Ironbridge rail link

[AlanL]

The Telford Steam railway have sent a message to all members to say that their long term plans to extend their line to Ironbridge have been stopped, as the rail line from Madeley Jnt to Buildwas (owned by NR) has now been leased to another company who are proposing to create a 'very light rail' link to Ironbridge using battery operated rail cars.

This would save significant money in reopening the line as major expensive repairs would have been necessary to restore heavy rail to the line.

Has anyone else heard anything about these plans? This seems to be a very interesting development!

 

[zwk500]

The Telford Steam railway have sent a message to all members to say that their long term plans to extend their line to Ironbridge have been stopped, as the rail line from Madeley Jnt to Buildwas (owned by NR) has now been leased to another company who are proposing to create a 'very light rail' link to Ironbridge using battery operated rail cars. This would save significant money in reopening the line as major expensive repairs would have been necessary to restore heavy rail to the line. Has anyone else heard anything about these plans? This seems to be a very interesting development!

The VLR concept is currently being trialled in Coventry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Very_Light_Rail. It has seen much lower construction costs, but equally is much lower capacity. It is a bit of a gimmick and very much feels like it's trying to be a bus with the qualitative benefits of railed transport. However, that's a niche that could well have calls for in larger towns/small cities where outlying areas would be tempted by a high-quality bus.

There was also a demonstrations of a VLR railar in Ironbridge a few years ago: https://transportdesigninternational.com/portfolio/revolution-vlr/

I don't know how much work the VLR would save against just reopening the line as an RA5 passenger railway though. I suspect the works to the viaduct would have been similar, VLR's major construction costs savings have been focused on on-street sections so far.

 

[The Planner]

The VLR concept is currently being trialled in Coventry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Very_Light_Rail. It has seen much lower construction costs, but equally is much lower capacity. It is a bit of a gimmick and very much feels like it's trying to be a bus with the qualitative benefits of railed transport. However, that's a niche that could well have calls for in larger towns/small cities where outlying areas would be tempted by a high-quality bus.

There was also a demonstrations of a VLR railar in Ironbridge a few years ago: https://transportdesigninternational.com/portfolio/revolution-vlr/

I don't know how much work the VLR would save against just reopening the line as an RA5 passenger railway though. I suspect the works to the viaduct would have been similar, VLR's major construction costs savings have been focused on on-street sections so far.

The viaduct is going to cost way more to remedy for heavy trains than a VLR. Its not in a good state.

 

[pdeaves]

The VLR concept is currently being trialled in Coventry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Very_Light_Rail. It has seen much lower construction costs, but equally is much lower capacity. It is a bit of a gimmick and very much feels like it's trying to be a bus with the qualitative benefits of railed transport. However, that's a niche that could well have calls for in larger towns/small cities where outlying areas would be tempted by a high-quality bus.

There was also a demonstrations of a VLR railar in Ironbridge a few years ago: https://transportdesigninternational.com/portfolio/revolution-vlr/

I don't know how much work the VLR would save against just reopening the line as an RA5 passenger railway though. I suspect the works to the viaduct would have been similar, VLR's major construction costs savings have been focused on on-street sections so far.

The Coventry and Ironbridge VLRs are two entirely different technologies. Given proximity, I would imagine the Ironbridge one would be the likely contender for running the branch. This type is more train-like than the Coventry one; it looked to me like a functional equivalent of a class 153 (no similarity in construction, etc.!) but without meeting heavy rail crashworthiness standards.

 

[edwin_m]

The Coventry and Ironbridge VLRs are two entirely different technologies. Given proximity, I would imagine the Ironbridge one would be the likely contender for running the branch. This type is more train-like than the Coventry one; it looked to me like a functional equivalent of a class 153 (no similarity in construction, etc.!) but without meeting heavy rail crashworthiness standards.

Here's some more detail on Revolution railcar https://revolutionvlr.com/ and the Ironbridge project at https://revolutionvlr.com/working-in-partnership-to-deliver-rvlr/.

Revolution Very Light Rail (RVLR) is an innovative, lightweight, cost-effective rail vehicle that provides a compelling alternative to operating traditional heavy rail vehicles on branch lines. Its low mass reduces all aspects of operating costs and can significantly improve the business cases for line reopenings and extensions, enhancing local connectivity.

Planning and implementing the RVLR demonstration environment at Ironbridge led to more Eversholt Rail and TDI personnel joining the project. It also involved working closely with the team at Harworth Developments, the Ironbridge site owners, as well as with experienced rail infrastructure and other suppliers. From the outset, we emphasised the partnership aspects by using of ‘RVLR team’ messaging and branding throughout the stakeholder demonstration phase, which began in September 2021. This approach has attracted positive comments from stakeholder visitors, as has the recognition of project sponsors and original consortium members on the Demonstrator vehicle itself.

A significant early outcome from the Ironbridge demonstrations has been the strong relationship that the RVLR team built with Network Rail’s Light Rail and Restoring Your Railway teams. All parties recognised the mutual benefits that can result from working closely together to identify and prioritise RVLR deployment opportunities, and this has led to regular engagement to progress the most promising prospects.

 

[BurtonM]

It's like a bubble car and a PPM had a baby

 

[pdeaves]

A couple of pictures for those unfamiliar.

Revolution (Ironbridge system):


Coventry:


Clearly very different levels of 'lightness' and appropriate intended operating conditions (branch line or urban short-hop journey). If (as would be likely) the Revolution vehicle would run the Ironbridge branch, bridges, etc. would need to handle heavier vehicles than if the Coventry one were to run, albeit still less than traditional heavy rail.

 

[Russel]

How likely is this light rail project to actually happen though?

Without wanting to sound negative, it's hardly the first time we've seen proposals like this...

 

[pdeaves]

That's the thing. Where would the vehicle go at the Telford end and who would it serve en route? I would expect most would want to go to Telford but the connection faces Shifnal. Could there be special permission to run the non-compliant vehicle on the main line? Even the nearly two miles to Shifnal? Or build a new station near the junction?

 

[Russel]

That's the thing. Where would the vehicle go at the Telford end and who would it serve en route? I would expect most would want to go to Telford but the connection faces Shifnal. Could there be special permission to run the non-compliant vehicle on the main line? Even the nearly two miles to Shifnal? Or build a new station near the junction?

The idea of building a new station, to me, makes this a non starter...

I would love to be proven otherwise though!

 

[zwk500]

That's the thing. Where would the vehicle go at the Telford end and who would it serve en route? I would expect most would want to go to Telford but the connection faces Shifnal. Could there be special permission to run the non-compliant vehicle on the main line? Even the nearly two miles to Shifnal? Or build a new station near the junction?

To me the VLR concept only has any useful application if the vehicles can be authorised on to the mainline for short stretches such as to reach a bay at a useful interchange station. Otherwise they're just another gadgetbahn.

The idea of building a new station, to me, makes this a non starter...

I would love to be proven otherwise though!

Opening a small single platform on a former siding is not a particularly unrealistic proposal. The business park wouldn't give that much traffic but perhaps if it was a Parkway station which could also be served by Birmingham-Bound trains it might make a case.

For me the bigger problem is that the railway line was followed by the dual carriageway, and therefore the (fairly low-density) housing is not particularly close to the rail corridor and journey times would be uncompetitive against direct private vehicle routing.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Could there be special permission to run the non-compliant vehicle on the main line? Even the nearly two miles to Shifnal? Or build a new station near the junction?

Almost certainly not, no. That is the whole point of VLR, it will only run where all the safety standards associated with the real railway don't apply. The likelihood of standards being reduced, after decades of nothing but standards becoming more restrictive, is nil.

 

[pdeaves]

Almost certainly not, no. That is the whole point of VLR, it will only run where all the safety standards associated with the real railway don't apply. The likelihood of standards being reduced, after decades of nothing but standards becoming more restrictive, is nil.

To me the VLR concept only has any useful application if the vehicles can be authorised on to the mainline for short stretches such as to reach a bay at a useful interchange station. Otherwise they're just another gadgetbahn.

I agree (my questions were supposed to be rhetorical). Promoters will need to solve the 'where does it go' issue one way or another if it will serve any practical use whatsoever.

 

[Harpo]

When did Ironbridge cease to be part of the network?

 

[The Planner]

When did Ironbridge cease to be part of the network?

It still is, though nothing has ran down there in anger since the power station closed. Its effectively out of use.

This train will not end up on the heavy rail network at all.

 

[edwin_m]

Almost certainly not, no. That is the whole point of VLR, it will only run where all the safety standards associated with the real railway don't apply. The likelihood of standards being reduced, after decades of nothing but standards becoming more restrictive, is nil.

In principle the process applicable to tram-trains could be followed, which mandates a risk assessment and TPWS protection at every signal may be a suitable mitigation.