable could sink the idea. That said, the loco list on uksteam.info (http://uksteam.info/tours/locos.htm) suggests 3 locos have been approved for use between Battersby and Whitby only (as opposed to full mainline certification) each with a top speed of 45mph or greater. Thus the issues are not necessarily completely insumountable although the less-ideal outcome of a different (slower, timed for heritage stock) timetable in summer (with a change of train required onto a modern DMU/battery/hydrogen shuttle in summer) might be a better one to aim for simply because it could be easier to acheive. The key point is getting a modern national rail through service between Minehead and Taunton in winter.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 23, 2020, 09:53:30
I have some specific operational type thoughts... which I will not yet share as I let the above thoughts sink in and be argued over.

Now digging a little deeper under the surface, there are numerous issues to be resolved (note - "resolved" and not "hurdles that will stop dual use") ...

Timetable, slowness, frequency

For a trip during a holiday - and probably for an arrival for that holiday or return, extra transit time is not an issue and 85 minutes from Taunton to Minehead is not a problem.  For an occasional trip from Minehead to Taunton for residents, it may be OK too.  For a daily commute, over an hour on the train would quickly pall - though with more modern facilities such as WiFi on the train ...

Sense in working towards a 55 minute transit, with 85 minutes during the day, April to October.  For an initial season, enthusiasm for the new mode might mean that it grew in spite of 85 minutes end to end.

With an 85 minute running time and single train, you're looking at a train every 3 hours. Reduce the running time to 55 minutes and you have a train every 2 hours.  The loop at Williton may well be in the right place for doubling of this frequency and staying clockfacish but any delays in one direction will get mirrored into the other direction

Intermediate Stations

What service do you offer at smaller communities such as Crowcombe, Stogumber and Doniford?  Trains to all call at Norton Fitzwarren? Do Minehead to Taunton passengers really want all those pauses and what is the effect in the timetable?

Differential costs and fares
Ongoing funding and mixed models

An anytime day return from Exeter to Barnstaple is £13.00, and from Par to Newquay is £10.20 ... Minehead to Bishop's Lydeard is shown as £28.00 for this year. Not quite "apples for apples" and various discounts available - but they tend to be more generous in percentage terms on the national rail lines.

It costs money to run a railway, and the fare-box income on a slower line is not going to directly pay the total costs unless premium fares are charged and paid in significant numbers.  Otherwise the benefit to the community / local economy has to be paid to help the service meet its bills.

You will have finances that don't work if you reduce fares to network levels on heritage trains (and overcrowded trains, I suspect). And you will end up carrying lots of fresh air if you charge £28.00 return from Minehead to Taunton, even if you reduce that to £21.00 for holders of a £10.00 resident's railcard.

Changes at BLD or mainline stock
Connections or through at Taunton
Main line paths and capacity at Taunton

Getting heritage rolling stock up to main line standards - both for safety and to ensure reliability that means that failures are rare - could be significant and add costs / ticket price. It's a different matter sharing Grosmont to Whitby tracks with thin local diesel services than sharing with four trains per hour, 100 m.p.h. plus expresses.

Running round at Taunton - likely to be an issue during the day if single loco and coaches used.  I *think* the bay on the town side would be available for a unit or top'n'tail but that involves crossing over the main lines in both directions. "Pity the bays and extra track were lost" - yes, but restoring them is likely priced out and there are other more pragmatic options.

There is ... sense ... in running service - peak and evening in summer, all day n winter, from Minehead into Taunton and 'often' linking them on to the Cardiff service - with a train every 2 or 3 hours, that's one extra set, though as more of those trains carry on from Cardiff via Exeter it becomes an issue. A more detailed look at options needed, with a note that as services speed up from 85 minutes to 55 minutes between Taunton and Minehead there's a need to avoid too many significant timetable changes away from the area.

Daytime, summer ... national rail trains turn back and connect with heritage at Bishop's Lydeard.  But - can that station cope (and will the passenger with luggage for Butlin's be happy).  Time taken probably not an issue, and cost might not be - but the hassle of multiple changes (see "last mile Minehead" too) might be.  And with luggage too?

Maintenance Regime

Current setup is for 25 m.p.h. and allows for significant off season closure. Recent landslips in Scotland and problems on Heart of Wales and Conwy Valley, past issues at Dawlish and Cowley Bridge emphasise the magnitude and safety issues of having a railway on which trains can run faster than within visual stopping distance.  The Minehead line may have significant engineering issues just to the west of Blue Anchor.

The use of Network Rail and national network experts could perhaps do wonders for works with minimal effect on 18x7 service, but at what cost financially an in terms of displacing people who are enthusiastically keeping the line in running order at the moment.

Keeping the volunteer volunteering
Opposition. Retain; time invested; bus drivers

There is a wonderful heritage of volunteers doing so much for the West Somerset Railway.  For some of them, the picking up of tasks by the daily team will be a boon and let them concentrate on what they enjoy, but for others there's a concern that all the stuff they've done and enjoyed will be changed out of all recognition or relevance, to the extent it will not be enjoyed any more. 

Community Rail (though there's an official stop on stations friends group volunteers doing any more than weekly light gardening at present) can and does pick up the use of volunteers and an old ACoRP (now CRN) report suggests that each £1 spent on supporting volunteers brings £4.20 in return. Could we transform volunteers into volunteers - and supportive ones - on the new, dual use railway?

Our poll that ended on 1st March - ((here)) (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=22949.msg283015#msg283015) informed us somewhat on which elements of the past members of the Coffee Shop wanted to see preserved in a heritage operation and the question arises as to which of those that people want can be retained and how in a new operation.

Early West Somerset objectives were to run a year-round Taunton service, but that raised opposition from bus drivers on the route, supported and championed by their representatives.  The concern was over jobs, and services to communities that were not near a station.

There will - always - be a few objections.  From experience, we have had "noise from more trains" for example.  But a coming together in a positive approach of all mainstream parties would do wonders for political support. Should that overwhelming desire be there to get things done, I'm sure that MPs and other elected people will be doing their darnedest to support it, rather than sitting on the sidelines or saying wonderful words which are not backed up by actions, or have the effect of kicking the project into the long grass

Level Crossings and staffing

I think I read that 7 staff had to be on duty to run the line prior to its closure. Level crossing, manually signalled loops.  While you can get trained volunteers for these roles during the day in summer, can you do so from the first to the last train on a cold and wet February.  I have no doubt that current volunteers are reliable and committed, but not every volunteer fits that description and the organiser does not have the tools to influence volunteers to perform when they would rather not than an employer has over paid staff.

Semaphore signalling, signal boxes, level crossings - all staff-costly, and all things that people vote to retain on the move from preservation to heritage to dual use. Perhaps the solution lies in the retention of (say) Blue Anchor as an exhibition piece and allow for modernisation, perhaps with a heritage veneer, elsewhere.

Development away from the railway

It's 50 year since the daily train service from Minehead to Taunton ceased, and in those 50 years housing and other developments have not been biased towards station sites - thus reducing the skew towards making the railway useful.  Now - with a long term daily train service, we could and should see a swing of that pendulum.  But it will take time.

Security at Minehead

Staff really not needed on platform duty for the very early or late trains - BUT what about the security of the resources there and indeed of trains parked up overnight if that happens (and it would be logical, like Weymouth)

Other stations along the line have similar issues but I would have thought to a lesser degree.  Minehead could potential be mitigated by the provision of a National Rail platform to / from which trains run, situated just behind Butlins. Lots of discussion on that one too!

Final mile to Butlins
Final mile to Taunton Town Centre

Minehead Station feels well situated - but is it well situated for the residents and for the holiday maker traffic at the holiday camp?  Would the train attract people, or would that final 800 yards or so be the straw that broke the camels back and push many people off the train and into their cars for the whole journey to their holiday?  Big question I should have raised earlier - what / how would support from Butlins' be?

And a last point in a very long post indeed ... Taunton Station to Taunton Town Centre ...

Footnote - a guess at what a National Rail service could look like

Year 1:
80 minute journeys ...
From Minehead at
05*45, 07#05, 09z00, 12w00, 15w00, 18:00 and 21:00
From Taunton at
07:05, 10w30, 13w30, 16z30, 18#00, 19:30 and 22*30

Year 2 onward:
55 minute journeys
From Minehead at
06*15, 07#30, 08z30, 10w30, 12w30, 14w30, 16w30, 18:00 and 21:00
From Taunton at
07:30, 09w30, 11w30, 13w30, 15w30, 16z30, 18#00, 19:45 and 22*30

* - First / last trip of day
# - Through Bristol train / stables at Minehead
w - winter service only
z - all year; in summer then/from running Bishops Lydeard Shuttles

and finally

A post not designed to answer, but to raise questions and issues all in the one place. Will I get a shell-shocked silence from members, or strong reaction?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 23, 2020, 16:24:51
As regards fares, one possible solution might be to charger higher fares (similar to the present fares) for peak season heritage trains, and lower fares (similar to those elsewhere on network rail) for the of season trains.

To avoid disadvantaging local residents who travel regularly including during the heritage season, offer monthly season tickets all year around but based on the off season fares.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 23, 2020, 16:47:47
These are my thoughts on grahame’s proposal:

Here on the Guingamp-Carhaix line we are in a similar position in that we are a branch line with restricted speed limits. We are about 10km longer than the Taunton-Minehead route, with 2 mandatory intermediate stops (Mousteru and Callac) and 6 request stops (Coat-Guegan, Pont-Melvez, Plougonver, Les Mais, Le Penity and Carnoet-Locarn). Average daytime end to end journey time is 65 minutes, with around 1 or 2 request stops requiring passenger calls per journey. Peak journeys have a few minutes extra added as all request stops generally require passenger calls. There tends to be a few minutes extra added to journeys that pass each other at Callac too, although this is generally because of waiting time due to the timetable not being clockface as it needs to connect with mainline trains that are generally at different times per hour.

Taunton-Minehead through trains in winter would likely have 3 mandatory intermediate stops (Bishops Lydeard, Williton and Watchet) and 7 request stops (Norton Fitzwarren, Crowcombe Heathfield, Stogumber, Doniford Halt, Washford, Blue Anchor and Dunster). An average daytime end to end journey time of 55 minutes has been slated, and it wouldn’t surprise me in winter to see around 1 or 2 request stops requiring passenger calls per journey. Peak journeys may well see all request stops generally requiring passenger calls, so it may be wise to allow 60 minutes end to end for such journeys, but as for example with the Barnstaple line, it is at these times you would look to serve all stations in any case.

However, as the timetable is slated to be clockface-ish, it may well be that you could pass trains in less time and more efficiently at Williton than you can at Callac. Add to that the fact that you have allowed slightly more time per km for Taunton-Minehead than we get on Guingamp-Carhaix, and I believe that an overall winter through service with the above calling pattern would be viable.

However, if you do ultimately decide to miss out some station calls, then one thing to particularly watch out for though would be the transition between Year 1 and Year 2 timetables. With an initial 80-85 minute Year 1 end to end journey time, the temptation would be to call all trains at all stations in order to demonstrate to everyone along the line the potential benefits. However, if you then decide to drop some calls in the faster 55 minute end to end Year 2 timetable, you risk needlessly antagonising those affected, and potentially turning them into opponents of the overall project. Far better in my opinion to have a fairly solid view of your preferred calling pattern from Day 1, and only allow minor deviations from it.

Fare-wise, having different fares for the National Rail services to the Heritage Rail services seems the only logical solution. I just don’t see how you arrive at an acceptable compromise between the two.

In my mind, optimal solution is as grahame’s final timetable suggests. Through National Rail trains all day Taunton-Minehead November-March, from April-October peak and evening through National Rail Taunton-Minehead, daytime National Rail Taunton-Bishops Lydeard, change to Heritage Rail Bishops Lydeard-Minehead. Special dispensation for special occasions such as Santa Specials etc.

In terms of the maintenance regime, I would agree with the concept of modernisation with a heritage “veneer”. However, this should be done in such a way that during Heritage Rail operating hours, Bishops Lydeard-Minehead can be handed over completely to WSR to operate, with the aim of allowing them to function very much as they normally would. In order to facilitate this, I wonder whether legal and Health & Safety rules would allow for an Intermediate grade of railway worker, somewhere between Network Rail employee and WSR volunteer. The idea being that Network Rail could train WSR volunteers in how to use the modernised equipment on the line between Bishops Lydeard-Minehead, with the younger volunteers perhaps having the option to step up to Network Rail apprentice status. The benefits of this would be twofold – Firstly, WSR volunteers could continue to enjoy performing operational tasks on the modernised railway, and Secondly, it would help to bring through both the Network Rail employees and the Heritage Rail volunteers of the future.

I believe the best vehicle for achieving this would be the type of locally-managed Micro-Franchise first mooted by the SRA for the Cornish Branch Lines in the 2000s, and briefly resurrected as a concept by the Buxton-Barnsley ACORP regime in the mid-2010s. It would be led by a Chair and Deputy Chair - The Chair would be fully focused on the key reforms that would need to take place, and determined to see them through, while the Deputy Chair would work with those long-standing supporters and volunteers who would not be at all sure all this change is a good idea, and reassure them that it will all be ok. The Chair ideally should be a grahame-type, and the Deputy Chair a Peter Blackburn-type. That’s only based on my own experience of course – A RichardB-type with appropriate deputy would work just as well.

The board or committee they would lead would include liaison officers from Network Rail and GWR to ensure seamless interface with the National Rail Network, and a high-ranking officer from WSR to ensure equally seamless interface with Heritage Rail activities. Key local politicians at MP and local level, particularly given Somerset County Council’s pivotal ownership role, should also be on board.

All of them will need to agree a workable plan and unite to put it to volunteers and travelling public alike, as only then do I believe it will get the widespread support it would need to really become a runner. If just one of those groups or individuals breaks ranks, then that could be enough to spark the level of opposition that could lead us to the type of binary choice we would all want to avoid – National Rail “The only way this will work is if WSR are removed from the playing field” vs WSR “We are quite happy running a Heritage Railway thankyou, and we will make your life a legal and PR hell if you try and remove us from the playing field”.

I am sure that many of us can see an agreed way forward – Let’s work together to find and achieve that.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 23, 2020, 16:48:08
For the Butlins traffic, I feel that the longer term aim should be to build a Butlins station within the holiday camp site. The walk from train to holiday accommodation would then be no longer than from a car.

IMHO, this should be partly funded by Butlins, and partly funded from the public purse in order to encourage sustainable transport choices.

This new station could be either on a loop from the existing line in order that trains could still run to/from Minehead via Butlins, or a single ended branch terminating within the camp.
This would require portion working to still serve Minehead.

"This train is for Butlins and Minehead town. This train divides en route. Join the front 8 coaches for Butlins. Join the rear 4 coaches for Minehead town"

In the reverse direction, that portion of the train starting from Butlins could be at the new station in plenty of time without delaying anything else. Ample time for boarding with luggage, children, cycles, dogs etc.

Portion working is easy with DMUs or new battery trains, and entirely achievable with steam locomotives, though more trouble.
Steam haulage right into the holiday camp could be an attraction in its own right.
A modern battery train could be attractive for environmental reasons.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 23, 2020, 17:01:32
For the Butlins traffic, I feel that the longer term aim should be to build a Butlins station within the holiday camp site. The walk from train to holiday accommodation would then be no longer than from a car.

IMHO, this should be partly funded by Butlins, and partly funded from the public purse in order to encourage sustainable transport choices.

This new station could be either on a loop from the existing line in order that trains could still run to/from Minehead via Butlins, or a single ended branch terminating within the camp.
This would require portion working to still serve Minehead.

"This train is for Butlins and Minehead town. This train divides en route. Join the front 8 coaches for Butlins. Join the rear 4 coaches for Minehead town"

In the reverse direction, that portion of the train starting from Butlins could be at the new station in plenty of time without delaying anything else. Ample time for boarding with luggage, children, cycles, dogs etc.

Portion working is easy with DMUs or new battery trains, and entirely achievable with steam locomotives, though more trouble.
Steam haulage right into the holiday camp could be an attraction in its own right.
A modern battery train could be attractive for environmental reasons.

As Captain Mainwaring used to say "I think you're getting into the realms of fantasy"  ;)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 23, 2020, 19:09:08
I don't consider that a new Butlins station is into the realms of fantasy, there is growing concern about road congestion both locally and more generally.
The environmental costs of flying and driving are increasingly considered.

I did state that this should be considered in the longer term, not initially.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 23, 2020, 21:52:40
Some comments back ...

Timetables 1 to 2 are adjusted in peak times to be at the most time-dependent location at about the same time - usually Taunton, helping with the same work / college starts and ends, and avoiding the replacement of one set of connections with another as the trains get faster.  During the day it follows the differing clock face and (yes) huge care to be taken if any stops are on some trains only.

Minehead station(s). I find it hard to see trains dividing on their way in. I could see a modern platform alongside the single line on the north side outward of Seaward Way.  Borders onto Butlin's back fence - and perhaps there is no longer any need or desire for people to check in at the front in person? Could be a bit of a reminder of PenyChain - but not just from the holiday traffic.  I can do maps (I have drawn a catchment 1km) should it move forward (others can do maps just as well, of course!)

Apprenticships into NR - Wow! That is a brilliant thought - just the sort of new dawn opportunity that's needed and we hope (and can we do more than hope? - encourage? - suggest? - invite?) that a charismatic local lead picks in up and brings almost everyone along as owners within the team.

Shortish response to a long and excellent set of responses. But a further question in that last paragraph.  And another question - are there any other elephants I haven't even hinted at?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Celestial on August 23, 2020, 22:58:39
I don't consider that a new Butlins station is into the realms of fantasy, there is growing concern about road congestion both locally and more generally.
The environmental costs of flying and driving are increasingly considered.


I'm not sure many of Butlins' clientele fly in if I'm completely honest.  Though maybe they could remove the helipad from any future development in a nod to the environment.

And in a similar vein, for those deciding that the environmental cost of a fortnight on the Costa del Sunburn is too much, I doubt Butlins will be a first choice alternative.  I suspect that the typical demographic that considers Butlins an acceptable choice of holiday is more concerned with the budget available than the carbon footprint of their summer escape.   


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Rhydgaled on August 23, 2020, 23:02:03
Now digging a little deeper under the surface, there are numerous issues to be resolved (note - "resolved" and not "hurdles that will stop dual use") ...

Some comments back ...are there any other elephants I haven't even hinted at?
I fear so. I overlooked this one too, and it's a big one. PRM (Persons of Reduced mobility) - if the service is to run year-round as a part of the National Rail network, with through ticketing etc. ALL the trains will have to comply with the PRM TSI (Technical Specification for Interoperability). The regulations may have a dispensation allowing a train (or bus) operator to use heritiage vehicles on special occasions, which (if such a clause exists, I'm not sure if it does) I have thought in the past may allow a preserved IC125 or IC225 set in heritiage livery (with non-compliant, non-contrasting, doors) to be used to provide extra capacity for festivals etc. but I am almost certain the operating season of a heritiage railway is far greater than the limited number of days heritage stock would be permitted (if it is at all).

Therefore, the heritage stock needs to comply, meaning at the very least:
  • all toilets must be locked out of use, unless a wheelchair-accessible one is provided
  • wheelchair spaces must be provided
  • audio announcements must be provided detailing the next stop etc.
  • visual information must be provided detailing the next stop etc. for deaf passengers
Slam doors and the use of heritiage livery with non-contrasting doors could perhaps be managed by requiring the guard or a porter to open a few doors at each station. A brake coach at one end of the train could perhaps be fitted with wheelchair spaces and a wheelchair-accessible toilet while keeping the exterior and the rest of the train looking vintage, and I've been on at least one heritiage railway that has audio announcements. As long as they are done manually by a real person (or the whole announcement is recorded in one go, rather than being stiched together by a computer in real time) and 'see it, say it, sorted' etc. is avoided they may not appear too modern. But visual information? Sorry, I don't think that can be done without destroying the heritage feel. Would it be within the regulations to only provide the visual information in the modified wheelchair-carrying brake coach? Even if that is permissible, how would you communicate to the deaf person that they need to travel in the wheelchair coach?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 24, 2020, 00:06:29
But visual information? Sorry, I don't think that can be done without destroying the heritage feel. Would it be within the regulations to only provide the visual information in the modified wheelchair-carrying brake coach? Even if that is permissible, how would you communicate to the deaf person that they need to travel in the wheelchair coach?

If we provide a prominent, unmissable sign in heritage "veneer" style at every station informing deaf people that they need to travel in the wheelchair coach, would that cover it?

In terms of the overall changes that Rhydgaled has detailed, given that we would already be going for the concept of modernisation with a heritage "veneer", then I feel that a way could be found to accommodate them into the overall plan if that ends up being what is required.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: GBM on August 24, 2020, 03:58:53
Which perhaps then brings in another welliphant.

Oooooooz gooooonnna pay for it..................


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TaplowGreen on August 24, 2020, 05:55:26
Which perhaps then brings in another welliphant.

Oooooooz gooooonnna pay for it..................

Not a problem, Broadgage has decreed that Butlins will pick up the bill (see above), probably means that the prizes for the knobbly knees competition will be a little less extravagant though in order to offset the cost, and I doubt you'll find fillet steak and Port on the menu in the "all you can eat" buffet for much longer..........(I am presuming however that all trains to Butlins Central will have a Pullman restaurant?) 🙂


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 24, 2020, 07:41:37
A very interesting overnight discussion, thank you.  There is - I suspect - a need and desire to move forward with pragmatic steps - not "rip up and rebuild" mode.  This is not proposed as a borders railway project.  A requirement for a Development Consent Order should not be needed ... and a single carriage on heritage trains that are PRM accessible should be good provision, just as a single (lower) deck on double deck buses is good provision on buses.  There is certainly a need to look at each station that will be used by national services for access to those services for all, and in the case of some low number stations there could be a reluctant decision not to have the national services call.

Funding - perhaps a requirement to tap in on the national stage to the various funds and schemes. We are at a time of changes, and that's both a curse and a blessing.  There is a history of getting things "shovel ready" prior to knowing which fund / method will be used, and this one may be no different.  And, yes, it required speculation to get all the ducks in a row without a guarantee it will happen.    With a good scheme, with virtually everyone saying "we want this", it could happen.  I can find you some schemes that have moved forward without full funding which has then been found ... requires some "balls" and confidence - but can be done.  Look at extra funding just found for Portway Parkway, increased money for Portishead, which was not on the table at the start.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 24, 2020, 08:37:59
Missed from previous post ...

Let's look at the metrics of "who will use it" for both Butlins and the town, perhaps changed in the new normal.  Rail and public transport in general is for everyone and as well as the genteel country music festival goers and stereotype families. It's for the people who may have preferred Ayia Napa or Ibiza for their main / usual holidays or weekends away, but the carrot of Minehead plus the stick of quarantine worry on return may keep them local now. Comparisons to Weymouth - served by what are (this month) the most overcrowded GWR trains.  Yes, I know - that 21:00 off Minehead connects with the 22:21 or 22:43 at Taunton to Bristol (M-F services) and is likely to require 'dry rules'.

Daytime outbound by heritage train, back on the national service are likely to be common requirements for some of the people I mention, and that's where care needs to be taken in having an encouraging yet financially secure fare system.  Outgoing I suspect the day trippers who may not be fit enough to drive home by the evening will pay heritage rates and if those are "return by national rail" tickets, you eliminate fare collection issues after dark.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 24, 2020, 10:13:51
Which perhaps then brings in another welliphant.

Oooooooz gooooonnna pay for it..................

In answering that, it is probably prudent to also ask Ooooooow much is it gooooonnna cost......

Lord Tony Berkeley and Michael Byng attempted to do that in their July 2020 South West rail enhancement proposals report:

Does anyone know what is proposed regarding "upgrading the Taunton – Minehead West Somerset Railway heritage line    (£11.8m)."

Do they mean upgrading the existing heritage line, perhaps to national network standards ?
Or improving facilities for through running between the WSR and Taunton ?
Or subsidising the running costs of a regular through service ?

Or something else.

No, I don't know - but I can look it up using the link Lee provided:
Quote
West Somerset Railway – provision of community rail services; estimated project cost
£11,800,000.00

This popular heritage line is in need of major track and structures upgrade if it is to continue to operate. Expert track engineers will need to finalise the exact needs, but they can provide this service as part of the heritage sector support. The works themselves, however, should include upgrading the line to higher line speeds and enabling scheduled passenger services from the large town of Minehead and intermediate stations to Taunton and possible beyond on the GW Network. It has the potential of removing the need for many journeys on the currently congested and slow road network.
a. Taunton Station (NR) – alterations to Platform 2
b. Taunton to Norton Fitzwarren (NR) – enhance bi-directional loop
c. Norton Fitzwarren to Minehead (WSR) – track renewals and capacity enhancement

However, it is unclear whether the actual costs of providing the through National Rail services are included in the £11.8m figure, and the authors themselves admit that the exact needs of the upgrade of the WSR section are yet to be finalised. It is unlikely that additional potential issues such as those identified by Rhydgaled have been factored in either. And, dare I say it, there is a fear that potential costs of projects elsewhere in their report have been somewhat undershot.

So let's err on the side of caution, double that figure, and call it £25m.

That just happens to be the cost of the recent upgrade of our neighbouring Guingamp-Paimpol line. It has SNCF services all year round, with the line being shared with steam services in the summer. It is also roughly the same length as the Taunton-Minehead route, with a similar restricted speed limit profile.

However, SNCF didnt happen to have a spare £25m sitting around for this project, and a similar Oooooooz gooooonnna pay for it debate ensued.

The answer was that all the project stakeholders chipped in to pay for it, to the following contribution percentages:

Brittany region: 43%, Central Government: 20.3%, SNCF Réseau: 15%, Departmental Council of Côtes d'Armor: 11%, Paimpol community of communes -Goëlo: 4.4%, Guingamp Community: 4%, Pays de Guingamp: 1.5%, Pontrieux Community: 0.6%, Pays de Bégard: 0.2%

While I would be the first to admit that acheiving similar contribution percentages in terms of funding would be difficult to say the least in the current climate, it does underline the need to come up with a coherent, united plan, and to get everyone involved to coherently unite around it.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on August 24, 2020, 10:44:50
As one of those involved in the rescue of the WSR from oblivion from 1973 onwards, and active involvement in operation from early 1976 to late 1979, I'd like to say how heartening it is to see the branch again being thought of in the light of its ability to offer a proper public transport service

The GWR (the real one) added greatly to the line's capacity in the 1930s by doubling the sections between Norton Fitzwarren and Bishops Lydeard and between Dunster and Minehead.  I'm not sure about the utility of the first of these sections as being doubled in the present day (it was widely rumoured that the only reason the GW did it, along with the section to Milverton on the Barnstaple line, was to avoid the need for token exchanges at the extremely busy Norton Fitzwarren Jcn box).  Also, "summer service only" basic crossing loops were provided at Leigh Woods and at Kentsford.  Remotely-controlled reinstatement of some/all of these (assuming the money could be found, which is a huge "if") would enable a timetable to be provided that would cater for commuter trains to/from Taunton and beyond and also heritage steam trains.  30 - 40 minute headways would become possible with shorter sections and recovery from late running would be easier with the double track at the Minehead end.  Something like this was my ideal, back in the 1970s

40mph running for DMU type trains was envisioned by the 1975 LRO - I don't know how amenable to this prospect are the present day powers-that-be.

The signal (E627) that gives access to the main line at Norton Fitzwarren, controlled by Exeter Panel, routes only to the present Down/Up Relief.  Which is handy, because of access to the existing bay platforms at the country end of the Down Relief platform at Taunton, but a pain regulation wise because a train on or off the branch is difficult to cross the main lines.

I suspect it's all do-able, but lack of will politically, a dog-in-the-manger attitude amongst preservationists of the present WSR, and biggest of all, a shortage of money, will keep all of this very much on the back burner



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 24, 2020, 19:51:02
So let's err on the side of caution, double that figure, and call it £25m.

You have been reading what Jonathan Jones-Pratt, chairman of the West Someret Railway, said at the start of March:  (from  ((here))  (https://www.mineheadraillinkgroup.org.uk/component/content/article/105-news/365-rail-link-plan-could-cost-30-million?Itemid=1395))

Quote
He added: “We currently operate under the Light Railway Order.

“To run the service MRLG are proposing, at the speeds they are proposing, would require a huge overhaul of much of our infrastructure to bring it up to the standards required for running a Network Rail service.

“That alone could cost between £20 million and £30m.”

Away from the spotlight of publicity, and with the shakeup of coronavirus on top of everything else, I do wonder if some respected 'elder statesman' could start the unthinkable moving along. You've seen my description earlier, and I would add in a West Country knowledge too, and perhaps a railway and/or local government transport career.

As one of those involved in the rescue of the WSR from oblivion from 1973 onwards, and active involvement in operation from early 1976 to late 1979, I'd like to say how heartening it is to see the branch again being thought of in the light of its ability to offer a proper public transport service

[snip]

I suspect it's all do-able, but lack of will politically, a dog-in-the-manger attitude amongst preservationists of the present WSR, and biggest of all, a shortage of money, will keep all of this very much on the back burner

Wonderful extra fill in - thank you. Just snipped to make complete my post without getting out of hand.

Perhaps - just perhaps - the current crisis has tossed all the cards in the air and people can think the unthinkable, fund what would have been very hard to fund.    And move it OFF the back burner - bring it forward in a spirit of a new beginning.




Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 24, 2020, 20:53:50
So let's err on the side of caution, double that figure, and call it £25m.

You have been reading what Jonathan Jones-Pratt, chairman of the West Someret Railway, said at the start of March:  (from  ((here))  (https://www.mineheadraillinkgroup.org.uk/component/content/article/105-news/365-rail-link-plan-could-cost-30-million?Itemid=1395))

Quote
He added: “We currently operate under the Light Railway Order.

“To run the service MRLG are proposing, at the speeds they are proposing, would require a huge overhaul of much of our infrastructure to bring it up to the standards required for running a Network Rail service.

“That alone could cost between £20 million and £30m.”

I hadnt read that actually - If I had, then I would have quoted it  ;D

What I do find interesting is that both MRLG and our proposals see the provision of through National Rail services as a way of securing WSR's very survival, whilst Jonathan Jones-Pratt clearly takes what Witham Bobby described as a dog-in-the-manger attitude - ie that the proposal is an existential threat to the WSR.

In my opinion, he needs to be careful what he wishes for. It wont have gone unnoticed by those among the powers that be who view WSR as a barometer of the health of the Heritage Rail sector that they have yet to operate a timetabled train in anger since the Coronvirus hit in earnest, while a number of comparable heritage railways are up and running again.

If he and the WSR force the binary choice that I described in an earlier post, then they may find that they end up removing themselves from the playing field far more effectively than any supposed "enemies" might.

Our proposal provides a way of avoiding that and allowing WSR to continue what they do best for many years to come, while also enjoying the safety in numbers of being a key part of an overall effective team.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 26, 2020, 17:48:49
Re post # 132, This I find rather depressing. This is NOT to be taken as a personal attack on the O/P who is clearly very knowledgeable.
I am well aware that running an all round service from Minehead to Taunton or beyond is a non trivial undertaking.
It does look as though the problems are even greater than I and others anticipated. Even meeting the PRESENT regulatory challenges might not work as such requirements tend to become steadily more onerous.

It is becoming to sound comparable to building a new railway, and nearly as costly.

I say again that this is not a criticism of the poster, who is obviously well informed.

 


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: ellendune on August 26, 2020, 18:14:19
Re post # 132, This I find rather depressing.

I think I have worked out which post you mean. However, if like me you have changed the setting to show the most recent post at the top, they number from the most recent. 

Did you mean this one?

As one of those involved in the rescue of the WSR from oblivion from 1973 onwards, and active involvement in operation from early 1976 to late 1979, I'd like to say how heartening it is to see the branch again being thought of in the light of its ability to offer a proper public transport service

The GWR (the real one) added greatly to the line's capacity in the 1930s by doubling the sections between Norton Fitzwarren and Bishops Lydeard and between Dunster and Minehead.  I'm not sure about the utility of the first of these sections as being doubled in the present day (it was widely rumoured that the only reason the GW did it, along with the section to Milverton on the Barnstaple line, was to avoid the need for token exchanges at the extremely busy Norton Fitzwarren Jcn box).  Also, "summer service only" basic crossing loops were provided at Leigh Woods and at Kentsford.  Remotely-controlled reinstatement of some/all of these (assuming the money could be found, which is a huge "if") would enable a timetable to be provided that would cater for commuter trains to/from Taunton and beyond and also heritage steam trains.  30 - 40 minute headways would become possible with shorter sections and recovery from late running would be easier with the double track at the Minehead end.  Something like this was my ideal, back in the 1970s

40mph running for DMU type trains was envisioned by the 1975 LRO - I don't know how amenable to this prospect are the present day powers-that-be.

The signal (E627) that gives access to the main line at Norton Fitzwarren, controlled by Exeter Panel, routes only to the present Down/Up Relief.  Which is handy, because of access to the existing bay platforms at the country end of the Down Relief platform at Taunton, but a pain regulation wise because a train on or off the branch is difficult to cross the main lines.

I suspect it's all do-able, but lack of will politically, a dog-in-the-manger attitude amongst preservationists of the present WSR, and biggest of all, a shortage of money, will keep all of this very much on the back burner


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 26, 2020, 19:00:46
Re post # 132, This I find rather depressing.

I think I have worked out which post you mean. However, if like me you have changed the setting to show the most recent post at the top, they number from the most recent. 

Did you mean this one?

As one of those involved in the rescue of the WSR from oblivion from 1973 onwards, and active involvement in operation from early 1976 to late 1979, I'd like to say how heartening it is to see the branch again being thought of in the light of its ability to offer a proper public transport service

The GWR (the real one) added greatly to the line's capacity in the 1930s by doubling the sections between Norton Fitzwarren and Bishops Lydeard and between Dunster and Minehead.  I'm not sure about the utility of the first of these sections as being doubled in the present day (it was widely rumoured that the only reason the GW did it, along with the section to Milverton on the Barnstaple line, was to avoid the need for token exchanges at the extremely busy Norton Fitzwarren Jcn box).  Also, "summer service only" basic crossing loops were provided at Leigh Woods and at Kentsford.  Remotely-controlled reinstatement of some/all of these (assuming the money could be found, which is a huge "if") would enable a timetable to be provided that would cater for commuter trains to/from Taunton and beyond and also heritage steam trains.  30 - 40 minute headways would become possible with shorter sections and recovery from late running would be easier with the double track at the Minehead end.  Something like this was my ideal, back in the 1970s

40mph running for DMU type trains was envisioned by the 1975 LRO - I don't know how amenable to this prospect are the present day powers-that-be.

The signal (E627) that gives access to the main line at Norton Fitzwarren, controlled by Exeter Panel, routes only to the present Down/Up Relief.  Which is handy, because of access to the existing bay platforms at the country end of the Down Relief platform at Taunton, but a pain regulation wise because a train on or off the branch is difficult to cross the main lines.

I suspect it's all do-able, but lack of will politically, a dog-in-the-manger attitude amongst preservationists of the present WSR, and biggest of all, a shortage of money, will keep all of this very much on the back burner

Im not sure I find it quite so depressing.

What I thought Witham Bobby was saying was that it was do-able, but if none of the current variables change, then it wont happen. And he's right.

What I believe is that enough of the variables could be made to change to make the proposal worth investigating.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on August 26, 2020, 20:41:45
That's the trouble with times like these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfnhmuZ27eQ


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: trainbuff on August 26, 2020, 23:26:43
Its not the despair that does it. Its the hope! Love clockwise and John Cleese


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 27, 2020, 05:03:35
Drip, drip, drip ...

These are times of change, and there's a danger if parties don't change to match new times, they'll be left with little or nothing.  And perhaps that's a wonderful opportunity to say "what have we to loose - let's go all out and try this".  Writing that, I expect both the heritage and the National Network folks to have a feeling I'm looking at them.  And both groups are right.

People keep asking. People keep trying. In spite of all the issues raised, it would be "common sense" to use the already-engineered and currently-tracked corridor from Taunton into Minehead for both tourist trips out and the normal journeys of the population and economy of the area.  More likely than not it won't happen - but that is not to stop people trying.  If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.  For sure, "are we wasting our time even trying" is a good question, but perseverance over a number of years can pay off - just about every national network re-opening has grown from seeds of earlier schemes / thoughts / questions over the years which have been unsuccessful.

Edit - correcting a typo


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 29, 2020, 18:55:23

Footnote - a guess at what a National Rail service could look like

Year 1:
80 minute journeys ...
From Minehead at
05*45, 07#05, 09z00, 12w00, 15w00, 18:00 and 21:00
From Taunton at
07:05, 10w30, 13w30, 16z30, 18#00, 19:30 and 22*30



Don't like guessing ... wanted a bit of light relief from something else so had a play, and had a couple of nagging wonders if it would work.

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/minehead_80.jpg)

* Crossing National Rail services at Williton ONLY
* Terminating at platform on Seaward Road directly beside / behind Butlins
* National Rail trains do not use Minehead heritage station which can be locked secure out of hours

Early train all year off Minehead handles connecting London and Bristol commuters
Second train is for Bristol / Cardiff ... school and commuters in to Taunton
Third train is hospital / shopping / leisure traffic
18:00 caters for commuters returning home from Minehead (pity about it being much earlier in summer?)
21:00 is final train for homebound people;  Bristol connection at Taunton M-F

First train off Taunton provides for commuters into Minehead
Next two in winter provide for daytime arrivals (time difference no great problem in summer?)
16:30, 17:55 and 19:30 are school / commuter returns (pity 16:30 is earlier in summer)
Late train inbound at 22:30 for the night owls

Norton Fitzwarren, Doniford, Crowcombe and Stogumber services possibly thinner than need be, pointing joerneys towards Taunton in the morning, back later in the day.

* Heritage trains cross at Crowcombe, Williton and Blue Anchor
* Heritage YELLOW timetable used - peak services only minor mods.
- Only mix of heritage and National is from 18:09 to 18:30 - cross at Crowcombe.
- Diesel heritage services call at Minehead (Seaward Road)
- Only first outbound / last inbound steam trains call at Seaward Road to avoid cutting into service time

Keeping an eye on both day trips out from Butlins and arrival / departures from there.

Some summer / through train concerns as might be a bit tight; want to avoid double change?  How about longer layover at Bishops Lydeard which allow for staff PNBs?    How important is through Bristol service during day in summer - are connection at Taunton for London ad the north more critical?   Changes at Bishops Lydeard - run National Rail terminators to bay so that it can be cross platform to / from heritage and National Rail will not get in way of steam run around.

Connections at Bishop's Lydeard quicker in one direction, slower in other for mechandising
All have some allowance for making up time
All services except 16:15 off Minehead have National Rail connections (no NR train avaiable)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Witham Bobby on August 29, 2020, 19:16:36
Well thought out, Grahame

Striking similarity to the timetable which was in mind back in 1978. Except for the late evening services. Back then, there didn’t seem to be much point.

The weakness is the lack opportunity to cope when things go wrong; there’s no spare capacity in terms of vacant paths in summer. I guess the same can be said of all the West Country branches, though


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on August 29, 2020, 19:31:14
Looking good - I personally would call the last trains from both Minehead and Taunton at all stations, given that you dont have to pass them anywhere.

Only time for a very quick glance at moment, so may be back with more later. Looks like a great effort though.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on August 29, 2020, 21:47:29
I see relatively little risk in national network services running to/from the present Minehead station.
Whilst there might a slight increase in vandalism and theft risk, I doubt that this would be significant.
The existing station is far from secure at present, the gate can be locked but the low fence is easy to climb. Access is also easy by walking along the track for a short distance from the adjacent level crossing.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on August 30, 2020, 01:55:27
Thank you, gentlemen, for those early comments - and from knowledgable strength too.  Lots of choices made in coming up with what is an example of what could be done - I have tried to be "middle of road" most of the way but may have put too much expense in with a new platform, and too little be stretching infrastructure - I am acutely aware of awkward signalling conflicts across Norton Fitzwarren and the limitations of where the branch can be entered and left from, and issues of interfacing with existing national rail requirements not [yet] fully addressed at a major operating point.    Inputs - expert / community / financial - would / will test the choices made.

Good to hear of "striking similarities" to the earlier days proposals; what I came up with looked from current first principles rather than reading back through old papers, so the similarities are an additional re-assurance - if I have come up, independently, with something along the same lines, it would suggest it may not be 100% a mad thought.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on September 01, 2020, 12:01:52
From the West Somerset Railway Association (https://www.wsra.org.uk/2020/09/01/financial-support-for-the-west-somerset-railway/)

Quote
The trustees of the West Somerset Railway Association (WSRA), and the board of the West Somerset Railway PLC (PLC) are pleased to announce that they have reached an agreement which will financially support the railway during these challenging times. Today’s agreement means that:
• The WSRA has sold their promotions business (which operates a shop & café at Bishops Lydeard and a restoration workshop at Williton) to the PLC
• The PLC will pay the WSRA an agreed sum of £90,721 for the assets of that business
• The WSRA will loan £70,000 to support the PLC, which has been prevented from operating by the Covid-19 restrictions. The low-interest loan is secured by charges on two WSR PLC owned coaches.

Mike Sherwood, acting Chairman of the WSRA said “I am pleased that we have been able to conclude this matter to the satisfaction of both parties. The WSRA will now be able to give its full attention to fundraising on behalf of the railway, to further supplement the financial support we are already providing at Williton, Minehead and via the rail renewal campaign”

Jonathan Jones-Pratt Chairman of the PLC said “Both parties have worked hard to bring this matter to a successful conclusion. We can now move on to focus on the preparations and funding necessary to bring the railway back into operation”.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on September 01, 2020, 13:25:00
Glad to hear of the cooperation between the two groups, but I still feel that a more unified structure would be preferable.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on September 06, 2020, 07:09:02
Glad to hear of the cooperation between the two groups, but I still feel that a more unified structure would be preferable.

It seems that only some groups are at peace, other not so  ....

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/wsr_20200905_01.jpg)(http://www.wellho.net/pix/wsr_20200905_02.jpg)

I fear that elements are fighting for what they believe, but terms like "fighting to the death" and "Pyrric victory" come to mind as I look at potential outcomes. I don't see how that sort of outcome is in the interests of a vibrant contribution to the local economy, be it in terms of tourist attraction and income, or in terms of national connectivity or (lest we cease to dream) ... both!   And if volunteers want to be able to volunteer in the future, staff want jobs in the future, shareholders want value in their shares and/or see a reward in their investment bearing positive fruit, this is not good for that prognosis.

While there is what looks like infighting going on between apparently significant (at least very noisy) parties, those who can or could help such as the land owner, the local MP, government agencies, local authorities, potential funders, respected elder statesmen, will be reluctant to put their time, name, or money towards helping to provide an asset for the West Somerset area. Should everyone close get behind a unified plan - rather in the same way that a coalition of views can come together with cabinet responsibility and compromises, these necessary wider helpers might well come on board.

Just my personal thought ... but not out of line with what's being said on social media ...

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/wsr_20200905_03.jpg)

Images in this post may be enlarged to more readable size if you "view image in separate window"



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on September 06, 2020, 13:49:07
This is getting a bit People's Front of Judea vs. Judean People's Front (splitters!).


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on September 06, 2020, 14:26:18
This is getting a bit People's Front of Judea vs. Judean People's Front (splitters!).

I agree, unfortunately.

Perhaps that should be Public limited front of Judea, versus Judean peoples association.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: GBM on September 06, 2020, 15:43:00
This is getting a bit People's Front of Judea vs. Judean People's Front (splitters!).
Not related to the Tooting Popular Front then! (going back too many years)  ::) ::)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on September 06, 2020, 15:55:16
And not forgetting the Minehead rail link group, and the broadgage BBTB group, which is related to the broadgage P+S group, though these two work well together and are not in competition.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: TonyK on September 08, 2020, 11:19:28
And not forgetting the Minehead rail link group, and the broadgage BBTB group, which is related to the broadgage P+S group, though these two work well together and are not in competition.

I had forgotten about the Judean Popular People's Front, as many do.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on September 08, 2020, 11:49:22
And not forgetting the Minehead rail link group, and the broadgage BBTB group, which is related to the broadgage P+S group, though these two work well together and are not in competition.
I had forgotten about the Judean Popular People's Front, as many do.



And so it goes on ... from the Minehead Rail Link Facebook page ... the troops are amassing ready for the Battle of Blue Anchor ...

Quote
If members here are following the evolving drama concerning what the WSR have called a `hostile' takeover of the WSSRT, here`s the latest from the `rebels' themselves.  I`ll not add anything to this other than to note that across social media, the `rebels' seem to have more support for their planned action than the opposition have for their defence so far.  But please, as ever, make up your own minds.

As a public group, everyone is welcome to read the message which I have mirrored ((here)) (http://www.passenger.chat/sfptWSSRT.pdf) and the comments via https://www.facebook.com/groups/mineheadraillinkgroup/permalink/1225759217770126/ .  From the outside, it does seem to be a very different metric to many other heritage railways - noticed by a contributor
Quote
The WSR Plc is near bankrupt and expects to run on donations again for this year.
The likes of the mid Hants railway has been running a train service for sometime now along with others.
At the end of the furlong in October the remaining WSR paid staff of the railway be out of a job.

Having said which ... no trains to Bronwydd Arms, Bodmin, Brechin, Bo'ness, Corris, Stanhope .... perhaps they have very similar problems, perhaps even dirty washing which, however, has not come to such wide public attention.






Edit to add ... P.S.   Lots of references the Bailey Report.  Not found a copy, but discussion at https://www.wsfp.co.uk/article.cfm?id=124137 which makes it very clear on much of what is in there.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Red Squirrel on September 08, 2020, 13:40:13
There's a very good poem by Simon Rae called, as I remember, 'All-purpose late 20th century creed'. I am surprised I can't find it online, but from memory it ends something like:

Quote
...in the pursuit of peace, all wars (excepting mine) shall cease.

It's that darned 'excepting mine' that gets you every time...



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on September 25, 2020, 10:01:58
From the West Somerset Free Press (https://www.wsfp.co.uk/article.cfm?id=124278&headline=Railway%20expert%20points%20to%20%27Trojan%20Horse%27%20move&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2020)

Quote
THE controversy surrounding the three organisations running the West Somerset Railway escalated further this week when it was claimed that moves to merge two charities would only result in ?bitterness, anger and distrust?.

But don't we already have bitterness, anger and distrust in large measure and in public ... enough to put off other organisations and individuals who might otherwise be very supportive in normal, and these abnormal, times.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 03, 2020, 10:09:19
It all seems so long ago ... can someone check / remind me, please?   West Somerset Railway was closed overwinter and that ran direct into the covid shutdown.  What was the last date that a train called at Blue Anchor?   Last Christmas specials??


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on October 03, 2020, 10:33:13
It all seems so long ago ...

...since we had the last instalment of your masterplan to revive (it will soon be "reopen" at this rate) the line.

More please  :)


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 04, 2020, 19:31:37
It all seems so long ago ...

...since we had the last instalment of your masterplan to revive (it will soon be "reopen" at this rate) the line.

More please  :)

I'm noting that John Bailey of the North Yorkshire Moors Railway has taken a full look and written a report / recommendations, further (as I undertstand it) has at least followed up at certain meetings, from various minutes online.  From those various minutes, they're also sharing  with / learning from the team on the Swanage Railway.  Whether the ideas / experts are used to their positive full advantage to supplement and co-ordinate local skills, and whether they're available enough to do so, and whether they have everyone's full support, let's see over the next months.

From those same minutes ... plans to run Santa Specials from Bishop's Lydeard to Williton are being made ... which will involve an ECS working from Minehead. Notable by its absence from those notes - any plans for any trains after 24th December.

But before you look forward to celebrating Santa through Stogumber - look at the website timetable page ( https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/timetables ) which over this weekend has stated:

At the present time we are not clear when the railway will reopen, but this information will be posted here, as soon as it becomes available. We are working to maintain the railway, and plan to operate a service as soon as we can. We regret however that for the remainder of this year, 2020, all special events, including galas and dining trains, have been cancelled. (This information supersedes any information about these events elsewhere in this website. In some cases that information is still shown so that you may plan for the future.)

The front of the website - comes up with a big popup:

Quote
COVID 19 AND THE WEST SOMERSET RAILWAY
We regret that the West Somerset Railway is currently not running services due to the Covid-19 virus pandemic. We are fully complying with and following government guidance. However we will be holding a smaller than normal 1940s event over the weekend of 12th and 13th September 2020 for more information please visit the Events and Experiences page on our website. At the present time we are not clear when the railway will start to run services, but this information will be posted here, as soon as it becomes available. We are working to maintain the railway, and plan to operate a service as soon as we can. We regret however that for the remainder of this year, 2020, the majority of our special events, including galas and dining trains, have been cancelled. No bookings for any of these events are being taken at the present time apart from the 1940s event. We are very sorry to have had to take these decisions, and we very much look forward to welcoming you back to the West Somerset Railway as soon as we are able to do so. If you would like to donate to the West Somerset Railway, please click on the picture.

and the use of "will" indicates it was written a while back and not updated when the date passed.    And in any case the event touted to all new arriving visitors got amended to an unspecified later date

Quote
Mineheads 1940s weekend postponed
Published: 10th September 2020
Following discussions between the organisers the West Somerset Railway and Minehead BID it was been decided with sadness to postpone this weekends planned 1940s event in Minehead.



No conclusion from me, Lee ... except to suggest that if they really are all sorting themselves out, they would do well to have starightforward, joint, and current statement on the web site to that effect, and to take down / mark as "archive - see xxx" all the other contradictory stuff.

If they get sorted out, good.   If they fail, perhaps there would be an opportunity for a respected elder statesman - a newly retired transport industry boss with a track record of positive community engagement who's got experience of the area but has not been tainted by significant association with any of the groups.  I have several it could be in mind.




Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: AMLAG on October 04, 2020, 22:52:00
The WSR has stated that no passenger trains will run from and to Minehead (irrespective of the Virus situation) until next March. This is due to the Somerset County Council funded and organised renewal and updating of the Level Crossing at Minehead and associated railway signalling not being completed until then.
Hand signalling of passenger trains across the Level Crossing is, some may be surprised to learn, deemed undesirable.
The currently planned Santa trains are only running from Bishops Lydiard to Williton and back.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 06, 2020, 18:42:08
Funny things, Facebook posts ... someone has just posted this from last year.



https://www.facebook.com/groups/mineheadraillinkgroup/permalink/1250025698676811


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: infoman on October 09, 2020, 07:34:41
BBC points west(at 07:25am on friday) are reporting that Minehead station will get ?900,000 pounds from the heritage fund.

Should be shown again during the morning local news.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 09, 2020, 09:32:07
BBC points west(at 07:25am on friday) are reporting that Minehead station will get ?900,000 pounds from the heritage fund.

Should be shown again during the morning local news.

From the West Somerset Railway (https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/west-somerset-railway-secures-significant-culture-recovery-fund-for-heritage-support-from-government) ... a long article with a great deal of information.   Excellent news for the WSR!

Quote
The West Somerset Railway (WSR) has announced today Friday 9 October that its recent application to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport?s (DCMS) ?Culture Recovery Fund for Heritage? support has been successful. The Plc will now receive a grant of ?865,000, all of which will help the 23-mile former GWR branch line recover from the enforced closure of the railway since March during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: bobm on October 09, 2020, 09:56:28
Paul Clifton of the BBC has also tweeted that money has gone to the Watercress Line and the Swanage Railway too.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on October 09, 2020, 10:40:00
BBC points west(at 07:25am on friday) are reporting that Minehead station will get ?900,000 pounds from the heritage fund.

Should be shown again during the morning local news.

From the West Somerset Railway (https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/west-somerset-railway-secures-significant-culture-recovery-fund-for-heritage-support-from-government) ... a long article with a great deal of information.   Excellent news for the WSR!

Quote
The West Somerset Railway (WSR) has announced today Friday 9 October that its recent application to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport?s (DCMS) ?Culture Recovery Fund for Heritage? support has been successful. The Plc will now receive a grant of ?865,000, all of which will help the 23-mile former GWR branch line recover from the enforced closure of the railway since March during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.



On a completely unrelated note, we came across an interesting post on a Jack Russell dog forum (we have 2 at home). An owner had become increasingly concerned that her previously healthy, vibrant dog kept drinking whole bowls of water one after the other - she literally couldnt fill it up fast enough!

On closer inspection though, it became clear that the bowl had been fatally compromised by a hairline crack, and no matter how much water she poured into it, it would simply drain away, and the poor dog was deprived of any of the life-sustaining benefits.

There was nothing for it but to throw the broken old bowl out, and replace it with a completely new one. Both dog and owner are understandably far more relieved and happy going forward as a result.

My apologies for this off-topic wander - I will now let you get back to discussing Minehead and the future of the WSR  ;D


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: bradshaw on October 09, 2020, 11:42:56
Full list in alphabetical order at this site

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/925262/List_of_under__1m_awards_9_Oct.pdf



Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Andy on October 09, 2020, 11:56:25
Good to see other heritage railways in the region have also received some support.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 09, 2020, 12:24:01
Good to see other heritage railways in the region have also received some support.

29 out of 433 awards have "Rail" in their organisation name:

Quote
906000 Award Severn Valley Railway (Holdings) Public Limited Company
865000 Award West Somerset Railway Plc.
727200 Award Bluebell Railway PLC
600000 Award Mid Hants Railway Ltd / Mid Hants Railway Preservation Society Ltd (MHRPS)
470000 Award Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch Railway
360000 Award North Norfolk Railway plc
332300 Award South Devon Railway Trust
318000 Award Gloucestershire Warwickshire Steam Railway plc
301500 Award The Kent and East Sussex Railway Company Limited
245500 Award Tanfield Railway Company Limited
231600 Award Keighley & Worth Valley Railway Preservation Society
223200 Award Swanage Railway Company
207200 Award Ribble Steam Railway Ltd
190500 Award The Mid Norfolk Railway Preservation Trust
153900 Award Wealden Railway Company Limited
98000 Award Epping Ongar Railway Holdings Limited
90000 Award Wensleydale Railway Plc
85000 Award WyvernRail plc
84300 Award South Tynedale Railway Preservation Society
79900 Award Middleton Railway Trust
76100 Award Helston Railway Preservation Company Ltd
49000 Award The Whitwell & Reepham Railway Preservation Society Ltd
46000 Award Northampton Steam Railway Limited
27900 Award Plym Valley Railway Company Limited
26500 Award Sittingbourne and Kemsley Light Railway Limited
25000 Award Great Northern & East Lincolnshire Railway Ltd T?A Lincolnshire Wolds Railway
21300 Award Aln Valley Railway Trust
20000 Award Colne Valley Railway Preservation Ltd.
20000 Award Cambrian Heritage Railways Limited

Widen in to "Heritage" and "Preservation" as well and you get more than twice the number:

Code:
Aln Valley Railway Trust Award ?21,300
Barnsley Museums and Heritage Trust Award ?24,000
Bath Preservation Trust Award ?825,400
Bluebell Railway PLC Award ?727,200
Cambrian Heritage Railways Limited Award ?20,000
Canalside Heritage Centre Award ?99,800
Christian Heritage Award ?25,000
Colne Valley Railway Preservation Ltd. Award ?20,000
Cornwall Aviation Heritage Centre Award ?53,200
Daniel Adamson Preservation Society Award ?151,000
Delapre Abbey Preservation Trust Award ?143,100
Epping Ongar Railway Holdings Limited Award ?98,000
Fly Navy Heritage Trust Award ?280,400
Gloucestershire Warwickshire Steam Railway plc Award ?318,000
Great Northern & East Lincolnshire Railway Ltd T?A Lincolnshire Wolds Railway Award ?25,000
Great Yarmouth Preservation Trust Award ?140,000
Hartlebury Castle Preservation Trust Award ?166,500
Helston Railway Preservation Company Ltd Award ?76,100
Heritage Trust for the North West Award ?187,600
Heritage Trust of Lincolnshire Award ?278,200
Hoghton Tower Preservation Trust Award ?106,700
Keevill Heritage Ltd Award ?19,500
Keighley & Worth Valley Railway Preservation Society Award ?231,600
Mid Hants Railway Ltd / Mid Hants Railway Preservation Society Ltd (MHRPS) Award ?600,000
Middleton Railway Trust Award ?79,900
Morecambe Winter Gardens Preservation Trust Award ?20,800
Mountain Heritage Trust Award ?17,400
New Brighton Heritage and Information Centre Award ?15,000
Nimrod Preservation Group XV232 C.I.C. Award ?11,100
North Norfolk Railway plc Award ?360,000
Northampton Steam Railway Limited Award ?46,000
Nottingham Heritage Vehicles Charity Award ?24,200
Pendeen Community Heritage Award ?186,300
Pilgrim Heritage Sailing Foundation Award ?38,000
Plym Valley Railway Company Limited Award ?27,900
Re-Form Heritage Award ?26,300
Ribble Steam Railway Ltd Award ?207,200
Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch Railway Award ?470,000
Severn Valley Railway (Holdings) Public Limited Company Award ?906,000
Sharpe's Pottery Heritage and Arts Trust Award ?127,800
Silverstone Heritage Ltd / The Silverstone Experience Award ?572,000
Sittingbourne and Kemsley Light Railway Limited Award ?26,500
Slough Fort Preservation Trust Award ?10,900
South Devon Railway Trust Award ?332,300
South Tynedale Railway Preservation Society Award ?84,300
Sporting Heritage Community Interest Company Award ?97,000
St Bartholomew's Heritage Award ?151,600
Swanage Railway Company Award ?223,200
Tanfield Railway Company Limited Award ?245,500
The Dronfield Heritage Trust Award ?79,200
The Kent and East Sussex Railway Company Limited Award ?301,500
The Mid Norfolk Railway Preservation Trust Award ?190,500
The New Mechanics Institution Preservation Trust Ltd (and The Mechanics Institution Trust Enterprises Ltd) Award ?42,300
The Saltaire World Heritage Education Association Award ?13,200
The Whitwell & Reepham Railway Preservation Society Ltd Award ?49,000
Triskele Heritage Award ?15,100
Wealden Railway Company Limited Award ?153,900
Wensleydale Railway Plc Award ?90,000
Wentworth Woodhouse Preservation Trust Ltd Award ?468,300
West Somerset Railway Plc. Award ?865,000
World Heritage UK Award ?16,700
WyvernRail plc Award ?85,000


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 09, 2020, 19:02:04
From the West Somerset Free Press (https://www.wsfp.co.uk/article.cfm?id=124317&headline=Huge%20grant%20for%20WSR&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2020)

Quote
West Somerset Railway is to get a huge cash injection that could get it back on track. MP Ian Liddell-Graingers says the ?865,000 Government grant could prove to be the life-saver the WSR desperately needs.

He said the grant should help the railway company make an early return to normal services on the 22-mile line between Minehead and Bishop?s Lydeard.

The full report will be in next Friday?s Free Press.

General discussion on funding for dozens of other heritage operations - http://www.passenger.chat/24103


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 09, 2020, 19:09:27
On a completely unrelated note, we came across an interesting post on a Jack Russell dog forum (we have 2 at home). An owner had become increasingly concerned that her previously healthy, vibrant dog kept drinking whole bowls of water one after the other - she literally couldnt fill it up fast enough!

On closer inspection though, it became clear that the bowl had been fatally compromised by a hairline crack, and no matter how much water she poured into it, it would simply drain away, and the poor dog was deprived of any of the life-sustaining benefits.

There was nothing for it but to throw the broken old bowl out, and replace it with a completely new one. Both dog and owner are understandably far more relieved and happy going forward as a result.

My apologies for this off-topic wander - I will now let you get back to discussing Minehead and the future of the WSR  ;D

Yeah, right  ;).  ... looks like a fable.  Was the new bowl automatically like the old one, which has been of a design shown to have an issue, or did the owner take the opportunity to consider carefully whether to move to a different design more suited for the particular dog in question?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Lee on October 10, 2020, 08:54:40
On a completely unrelated note, we came across an interesting post on a Jack Russell dog forum (we have 2 at home). An owner had become increasingly concerned that her previously healthy, vibrant dog kept drinking whole bowls of water one after the other - she literally couldnt fill it up fast enough!

On closer inspection though, it became clear that the bowl had been fatally compromised by a hairline crack, and no matter how much water she poured into it, it would simply drain away, and the poor dog was deprived of any of the life-sustaining benefits.

There was nothing for it but to throw the broken old bowl out, and replace it with a completely new one. Both dog and owner are understandably far more relieved and happy going forward as a result.

My apologies for this off-topic wander - I will now let you get back to discussing Minehead and the future of the WSR  ;D

Yeah, right  ;).  ... looks like a fable.  Was the new bowl automatically like the old one, which has been of a design shown to have an issue, or did the owner take the opportunity to consider carefully whether to move to a different design more suited for the particular dog in question?

Only time will tell...But you summed up an entirely unconnected dilemma neatly in the intro to your split-off thread... (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=24103.0)  ;D


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: southwest on October 12, 2020, 00:49:30
The present management and directors of the WSR seem to be asserting their authority now in a way not seen before.  I'm not convinced this is for the better.  But they do have the laws of finance to contend with, and this may have concentrated their minds somewhat.  The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust, who have been sub-leesees of the site at Washford Station since the 1970's, have been given a year's notice to quit very recently

From Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2020/02/somerset-and-dorset-railway-trust-asked-to-leave-wsr-washford-site.html) posted earlier today

Quote
The Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (S&DRT) have posted the sad news they have been asked to leave the Washford site.

The S&DRT received a letter from solicitors on behalf of the West Somerset Railway PLC, owners of the Washford site, with a Notice to Terminate on the agreement allowing S&DRT to use the Washford site, giving the S&DRT a years notice.

The one reason the WSR PLC have stated so far for asking the S&DRT to leave is to allow the WSR PLC to use the site for its own purposes, but no further details have been added. The S&DRT have sent a response and are now seeking legal advice.

The West Somerset Railway has issued a statement over them giving the Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway notice to leave their Washford site says Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2020/02/west-somerset-railway-board-statement-regarding-washford.html)

Quote
The West Somerset Railway has said that ‘The Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway Trust seems governed in such a way that it meant they felt unable to assist us financially other than allowing the WSR to hold and retain the modest profits from the Real Ale Festival last year’

The West Somerset Railway has also said that the SDJRT acted like a ‘cuckoo in the nest’ during their crisis period, which the PLC found unacceptable.

As a result of this, they have given the railway a year’s notice to remove themselves from the Washford site.

Currently, the Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust occupies some of the land adjacent to Washford railway station, and have done so for many years.

However, the West Somerset Railway has said that the rent the SDJRT pays is far lower than any other organisation occupying space elsewhere on the railway.

The WSR has a plan to develop the Washford site to meet their needs which will include P-Way vehicle and equipment storage, workshops and covered winter accommodation.

So basically the WSR gets into financial trouble due to poor management, they then go to the S&DRT for money, they rightly refuse to help other than giving some profits from the real ale festival, as it could cause harm to them. Consequently the WSR serve them an eviction notice? Seems very pathetic & childish to me, I hate to think what these idiots are doing running a railway!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on October 20, 2020, 09:51:07
Roland Bushell, an admin of the Minehead Rail Link Group, posts

Quote
This is definitely worth a read.  I have a lot of time for Steve Edge - his website is far better than most of the `official' heritage sites out there, and he has long been a supporter of all things WSR.  It doesn`t mean I agree with him on everything by any means, but this is a good analysis of the current situation with some revealing contributions in the timeline from different members of the `family'.   I`ll not comment beyond this introduction myself, and there is quite a significant gap in Steve's reflections.  But its still a pretty good summary for anybody wondering just what is happening.

https://transformwsr.wordpress.com/2020/10/19/keep-it-simple/

"Keep it Simple" says that article and illustrations with diagrams of how the organsations relate to each other now, and in thoughts.  It does not get into the structure within each of the three organsistions and the proposed new one. It does hint at "power games" for control of a new central organisation.

An article in the current ?Steam Railway? magazine covered current progress. A few days ago, I sent the words below to the Chairmen of the ?WSR3? (WSSRT, WSRA and WSR Plc). Replies were received from the WSRA and WSSRT for which I am grateful.   It seems all is not sweetness and light yet.

Quote
?To me, the Steam Railway article serves only to confirm the Plc?s intention to create a new charity making all the final decisions. Consultations, yes; approval by PDG, yes. But it?s not looking like a pan-Railway project, just another unilateral decision by the Plc, rather than the ?WSR3? (WSRA, WSSRT, WSR Plc) which is what I?d hoped for.?

What does this mean for heritage train services over some or all of the line next year?  For connections by rail to and from the National Network?  To safeguarding the line and use for the future?  To the railway line providing public rail transport into the main national network daily, all day, all year?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on November 08, 2020, 05:13:19
Joint Statement from West Somerset Railway PLC & The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust Limited
Published: 6th November 2020 ((here)) (https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/joint-statement-from-west-somerset-railway-plc-the-somerset-dorset-railway-trust-limited-2)

Quote
The West Somerset Railway PLC (PLC) and the Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (S & DRT) can confirm that they have opened discussions regarding a new 10-year lease for the Trust to occupy the Washford site. This follows from Washford Yard not now being required by the PLC in its entirety in the foreseeable future although the PLC will still, by agreement with the Trust wish to use the Yard from time to time during the period of the new lease. Any future arrangement will exclude the station which will revert to PLC management. This will allow the Trust to continue with their restoration and maintenance work on their rolling stock at Washford whilst at the same time making arrangements for relocation of artefacts to other sites. The Trust had already completed a strategic review of how it is fulfilling its charitable objectives. It has concluded that moving its Museum items and some of its rolling stock to other locations will enhance their access by the public and broaden the appeal of the Trust.

Whilst a move of some items to other locations may enhance public access and broaden appeal of S&DRT assets, I can't help wondering if the move is something they would have done as a regular decision had it not been for the actions of the PLC, or if the move is something that they were forced into and have spent money on, and are now looking for and promoting what positive they can from it?


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2020, 10:43:26
Whilst a move of some items to other locations may enhance public access and broaden appeal of S&DRT assets, I can't help wondering if the move is something they would have done as a regular decision had it not been for the actions of the PLC, or if the move is something that they were forced into and have spent money on, and are now looking for and promoting what positive they can from it?

Yes, as so many organisations are finding at the moment for a different reason, adverse circumstances sometimes make you look for a different course only to discover, when you have found it, that the new course was a better one than the one you have been following before!


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Kempis on November 08, 2020, 14:12:37
Joint Statement from West Somerset Railway PLC & The Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust Limited
Published: 6th November 2020 ((here)) (https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/joint-statement-from-west-somerset-railway-plc-the-somerset-dorset-railway-trust-limited-2)

Quote
The West Somerset Railway PLC (PLC) and the Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust (S & DRT) can confirm that they have opened discussions regarding a new 10-year lease for the Trust to occupy the Washford site. This follows from Washford Yard not now being required by the PLC in its entirety in the foreseeable future although the PLC will still, by agreement with the Trust wish to use the Yard from time to time during the period of the new lease. Any future arrangement will exclude the station which will revert to PLC management. This will allow the Trust to continue with their restoration and maintenance work on their rolling stock at Washford whilst at the same time making arrangements for relocation of artefacts to other sites. The Trust had already completed a strategic review of how it is fulfilling its charitable objectives. It has concluded that moving its Museum items and some of its rolling stock to other locations will enhance their access by the public and broaden the appeal of the Trust.

On 5 November, the day before the date of the joint statement linked above, the Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust, the Mid Hants Railway Ltd and the Mid Hants Railway Preservation Society announced that 'they are in detailed discussions regarding the relocation of rolling stock and artefacts belonging to the S&DRT from Washford on the West Somerset Railway to the Watercress Line in Hampshire':

https://preservation.watercressline.co.uk/news/entry/rolling-stock-and-artefacts-to-be-relocated-from-west-somerset-railway-to-w


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: Kempis on November 08, 2020, 16:06:45
Whilst a move of some items to other locations may enhance public access and broaden appeal of S&DRT assets, I can't help wondering if the move is something they would have done as a regular decision had it not been for the actions of the PLC, or if the move is something that they were forced into and have spent money on, and are now looking for and promoting what positive they can from it?

There's a little more indication of the S&DRT's thinking in a statement from its Chairman, Ian Young, who writes:

Quote
It has been an interesting year for the S&D Railway Trust. The Chairman and Board of Directors have worked hard, ably supported by volunteers at Washford and, elsewhere, to continue the work of the Trust through incredibly difficult circumstances. We soon came to the conclusion that, notwithstanding the situation which prevailed at the time regarding the West Somerset Railway, this was an opportunity to review the Trust?s standing in the heritage sector and what the priorities should be.

It was decided that a physical move of at least some of the artefacts away from Washford where access has always been difficult, is desirable. It must also be said that, over the considerable period in which I have been involved with the Trust, this thought has cropped up time and time again, including at AGMs. Up until now we have not displayed the courage to carry this out. It is, therefore, that our joint venture with the Watercress Line is an exciting prospect.

https://www.sdrt.org/images/files/news/press_release_05-11-20.pdf


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on January 05, 2021, 13:09:43
From the the Didcot Railway Centre, Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/DidcotRailwayCentre/posts/4298346776858844), posted last Saturday.

Quote
50 years ago today, on Saturday 2 January 1971, the branch line between Taunton and Minehead closed, with the Great Western Society?s Taunton Group running the last daylight train ? a diesel multiple unit ? as shown on this poster.

The full line of almost 25 miles between Taunton and Minehead had opened 16 July 1874 as a broad gauge railway. At first the line was worked by the Bristol & Exeter Railway and then by the Great Western Railway from August 1876. The whole section between Norton Fitzwarren and Minehead was converted to standard gauge on 29 October 1882. One of the stations on the line, Crowcombe, was used in filming the Beatles 1964 film ?A Hard Day?s Night?.

Five years after closure by British Railways the line successfully reopened as the heritage West Somerset Railway.


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: broadgage on January 21, 2021, 15:34:27
Recent reports refer to a plan to run a modern battery train from Bishops Lydeard to Taunton and Swindon.

Details herehttp://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm (http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm)

Edit to add that this is discussed in "transport scholars" Suggest NOT replying here so as to keep it in one place


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on January 21, 2021, 16:44:15
Recent reports refer to a plan to run a modern battery train from Bishops Lydeard to Taunton and Swindon.

Details herehttp://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm (http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm)

Text and discussion in "Transport Scholars" area at http://www.passenger.chat/24561 ...


Title: Re: Minehead Rail Link Group
Post by: grahame on January 21, 2021, 21:09:51
Recent reports refer to a plan to run a modern battery train from Bishops Lydeard to Taunton and Swindon.

Details herehttp://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm (http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm)

Edit to add that this is discussed in "transport scholars" Suggest NOT replying here so as to keep it in one place

Indeed ( http://www.passenger.chat/24561 ) ... but ... I have a naughty thought that says "why not run it on through to Minehead" ... Open Access in its very setup is designed to provide service which are not provided by the franchises, EMAs, ERMAs, and whatever we get next.  Yes, best follow up in Transport Scholars.



This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net