Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 12, 2006 18:39:03 GMT
Following on from the comments in the National Rail Train Tracker thread in the rant area about what is or isn't on the line east of Epping station, here are the photographs that I took from the eastbound platfrom on the 27th of May this year. I can see no big planks of wood or fences beyond the fixed red lights.   Click for full size versions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2006 19:18:32 GMT
To elaborate, as can be seen the northbound line runs on a tangent after the bridge. The southbound becomes single track, and for about another 100m or so (?) there is 4 rail track round the bend (which is still LU property). The sleeper bolted to the track panel is at the very end of the LU track which can't be seen from the Epping platforms (not sure about the bridge though), after which is the fence separating LU and EOR Holdings property and where the traction rails (still live!) end. If eventually I go down to the EOR side of the fence again I'll get a photo of the boundary, but I can assure you the sleeper on the track panel is definately down there!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 12, 2006 19:30:53 GMT
How close to the fence do the live rails extend?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2006 19:55:06 GMT
No more than a foot or two, Chris, but I've no idea why they're kept there, and what's more Live, considering trains cannot go further than Epping station (unless they're going to take the red lights with them in Coded Manual!).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2006 20:08:38 GMT
Because there is no independant isolating switch for the Epping - Ongar branch, or what remains of it?
It's fairly well known that it did not have it's own sub station.
Sam
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 12, 2006 20:33:49 GMT
www.eorailway.co.uk/down_the_line.htmThe end of the line 'tother side (bottom view)! I wish I could find that amazing photo from 1951 I think it was of three ACV diesel railcars at Epping on trial. It gives you a 'flavour' of what may happen. I only went once to Ongar, and that was to visit Ongar Motorcycles...are they still there?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 12, 2006 20:40:41 GMT
Because there is no independant isolating switch for the Epping - Ongar branch, or what remains of it? It's fairly well known that it did not have it's own sub station. Sam But why didn't just take a chunk out of the power rails shortly after the FRLs - I remember reading on one thread (iirc it was about current rail gaps at Stratford) that these gaps are cut by engineering teams to isolate sections almost routinely - so why not here? It must be costing LU money to keep those rails energised? imho it is an unnecessary risk of someone getting electrocuted. If they did want to extend beyond Epping again all they would need (assuming the rails were in serviceable condition anyway) would be the standard heavy duty cabling. Chris |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2006 21:52:08 GMT
www.eorailway.co.uk/down_the_line.htmThe end of the line 'tother side (bottom view)! I wish I could find that amazing photo from 1951 I think it was of three ACV diesel railcars at Epping on trial. It gives you a 'flavour' of what may happen. I only went once to Ongar, and that was to visit Ongar Motorcycles...are they still there? I don't know if Ongar Motorcycles are still going, but my Dad bought a BMW R100RS from them in 1982. We had to bring it back to Ongar for it's first free service. Whilst it was being done, Dad took me for a ride on the Tube to Hainault. We had a cab ride from Ongar to Epping, where Blake Hall Station had only just been closed. We also rode on 1960 and 1967 TS on the Woodford to Hainault shuttle. For years, I was very proud of my picture of 1967 stock at Hainault (the picture went AWOL after I moved back to the south in 1989). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2006 22:08:19 GMT
Oh yeah their live alright! The sleepers used as a train stop. Well, move the fence and take out the current rails. One lil push and you can ride it down to Epping station.
Out of Epping. Your right hand rails, is the way to EOR. But the left hand rails lead on for around, 250 yrds. See it was used as a head shunt when steam was in place. If an Ongar train was approaching, to clear the platform. They would back into there and wait for the train in the platform. Then pull into the platform. As the Ongar train pulls in.
Today, they are both used as over-runs. Hey ATO is gonna fail sometime!
James
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 12, 2006 22:15:09 GMT
If I'm going to be on an overrunning train, I'd rather it take the right hand track as the left hand looks like it ends on quite a downhill gradient and I'm not aware that the 92ts has been designed for cross-country excursions...
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Jun 12, 2006 22:17:38 GMT
No more than a foot or two, Chris, but I've no idea why they're kept there, and what's more Live, considering trains cannot go further than Epping station (unless they're going to take the red lights with them in Coded Manual!). Oh but they can go further... The approach to Epping is quite high speed for a terminal station, in fact the platforms can be approached more or less at line speed. The Distance to the LU/EOR boundary is the length of the full speed overlap on the fixed reds. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Jun 12, 2006 22:20:53 GMT
Hey ATO is gonna fail sometime! Maybe statistically yes but I would question the likelihood of a high speed overrun actually occuring if the T/Op is paying attention as to the running of his or her train. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2006 0:50:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mandgc on Jun 13, 2006 6:35:21 GMT
Gradients Through Epping -
From some rough notes I have, taken from the Electrification Traffic Circular, showing that the changes in gradient occurred ever few hundred feet but it appears that-
The line rises from between Theydon Bois to Epping at gradients between 1 in 56 and 1 in97.
The line through Epping Station is shown as rising at 1 in 93.
From the Station to the end of the original siding - Between 1 in 70 and 1 in 76 on the Main Line.
The main line cotinues rising to west of North Weald at between 1 in 56 and 1 in 76.
The left hand siding obviously falls below the original main line, presumably to prevent run aways.
Hope this helps.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 13, 2006 7:41:53 GMT
Yep! Although iirc your original comment was about pointing this out to a customer at Epping station - from where it can't be seen. Chris |
|
|
|
Post by rob66 on Jun 13, 2006 10:36:33 GMT
I remember when driving from North Weald to Epping. From Coopersale the track was very slippery in the worse weather, especially a slight drizzle of rain on the leaves that made it one of the worse slippery places on the Central Line. You had to start breaking at Coopersale - otherwise it was a dead cert' you would pass the home signal out of control. One train did that - sliding from the home signal, pass Epping platform into the sand-drag, inches away from a factory as it knocked over the red stop lights. Maybe this is one of the reasons why they put a sleeper across the track - depending how far the Ongar Railway Society (whatever) allow their trains near Epping.
Often many drivers had to select reverse when sliding in this spot, hoping this would help the train to slow down or stop. Even when leaving Ongar uphill towards Blake Hall, the train hardly made it up the hill. The speed showed up to 70mph - only travelling at 5mph with smoke pouring from the motors due to slippery conditions. Not forgetting one day that a ballast train travelling into Ongar didn't stop until it overran the buffers, causing lots of damage.
One year the embankment caught alight at Ongar. They discovered under the embankment was buried coal from the steam days. The smoke lasted a very long time until it burnt itself out.
There are many stories involving the Ongar line. They even had a passenger jump under a train at North Weald. He threw all his money in the air before he jumped.
|
|
|
|
Post by ribaric on Jun 15, 2006 14:20:43 GMT
I was the LU project rep for the EO line between 2000 & 2004. This bit of track was the scene of big fights between the owners and LUL regarding getting access to Epping station. AFAIK the stand-off continues to this day with (IMHO) both sides taking un-supportable positions. Damn shame as it may be preventing some kind of service being operated. I have details but I'm not sure if anyone really cares any more.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 15, 2006 16:03:44 GMT
I for one would be fascinated to know more. Back in the early 80s I was a lawyer and asked by the Teifi Valley Railway based at Henllan, Camarthenshire, to look at their operations with a view to them joining the ARPS. They bought the old Pencader Junction-Newcastle Emlyn branch and were going to run a NG steam railway. They even had a LRO without any track! Today I gather that they have extended their line to the bank of the River Teifi where the iron bridge has gone...it was there in BR days! Looks as though to get back to NE they wil have to build a new bridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by ribaric on Jun 15, 2006 22:16:54 GMT
Thanks for the PMs folks.
I'm retired now so I can have an independent opinion. As far as EO is concerned, it was sold with a contract which was subsequently interpreted in several radically different ways. The new owners (EOR is it? I didn't see much of them so I don't know them per se) took two positions with which LU disagreed.
1. There was tacit agreement that EOR could run trains to a platform adjacent to the north end of Platform one (the 'Ongar' platform) albeit with the required safety organisation in place. and
2. EOR could develop land at Ongar (aka- build and sell houses in the coal/goods yard/station forecourt) to raise funds to provide the necessary to get a service running.
The meetings between EOR (I'll call them that but the name doesn't ring a bell) and LUL/TfL got stuck on these 2 points. I always thought that we (LU) should make it possible to run to the new platform where EOR wanted. CED (Chief Eng Dir) - now just 'ED' shot down every plan and made the safety requirements so strict that the new platform would need to be located on EOR's land north of the current fence boundary. This is way too far away and too costly as it's on an old ash bank. Clearly, this would scupper any business plan that EOR had and render the whole thing a waste of time. I can only guess but I think EOR lacked the funds or the will to go to court.
In an attempt to make a new business plan, EOR asked LUL for permission to develop suitable bits of land in order to raise funds to try and get something going. This was expressly ruled out in the contract BTW.
The people in LUL clearly didn't believe that EOR ever intended to run any kind of railway and that the whole deal was about getting cheap land and making mega bucks out of developing it. So "no" was the answer.
This is all my personal opinion and I do not have documentray evidence to prove any of it, but it is my opinion. When I left LU in Sept 05, this project was still 'mine' as it were. I had been moribund for 2 years and I suspect is still gathering dust.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2006 22:38:24 GMT
Thanks for the PMs folks. The meetings between EOR (I'll call them that but the name doesn't ring a bell) The people in LUL clearly didn't believe that EOR ever intended to run any kind of railway and that the whole deal was about getting cheap land and making mega bucks out of developing it. So "no" was the answer. How's about Pilot Developments; EOR Holdings name before it was changed? As for housing, it's very true that EOR Holdings wish to build houses on the land, and from what I hear are close to doing so albeit with a small argument with Epping Forest District Council. On the other hand, it was LUL who accepted EOR Holdings's bid for the line over ORPS's (Ongar Railway Preservation Society), the latter of which did want to run a railway, so LUL are in part to blame for the situation that has arisen now.  |
|
|
|
Post by ribaric on Jun 15, 2006 23:27:49 GMT
Pilot developments - that's them!
I wouldn't try to deflect any blame although I guess the other lot's bid wasn't as high as PD's. Any acceptance of a lower bid would have to be supported by other financial considerations, if there were none then the bid review team would be accused of some kind of corruption if they accepted the lower bid. LUL would have had little interest in the line being operated, just the money. If any attempt were to be made now, Metronet would be rubbing their corporate hands together at the opportunity to work outside of the PPP. It's not going to happen I fear. Shame but that's the way it is.
There was a lot of effort in marketing the line whilst it still ran, led by a chap called Solosy, but despite his efforts the best opportunity was lost when the line was closed. Frankly, it was a lame duck - if you look at things from a cost/benefit standpoint.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2006 3:14:24 GMT
And of course, just to make matters even more complicated, the folks who are actually running the train service, maintaining the line and restoring the stations are a third group entirely!
They are the Epping-Ongar Railway Volunteer Society, the EORVS, who supposedly operate the line by direction of an outfit called "Epping-Ongar Railway Limited", who may or may not be the same as Pilot Developments.
Personally the whole thing is a muddle; it was suggested by an EORVS member that the only way out is for Essex Council to buy the line and then lease it to the EORVS, who could then get a Transport & Works Act LRO to run a full service and also get their restoration works on a stronger footing.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 16, 2006 7:01:57 GMT
Very interesting! The dual-company private railway is something that is often the case in the UK and this causes in my experience in the past no end of problems. Often this is done as one is a charity and the other a commercial organisation. These are the companies that are extant and dissolved:
Name & Registered Office:
ONGAR RAILWAY COMPANY LIMITED
75 HIGHLAND ROAD
NAZEING
ESSEX
EN9 2PU
Company No. 01878797
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 17/01/1985
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
04/10/1991 EPPING AND DISTRICT CONVEYANCERS LIMITED
This address is for Robert William Ayton.
Name & Registered Office:
EPPING-ONGAR RAILWAY LIMITED
ONGAR STATION
HIGH STREET
ONGAR
ESSEX CM5 9BN
Company No. 03500437
Date of Incorporation: 22/01/1998
Name & Registered Office:
EPPING-ONGAR RAILWAY HOLDINGS LIMITED
ONGAR STATION
HIGH STREET
ONGAR
ESSEX CM5 9BN
Company No. 03123151
Date of Incorporation: 07/11/1995
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
12/10/1998 PILOT DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED
However previous company of same name now dissolved:
Name & Registered Office:
PILOT DEVELOPMENTS LTD
99 REDWING RISE
ROYSTON
HERTFORDSHIRE
SG8 7XD
Company No. 03688460
Status: Dissolved 14/06/2005
Date of Incorporation: 24/12/1998
|
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jun 16, 2006 7:07:39 GMT
The dual-company private railway is something that is often the case in the UK and this causes in my experience in the past no end of problems. Often this is done as one is a charity and the other a commercial organisation. Yes, but as you will know, UK law prohibits charities from trading. As a result they are often obliged to set up a trading company (with non-charitable status) to raise funds, leaving the charity to concentrate solely on its prime objectives. |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 16, 2006 7:16:15 GMT
There are exceptions to charities trading...e.g. shops*, but the dual-company status with property owned by one company and running done by another can cause problems when, and I had a very difficult problem years ago when this happened ona certain railway, the directors fall out and the volunteers then find that they have little say as their membership is in the XXXX Railway Society Ltd not XXXX Railway Ltd. It got very messy and injunctions flew around.
*PS On reflection this needs clarificiation: in fact they, as with railway companies, set up trading subsidiaries which is their way around the Charities Acts restrictions. Charities have VAT andother tax advantages. I knew this when I typed it in and as I was rushing out on the School Run! I passed my Revenue Law paper and I guessed correctly that a question on Charities would come up!
|
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jun 16, 2006 7:37:13 GMT
There are eceptions to charities trading...e.g. shops No that is not an exception, it is a generally held misconception. Charity shops are trading companies that are separate from the charities themselves and are set up to raise money for the charity whose name is displayed over the door. This is necessary because a charity is only allowed to use its funds for the purpose for which it was established. Any money that it spends on a shop (rent, electricity, maintenance, etc) is not classed as being used for the purpose for which it was donated. By comparison, a trading company may extract business expenses before donating the surplus to the charity. I agree with you on this. When a charity is set up for 'social' purposes it is very different from one set up with the objective of assisting those who are in need. The problem of two groups operating side-by side instead of a single body may seem strange, but it sometimes the only way that can be found to comply with the legislation. When the charity regulations were drafted, I do not think that anybody had any idea that people would be establishing preserved railways, let alone registering them as charities. The reason for two groups is often based on the regulation that states that the charity may not be controlled by its beneficiaries. Charities are overseen by trustees who, as their title suggests, hold property or money in trust for others benefit from. This is a protective measure that is intended to prevent those in charge from declaring themselves as needy and helping themselves to the funds. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2006 7:57:26 GMT
They are the Epping-Ongar Railway Volunteer Society, the EORVS, who supposedly operate the line by direction of an outfit called "Epping-Ongar Railway Limited", who may or may not be the same as Pilot Developments. Nah, the EORVS is almost totally separate from EOR Ltd. (As I'm a member of EORVS), bar a few meetings between the Chairman of the EORVS and EOR Ltd. every so often (no-one else, including me, has contact with them in general). The relationship is very distant, EOR Ltd. own the stuff and EORVS use it to run a service out of the good of their hearts, and that's as far as it goes, why is why I've attempted in this thread to create a distinction between the two, since usually it's EORVS who get the bad press from those who think we're one organisation, when it is EOR Ltd. who are screwing things up left, right and centre. Remember, all flak to be directed at EOR Ltd.! |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 16, 2006 8:44:09 GMT
The last posting sets out exactly what can happen when you have this duality (or more) of companies. For reasons just and eloquently stated volunteers join and become members of the XXXX Preservtion Society Ltd or similar name, whereas the railway and its land are owned by XXXX Railway Company Ltd or similar, with XXXX Engineering Ltd doing the maintenance/repairs, XXXX Shop Ltd running the shop, etc. Everyone always assumes that all are the same outfit....but problems occur when there is a conflict of interest and these can rapidly arise. I know personally of directors refusing to speak to each other and relationships between the railway and the supporters degenerating to such an extent that sackings, slanging matches and law suits cause the whole operation to implode. Very sad. My former colleague in what was ARPS now Heritage Railways Association, a solicitor, devotes much of his energies to trying to mediate and sort out these sometimes impossible situations.
May I remind that it seems that a constant source of conflict on any railway, national or private, and even such organisations as members' clubs, is that of land & building value and exploitation.
|
|
|
|
Post by ribaric on Jun 16, 2006 9:37:44 GMT
Nice words Oracle, despite all the hyperbole about pres. societies etc, greed will usually win out in the end. Humans eh?
Is there a mission statement (jeeez, I'm using these buzz words now, yeuk!) for the EORVS? I don't really know what they are about, no specifics in any case. The clue is in the title but I'm wondering what the game plan is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2006 10:00:41 GMT
Is there a mission statement (jeeez, I'm using these buzz words now, yeuk!) for the EORVS? I don't really know what they are about, no specifics in any case. The clue is in the title but I'm wondering what the game plan is. No 'official' mission statement to my knowledge but our general plan, as an organisation whose sole mission is restoration of the railway, is to restore the line as heritage, running steam trains between Ongar and (somehow) Epping in the future, so in effect giving London a standard guage steam railway which it doesn't have at the moment. EORVS is non-profit, run by volunteers like myself, and is working with EOR Ltd. (heh) to make progress on restoring the line. For example, I can release news that track has been secured for carriage sidings and a new passing loop at North Weald and should arrive for laying in the next month or two (and I will be there putting the new track down! ;D). Admins, does that count as advertising or what?  |
|
