The LNER Encyclopedia

They're extending to their original terminus at Robertsbridge, about 4½ miles away from their current one at Bodium. They're spending a lot of money at the Robertsbridge end, renewing bridges, building a station and other buildings. They've also laid approximately ¾ mile of track towards Bodium. At the Bodium end, they've purchased land and laid about a mile of track towards Robertsbridge.

Unfortunately, to bridge the gap, they've got three roads to contend with: an "A" road, a "B" road and an unregistered road. They've yet to buy the land of the old trackbed and also need planning permission to build the three level crossings. They're taking a big gamble, in my opinion. They may well get approval to cross the unregistered road, maybe even the "B" road at a push. But the A21? I don't think so. And how many millions would a flyover cost them? It looks to me that it will all end in tears. Any opinions, anyone?

Currently Network Rail are self-congratulating themselves on closing a large number of road level crossings around the country (maybe as many as 200 in the last few years?) so the chances of opening a new road level crossing or possibly two new road level crossings on a preserved branch line mite be a bit of a doubtful prospect for sometime to come?.

It is a separate group to the KESR that is building the Robertsbridge link and what they have done so far is quite impressive. Of course, the real hard part awaits them.

The KESR itself is supportive of what they are doing but I think they are not putting any money in themselves. Once it is all complete, it will operate as one railway.

Photos available in the slide bar at left.
Trackwork and Bridge works tend to be towards the bottom in date order.
http://12rvrnews.blogspot.co.uk/

Another railway currently extending is the Bluebell
http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/blueb ... tprog.html
and also on here a not quite daily overview of events.
http://www.railwaytrains.co.uk/

HMRI are normally opposed to new lrevel crossings, so this one will be difficult. The Stathspey are having to raise quite a lot of money to go under the main A95 to get into Granton on Spey - which is a great prize in terms of the railway and also for Granton. Good luck to the KESR & Rother Valley, but it looks a tall order

cambois wrote:HMRI are normally opposed to new lrevel crossings, so this one will be difficult. The Stathspey are having to raise quite a lot of money to go under the main A95 to get into Granton on Spey - which is a great prize in terms of the railway and also for Granton. Good luck to the KESR & Rother Valley, but it looks a tall order

I believe they are only opposed to crossings on A roads not B roads. Having said that the case for a crossing is good when you think of the stimulus to the local economy through running would bring.

Pinza

Not sure where you got the A roads only idea from. On the Scottish re-oopening (most old NBR/LNER) there was a complete prohibition on new level crossings of any sort. Even farm crossings and pedestrian crossings have been banned.

The only ones on a re-opened line are on Stirling - Alloa (4 in total) where the number hae ben reduced and fitted with full barriers on the public roads (3 of them) They were only accepted as they were on the Stirling - Cambus section so never technically closed - it was a lucky fix. East of Cambus no level crossings were permitted. The one at Kincardene was on an existing open railway.

I realise it may be different on heritage railways as speed and number of trains are both lower than regular NR tracks, but there are other risks - witness Wensleydale Rly recent difficulty.

cambois wrote:Pinza

Not sure where you got the A roads only idea from. On the Scottish re-oopening (most old NBR/LNER) there was a complete prohibition on new level crossings of any sort. Even farm crossings and pedestrian crossings have been banned.

The only ones on a re-opened line are on Stirling - Alloa (4 in total) where the number hae ben reduced and fitted with full barriers on the public roads (3 of them) They were only accepted as they were on the Stirling - Cambus section so never technically closed - it was a lucky fix. East of Cambus no level crossings were permitted. The one at Kincardene was on an existing open railway.

I realise it may be different on heritage railways as speed and number of trains are both lower than regular NR tracks, but there are other risks - witness Wensleydale Rly recent difficulty.

I am a member of an RPS and the A and B road thing is the received wisdom from "those who know".

BTW you know the Welsh Highland Railway has several crossings?

The latest (January 2013) issue of Railway Magazine has an article about the K&ESR, or to be more precise, the nominally independent Rother Valley group.

Here's a link to ORR's current policy on level crossings: http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1564

It all depends on what constitutes "exceptional circumstances", I suppose. This will be one of the (many) issues any reconnection between Pickering and Rillington Junction will need to address.

I have found that any attempt to mention Pickering - Rillington results in low to medium level abuse so its probably best to stick to the original topic.

That WOULD be the icing on the cake for the NYMR, an extension to Rillington Junction, which would potentially mean a resumption of the Malton to Whitby Town service, or even a service from York! Since the Road Lobby see level crossings as Public Enemy Number One, they have no chance whatsoever, despite any increase in tourist trade such a move may bring. Take a look at the site that was once Pickering Level Crossing (you can go there via Google Earth Street View); if you didn't know better, you'd never believe that a level crossing had ever been there. They must have turned the trackbed into a road

Going back to the subject of the KESR, why did they deem it necessary for the Rother Valley Group to be a separate entity? I imagine that the latter were determined to give it a go, whilst the former weren't prepare to embarrass themselves or spend their money on such a folly. The best of luck to them, though. They'll need it.

P.S. If anyone can point me in the direction of any online photographs of Pickering Level Crossing prior to closure by British Railways, I'll be very grateful

"Going back to the subject of the KESR, why did they deem it necessary for the Rother Valley Group to be a separate entity? "

I think it may be a "damage limitation" thing so that if the RVR folds it won't take the KESR with it?

"P.S. If anyone can point me in the direction of any online photographs of Pickering Level Crossing prior to closure by British Railways, I'll be very grateful"

Not got any photos but the Michael Marsden DVD "Brakevan To Whitby" includes a fair bit of colour footage of shunting moves over the crossing, besides being the best video of lines in the area which you can buy.

Remember the Ffestiniog deviationists who went separate from the main society to recreate a route into Blaneau Ffestiniog around the Hydro scheme, I see the extension of the KESR in the same light and i wish them well in thier endeavours.

PinzaC55 wrote:"Going back to the subject of the KESR, why did they deem it necessary for the Rother Valley Group to be a separate entity? "

I think it may be a "damage limitation" thing so that if the RVR folds it won't take the KESR with it?

"P.S. If anyone can point me in the direction of any online photographs of Pickering Level Crossing prior to closure by British Railways, I'll be very grateful"

Not got any photos but the Michael Marsden DVD "Brakevan To Whitby" includes a fair bit of colour footage of shunting moves over the crossing, besides being the best video of lines in the area which you can buy.

Pinza Try contacting Mark Sissons at the NYMR Archive. Details on the page.
http://www.nymr.co.uk/learning/archive/