Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 14:15 06 Dec 2022
* December train strikes: Union told not to hold country 'to ransom'
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 30/03/23 - Railfuture Annual, Leeds

On this day
6th Dec (1897)
London becomes first city to host licensed taxi cabs

Train RunningShort Run
10:55 Truro to London Paddington
13:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
16:04 London Paddington to Truro
Delayed
12:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
December 06, 2022, 02:22:30 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[123] Advent Quiz - December 2022
[92] Rail unions strike action 2022/2023
[53] Sir Nigel Gresley railtour 5th December '22
[44] Drayton Green
[42] End date for Castles - initially a Rumour Mill thread
[25] Not all cancellations count....
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The Great Robertsbridge Train Robbery  (Read 2902 times)
CJB666
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 206


View Profile
« on: May 13, 2018, 10:26:51 am »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5719665/Families-accuse-steam-railway-trying-grab-farm-land-7million-project.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/11/plan-re-open-steam-train-line-leaves-farmers-fuming
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 37326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2018, 10:36:13 am »



See also our discussion of this at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=17973.msg237608#msg237608


From The Daily Mail

Quote
Train lines closed under the controversial 'Dr Beeching' cuts are set to be re-opened and serviced by 'no-frills' trains.

It is understood a £4milion trial will be launched within the next two years using cheap, low-speed trains built from 'lightweight' materials.

The new technology could see some of 5,000 miles of disused track opened again after it was originally closed in Dr Richard Beeching's review in the 1960s, when he was chairman of British Railways.

I have started a list:

[snip]
Robertsbridge to Bodiam
[snip]

... Can you spot the one or two sillies I have put in there to make reading it a bit of fun?

Robertsbridge to Bodiam was one of those odd ones I posted - a difficult line to see as a part of the daily network. Yet as a heritage line - could it make sense?

From The Daily Mail again

Quote
For some, there is no finer sight than a locomotive in full steam chugging majestically through the glorious English countryside.

But in one idyllic corner of East Sussex, that prospect has got the locals, well, rather steamed up.

They are trying to prevent a heritage railway line being extended by two miles from Bodiam to Robertsbridge amid accusations of bullying and environmental vandalism.

To make it clear ... the Kent and East Sussex railway is looking to restore its historic link along the old trackbed that was in use until 1961.



I'll leave this thread open here, as it may well we worthy of a topic on its own!

Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 37326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2018, 10:45:26 am »

An interesting discussion.  I note that a transport corridor has to join up all the pieces of land it needs to run over in a logical series and is far more constrained that other land use activities which have a second dimension of flexibility.  I also note that the land in question was in use as a railway for around 100 years up to 1961 (track in good enough condition for the track lifting train as late as 1970) but had been in use as farmland for hundreds of years before that.  Presumably at one time it was scrubland as per the Ashdown Forest?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
CJB666
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 206


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2018, 10:57:32 am »

In the late 1960s I rode a jigger from Robertsbridge to Tenterden. That was at the start of the preservation efforts. The railway societies have achieved much since then.

I am minded to compare the restoration of the line with that of the Wey & Arun Canal. If you see the newly constructed locks and bridges they are of a far higher standard and more extensive than were ever built originally. The rebuilt canal will ultimately cater for full length narrowboats from the main system, rather than short barges for local farmers.

It is the same with this line. The standard of rebuild (not restoration) is far higher than Colonel Stephens could ever have envisioned. The line is being rebuilt for heavy weight engines and long trains likely off the main line. In a way the gap to be filled will be far more extensive than was ever there originally.

More info. here about the protest:

http://greatrobertsbridgetrainrobbery.co.uk
« Last Edit: May 13, 2018, 11:18:33 am by CJB666 » Logged
rogerw
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1257



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2018, 11:27:03 am »

It is interesting to see the slant that people put on things. The railway will be an environmental disaster with its 10 trains a day.  The A21 is obviously not despite the fact that it is heavily congested.  Of course these people have cars but not trains so that the road and its associated pollution is not an environmental problem.   Roll Eyes Huh
Logged

I like to travel.  It lets me feel I'm getting somewhere.
CJB666
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 206


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2018, 03:42:49 pm »

The Cholsey and Wallingford line crosses a very busy dual carriageway fitted with only half barriers. Haven't heard of any issues or near misses.
Logged
JayMac
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 18296



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2018, 03:59:06 pm »

I don't think using Compulsory Purchase Orders is the right way to progress the project.

Sadly, if the landowners don't want to sell up at any price then that should be that. If the landowners want to name a price then the project backers should find the money, not use the local authorities to force sale through a CPO. This is not a project to improve public transport in the area. Its a private enterprise.
Logged

#NotMyKing
JayMac
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 18296



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2018, 04:24:18 pm »

It is interesting to see the slant that people put on things. The railway will be an environmental disaster with its 10 trains a day.  The A21 is obviously not despite the fact that it is heavily congested.  Of course these people have cars but not trains so that the road and its associated pollution is not an environmental problem.   Roll Eyes Huh

It's a false equivalence to compare existing A21 pollution with future RVR pollution. Those against the RVR project are not campaigning to reduce road pollution. See https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as

It is however right for the protesters to point out that pollution on the A21 is likely to increase with the installation of a level crossing. It's even worth pointing out the increased road vehicular traffic the RVR (if built) will attract. Those are legitimate environmental issues to raise, along with habitat removal, flood risk and train emission pollution. Rebuilding a railway is not done in a bubble no matter what extant formation is there. There are very real and genuine environmental concerns.
Logged

#NotMyKing
onthecushions
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 955


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2018, 05:51:24 pm »


Having walked the route, I think that the RVR has already contributed greatly to flood relief in its rebuilding of its bridges and reshaped watercourses underneath, benefiting the objecting landowners also. It has also faced determined opposition previously in its land purchase attempts - reversing, irrationally when ownership changed, allowing the progress to date. I believe the Bluebell R has also had problems in only being allowed to buy half its track bed in parts, i.e fencing in the six foot!

Heritage railways have a difficult time with land acquisition and planning. BR (British Rail(ways))/MoT didn't want to risk re-openings (like Henry 8 and the monasteries) and so disposed of land destructively, voiding useful rights of way. The record of Sustrans may be studied and the fiasco of the Helston fight is of recent memory.

Where one can sympathise with affected owners (the original railway acts are still extant) is in change management. An elevated railway to provide underpasses or funded exchange of land to provide separate but viable farm businesses each side of the railway could be sought. Often major road schemes lack this modest piece of humanity.

I don't think that the pub will maintain its opposition when custom increases..

Good luck to the RVR

OTC
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 9260



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2018, 05:59:04 pm »

The Cholsey and Wallingford line crosses a very busy dual carriageway fitted with only half barriers. Haven't heard of any issues or near misses.

It was a big issue in the 1980s when the society was trying to get back to Cholsey.  The Wallingford bypass was being built and threatened to cut the line in two.  I am not sure with the policy having changed how easy it would be to insist on a level crossing now.

There was one non-injury incident in the early days but nothing since.
Logged
CJB666
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 206


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2018, 11:04:10 pm »

The Cholsey and Wallingford line crosses a very busy dual carriageway fitted with only half barriers. Haven't heard of any issues or near misses.

It was a big issue in the 1980s when the society was trying to get back to Cholsey.  The Wallingford bypass was being built and threatened to cut the line in two.  I am not sure with the policy having changed how easy it would be to insist on a level crossing now.

There was one non-injury incident in the early days but nothing since.


The issue was neatly solved ...

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=File:Cholsey_and_Wallingford_Railway_level_crossing_over_Wallingford_Bypass_-_Geograph_-_393273.jpg
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 37326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2018, 07:24:08 am »

Here's another possible solution - note the commentary saying it was filmed on the Kent and East Sussex

https://www.facebook.com/BBCArchive/videos/566491307057237/UzpfSTY0NzI0NzYzNToxNjkyNzMxMzk0MDk2OTcy/
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 37326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2021, 09:00:43 pm »

Came across this ... RVRailway News

Quote
Inquiry - Statement from the RVR Trust
A message from Gardner Crawley, Chairman of the RVR Heritage Trust

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who wrote in  support of the Bodiam to Robertsbridge reconnection project. Many of you wrote to express your backing for the RVR’s application for a Transport and Works Act Order, and several of you gave evidence during the Public Inquiry this summer, all of which was greatly appreciated by the Trustees.
 
The Inquiry finished on 3 September and it is worth reading the closing submission made by our counsel Richard Olney. He counters all the issues raised by the objectors and makes the case that the scheme has an overwhelming public benefit. This can be found at the Inquiry website, as INQ 164, under the heading ‘documents submitted during the inquiry’:

We are now in the hands of the Inspector who will write his report to the Secretary of State for Transport and anticipate his decision will be made around spring or summer of next year.

Who's interest is it in for the process / time to be so protracted? Is it really necessary to take up to 9 months to come to a conclusion?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the 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 the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page