Great Central Railway

[The Pianoman 1,531]

Just been sent this link. Not quite Nottingham I know - well it gets to Ruddington. I knew it was intended but I hadn't realised it got this far

.http://www.nottinghampost.com/steam-ahead-1million-project-link-Nottingham/story-25838529-detail/story.html#8vyyA7pfAeumgzUW.01

[firbeck 859]

How many times have we heard this, sorry to sound cynical, quote 'We need public sponsorship', how much?

Will it be forthcoming, are the tram developers prepared to link up with Ruddington, why was the Ruddington Station site allowed to be mainly taken over by a housing estate. The bridge link is not just the end of the story, the embankment leading up to it from Loughborough Central has been half removed for an industrial estate. Then we have the all important fact that the main shed at Loughborough is positioned right across the mainline, that has to be removed and rebuilt somewhere else, the only place is Ruddington, will this create internal conflicts with the old retainers that have operating in Loughborough for over 40 years.

Hopefully all these issues can be resolved, but I still think there's a mountain to climb, anyone seen any plans of the proposed bridge by the way, has it been designed and got planning permission, plus the all important agreement with Network Rail.

[BulwellBrian 107]

I understand that Network Rail will build the bridge.

[The Pianoman 1,531]

I have always thought it was a bit far fetched but I would still liket o see it happen none the less

[Merthyr Imp 729]

All details are here: http://www.gcrailway.co.uk/unify/

(It won't let me post an actual link)

[barclaycon 569]

Re #2.

Yes, you're absolutely right. That bridge over the Midland line should have been re-instated years ago.

I remember walking over the original bridge when I was student in Loughborough in the 70's before it got removed.

The longer they leave it, the more expensive it's going to be.

Replacing this crucial link will join up 2 bits of important heritage railway.

This is the kind of thing that the Lottery should be contributing to.

It might even be of benefit to Network Rail. (Do they still use the Ruddington line to transport gypsum?)

All removal of railway infrastructure was done without any thought as to whether it might one day be used again.

The value of massive earthworks, structures, bridges etc. was never taken into account - neither was congestion.

They just sold off the land for industrial estates and low quality housing.

Every time I travel through Leicester on the train I look at the junction to what should have been the Ivanhoe line. Not usable now because they built a warehouse on it and also took one of the tunnels out of use.

There should have been passenger trains travelling from Leicester up to Coalville and Burton on Trent.

[Commo 1,292]

As far as I'm aware, the GCR line from Ruddington is now a heritage line from there via East Leake to Loughborogh, but I am not sure how close to L'boro' it actually gets, Bubble can tell us for a definite.

[The Pianoman 1,531]

The link: http://www.gcrailway.co.uk/unify/

[Merthyr Imp 729]

I don't think the preserved Great Central Railway were in a position to reinstate the bridge 'years ago'.

 

On the site I put that link to it mentions

'we now have a grant of one million pounds from the Governments Local Growth Fund towards replacing the rest of the 500 missing metres of track between the two halves of the GCR.'So they have got some grant money, although apparently not from the National Lottery, nor directly towards the actual bridge but the approaches to it.The British Gypsum trains (which I believe still run) use the 1977-built link from the Midland Main Line at Loughborough, so would not be affected by the existence of the new bridge.There's more on the following website: http://www.greatcentraltoday.com/gcrn/

[The Pianoman 1,531]

Link to the above http://www.greatcentraltoday.com/gcrn/

[plantfit 7,568]

I remember the bridge over the midland mainline being removed,it was done on a Sunday morning when I paid my first visit to the Great Central, got off the train at Loughborough midland and the bridge in question was being flame cut and sections removed using a STEAM CRANE no less,that must have been at the end of the 70's beginning of the 80's

Rog

[Merthyr Imp 729]

Thanks for putting those links in for me.

[Bilbraborn 1,594]

Nice to see that it will at long last be linked up. I think it will all go ahead, but like my mate says, there is so much other stuff to do and all needs paying for out of money raised.

[The Pianoman 1,531]

No problem. I don't know why it didn't work for you

[Merthyr Imp 729]

I can no longer either include quotes from previous posts or copy and paste anything (including links). Well, I can paste if I enable the HTML editor, but it won't do links and it messes up the formatting.

Don't know if it's as result of moving from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 a while ago, but I can't see anything on this site about what settings to adjust.

[barclaycon 569]

Thanks for those links.

That's very encouraging that they reckon the bridge will be in place this year !

I really hope that they can tie the two bits together to make a great heritage line.

I remember seeing a proposal at the Great Central station in Loughborough in the 90's about the bridge.

They had the design etc. just not the money.

The cost now is much more than they quoted then.

Didn't they get some money from the Lottery for the end of the line at Leicester North?

I wasn't sure if they were still running the Gypsum trains. They stopped at one point but then were re-started.

Not only are they a valuable source of revenue for the Great Central, it would be in Network Rail's interest to maintain that bit of line from Ruddington to the link chord.

[Merthyr Imp 729]

The only slight drawback I can see is that the new bridge will be single track - but I expect they can cope with that for such a short stretch.

[The Pianoman 1,531]

I can no longer either include quotes from previous posts or copy and paste anything (including links). Well, I can paste if I enable the HTML editor, but it won't do links and it messes up the formatting.

Don't know if it's as result of moving from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 a while ago, but I can't see anything on this site about what settings to adjust.

I moved from Win. 8 to 8.1 a while ago and noticed no difference

[catfan 14,793]

I can no longer either include quotes from previous posts or copy and paste anything (including links). Well, I can paste if I enable the HTML editor, but it won't do links and it messes up the formatting.

Don't know if it's as result of moving from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 a while ago, but I can't see anything on this site about what settings to adjust.

Windows 8.1 & this forum work fine for me Merthyr Imp.

[Dave 48 847]

I can no longer either include quotes from previous posts or copy and paste anything (including links). Well, I can paste if I enable the HTML editor, but it won't do links and it messes up the formatting.

Don't know if it's as result of moving from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 a while ago, but I can't see anything on this site about what settings to adjust.

Are you using an IPad Merthyr Imp ? If so I have similar problems.....see the forum on posting links.

[Merthyr Imp 729]

Nothing to do with Windows 8.1 then.

No - I fact I wouldn't be 100% sure what an IPad is let alone use one!

[Merthyr Imp 729]

Are you using an IPad Merthyr Imp ? If so I have similar problems.....see the forum on posting links.

Thanks - I DID find something in that forum:-

'To do that I had to toggle the icon in the top left corner. Whatever you've got it set on, set it the other way.'

That did the trick.

So here's another link to more GCR information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Central_Railway_(Nottingham)

[firbeck 859]

According to the original figures quoted by the GCR, the bridge and it's environs are going to cost £8m, so far just over £1m has been raised, so where's the rest of the money coming from, the public, they say.

If it all goes ahead, and believe me, it's my dearest wish, it really is, are Network Rail going to get cold feet ( they will!! )

For a start, the bridge is supposed to be in two sections so a new support will have to be put in between the Midland Mainline running tracks, fear and loathing, track closures, customer complaints, all for someone playing toy trains as the fare paying public will see it. Network Rail are grovelling so much down here for their incompetence at the moment, it's hard to see how they will respond to that one.

Let's see Network Rails wonderful fulfillment of promises on other Heritage Lines.

North Norfolk Railway, reinstatement of level crossing between the old and new (Bus Shelter) stations at Sheringham so that trains can come in off the mainline, a great idea. So many problems with the local authority ( crap, Sheringham High Street should be pedestrianized anyway, ever been there?), and of course Network Rail and even Tesco who were trying to bribe everyone to want their new store by offering to build Network Rail a half decent station. In the end poor old NNR had to compromise, a crappy crossing they can only use for 10 mainline trips a year, what a pile of rubbish.

Mid Norfolk Railway, refused access to the Network Station at Wyndham and having to build a new platform miles away thus making travel between mainline trains and the Heritage Line almost an impossibility

West Somerset Railway, denied access to Taunton station for 40 odd years despite ripped up tracks and an empty bay platform.

Swanage Railway, the same situation at Wareham.

The lovely railway up to Wirksworth, Network Rail ripping up the connection at Duffield, despite the great works going. on then refusing to reinstate it.

East Anglian Railway Museum, hoping to take over the crappy Anglia Rail services between Sudbury and Marks Tey as a steam heritage line. Network Rail promptly bulldozing the lovely station at Sudbury and replacing it with a bus shelter with no reversing loops and selling off the land in cahoots with the local authority to build a swimming pool across the old trackbed, thus ensuring that the more or less intact trackbed up to the historic and popular tourist villages of Long Melford and Lavenham can never be used again.

I could go on and on, building the A38 across the trackbed of the Midland Railway at Butterley, deliberately selling off land and preventing the expansion of the Colne Valley Railway just up the road from me.

Profit before pleasure, that's what it's all about, I would love to see a double track mainline all the way from the outskirts of Leicester up to Ruddington, then a tram link into the city centre, what a mouth watering thought, it could be the most profitable heritage line ever, but will the powers that be see that, unlikely, well not in our lifetime anyway, we'll just have to recall our memories of the way things once were.

[ravintrainman 10]

The plan for the GC bridge has now been changed to single span and should be going in later this year. This will allow a better alignment of the approach embankments and also reduce future maintenance laibilities, no central pier required. The total raised so far is, I believe £705,000, why not make a donation? This information from the most recent issue of Main Line the GC house magazine.

The NNR restrictions more to with the local council than Network Rail, I should reckon. I suspect that they probably insisted on a fully signalled crossing, but would then not want the High St closing off too much, there is much controversy over Lincoln High St crossing being closed as much as it is. Once all the freights are working over the Joint Line Lincoln may be open for as little as 16 minutes each hour through the day!

The Mid-Norfolk would I suspect have to equip their locos with GSM-R, OTMR and TPWS to be allowed to use Wymondham station, I believe GSM-R alone costs around £20k, the others would maybe have to be custom designed for each class of loco, all for about a 1/4 mile of track, I understand. I can clarify this next time I see a couple of my work colleagues who own one of the locos there. The requirement for GSM-R, OTMR and TPWS is a statutary requirement for any loco working on the National network, I believe.

I suspect similar things affect both Swanage and the WSR.

It must also be born in mind that generally when the track and connections were removed the preservation schemes were in their very early days, short of money resources, the only thing in plentiful supply was probably enthusiasm and optimism. That so many schemes have come as far as they did is a remarkable tribute to those early pioneers, for that is what they were, nobody could foresee the level of success acheived over the years.

The connection at Duffield was taken out over 15 years ago, if I recall, somewhat before the EVR had really even got going. If it was to be re-instated so that trains could run to Derby, an initial aim, I understand, there then occurs the equipmnet problem once again. There's also the issue of maintenance, it costs a lot more to maintain trains to 'mainline' standards and running speeds than it does for heritage lines where the maximum is 25mph.

The A38 was built a long time ago now, mid 80's(?) I'm sure that if they'd have owned the trackbed by then the MR-B would have had a bridge built, it's quite possible they were asked but declined as they couldn't see that they'd be able use or maintain it.

Quite a lot of preserved railways are finding it difficult to attract volunteers, so taking on more and more in terms of maintenance liablity may not even be feasible.

if you really want to get my back up over obstructive organisations try Sustrans, Grrrrr!

[Bilbraborn 1,594]

Sustrans? Absolutely.