Mothballed Lines

[yoyothehobo]

Having been following the thread on Beeching Marples and closures et al a lot of comments are made about Mothballing lines.

My question is:

In reality how long can a line be mothballed for (at minimal cost ie very very occasional inspections, no infrastructure work, disconnected from the main network, signalling cut off etc..)

In terms of track, what is its life when not being used at all/not inspected/tamped etc

Infrastructure (Victorian era embankments/cuttings) bridges, viaducts, drainage etc..

Signalling

Vegetation.

I know a lot of this is massively subjective, however at what point does it become better to just protect the alignment (properly) and lift everything?

PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT TURN THIS INTO A CLOSURES/NO CLOSURE BEECHING ARGUMENT

 

[BucksBones]

Trouble is, when a line is mothballed it often doesn’t take long before it “disappears”!

 

[AlterEgo]

Trouble is, when a line is mothballed it often doesn’t take long before it “disappears”!

I remember a former Jarvis rail employee actually hired some blokes to steal some of the Leamside Line over the course of a week!

 

[BucksBones]

I remember a former Jarvis rail employee actually hired some blokes to steal some of the Leamside Line over the course of a week!

Absolutely - talk about brass neck!

 

[Mikey C]

I find it interesting that when the East London line was extended over the old Broad Street viaduct to Dalston Junction, that certain parts such as the bridge over the Regents Canal had been replaced. Clearly the original bridge had deteriorated faster than the brick viaducts around it.

Brick viaducts do seem to last pretty well, I guess iron/steel structures are more likely to need replacing?

 

[AlterEgo]

Having been following the thread on Beeching Marples and closures et al a lot of comments are made about Mothballing lines.

My question is:

In reality how long can a line be mothballed for (at minimal cost ie very very occasional inspections, no infrastructure work, disconnected from the main network, signalling cut off etc..)

In terms of track, what is its life when not being used at all/not inspected/tamped etc

Infrastructure (Victorian era embankments/cuttings) bridges, viaducts, drainage etc..

Signalling

Vegetation.

I know a lot of this is massively subjective, however at what point does it become better to just protect the alignment (properly) and lift everything?

PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT TURN THIS INTO A CLOSURES/NO CLOSURE BEECHING ARGUMENT

That's a very broad question.

A "mothballed" route is in place on the old Varsity Line at Verney Junction. I've been to the site several times in the last 10-15 years and the deterioration is rapid.

The line was already at a nadir of upkeep upon mothballing in 199(3?). In about 2005 the rails and platforms were clearly extant with little overgrowth.

This year, the level crossing has been literally tarmacked over by, I assume, a farmer, so the rails can no longer be seen. Overgrowth is so severe the platforms can hardly be seen.

For any trains to pass, the line would have to be almost totally rebuilt.

 

[BucksBones]

I find it interesting that when the East London line was extended over the old Broad Street viaduct to Dalston Junction, that certain parts such as the bridge over the Regents Canal had been replaced. Clearly the original bridge had deteriorated faster than the brick viaducts around it.

Brick viaducts do seem to last pretty well, I guess iron/steel structures are more likely to need replacing?

I don’t know, Metrolink in Manchester uses an old metal viaduct between G-Mex and Cornbrook that AIUI was abandoned for many years previously. Not sure how much restoration it needed, mind.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Mothballing is of limited value, but protection of the land (basically only disposing of it by leasehold or rental with a lease term that the lease may be terminated without compensation at any time and any buildings must be removed by the occupier at their cost) would have had significant value. Even where housing had been built, it would have resulted in more use of the actual alignment for things like green space rather than housing.

 

[Mikey C]

That's a very broad question.

A "mothballed" route is in place on the old Varsity Line at Verney Junction. I've been to the site several times in the last 10-15 years and the deterioration is rapid.

The line was already at a nadir of upkeep upon mothballing in 199(3?). In about 2005 the rails and platforms were clearly extant with little overgrowth.

This year, the level crossing has been literally tarmacked over by, I assume, a farmer, so the rails can no longer be seen. Overgrowth is so severe the platforms can hardly be seen.

For any trains to pass, the line would have to be almost totally rebuilt.

Indeed many existing lines with a poor service have had to be completely rebuilt, to run a more intensive service, e.g. the Oxford to Bicester line, such was their condition...

 

[yoyothehobo]

Thanks, lots of interesting information. I have no specific interest in any route, I am just interested in how "mothballing" is used as an example of how lines could have been saved and in reality it seems that it is no more useful than effectively protecting the alignment.

 

[AlterEgo]

Thanks, lots of interesting information. I have no specific interest in any route, I am just interested in how "mothballing" is used as an example of how lines could have been saved and in reality it seems that it is no more useful than effectively protecting the alignment.

Protecting the alignment is the principal concern. But it also protects significant pieces of infrastructure from demolition like viaducts and tunnels, which may not need a great deal of work to bring back into service.

 

[DarloRich]

For the effects of mothballing see leamside or the notts colliery lines. It is fine short term

 

[HowardGWR]

An interesting example is the Glos.War.Steam.Railway who have recently restored the line from Laverton to Broadway. Done with mainly volunteers, it was the restoration of the metal bridges that was the biggest headache. Some parts of embankments also needed soil nailing and of course, drainage goes to pot when not constantly maintained over 40 years. It has been almost as big an effort as that carried out by NR on the Bicester line.

 

[6Gman]

"Mothballing" really isn't a practical idea - protecting the alignment is.

In my latter railway days [when Railtrack "managed" the network] one of my responsibilities was arranging infrastructure trains of various sorts (weedkillers, inspection specials, railgrinders and such exotica) including to supposedly "out of use" and "mothballed" lines.

It was ... interesting!

Especially when we found branches with sleepers tied across the track; six foot high trees in the four foot; or several thousand tons of coal on the permanent way! (That last one, I seem to recall, involved a Railtour.)

The best was when I rang Saltley to check if they could work along some obscure colliery branch.

"Do you sign the road?"
"Well ... yes ..."
"Is there a problem?"
"Not really, except they've lifted the track and demolished the bridges ..."

Thanks Railtrack.

 

[edwin_m]

I don’t know, Metrolink in Manchester uses an old metal viaduct between G-Mex and Cornbrook that AIUI was abandoned for many years previously. Not sure how much restoration it needed, mind.

There are three viaducts. The southernmost one (lower and made of brick) is still part of the national network. The other two used to go into Central station and Metrolink uses the middle one which is mainly also brick but with a metal span over the line towards Ordsall. The all-steel northern viaduct is the most visible but I'm told it is in poor condition and would be expensive to re-open even for the lighter loadings of trams (although if it was in any danger of collapsing under its own weight then something would have to be done).

This illustrates the wider point that masonry structures are generally low-tech, with all bricks/stones and mortar in compression so that they tend to stay put without much attention. For similar reasons they are instrinsically strong and able to withstand much greater loads than they probably bore when first built, and conversely can stand a fair bit of damage without being in danger of collapse. However water/frost and the dreaded buddleia can loosen parts of the masonry, and something will then have to be done if there is a risk of pieces falling on people below.

Most steel and modern concrete structures have certain parts in tension and have been designed to withstand a specific load with a margin of safety, but if allowed to deteriorate they will no longer support those loads and may even be in danger of not being able to support their own weight.

So any type of structure could become hazardous in time, steel and concrete generally more quickly than masonry. If not serving any purpose then it will most likely then be removed or infilled to avoid the maintenance liability.

 

[snowball]

There are three viaducts. The southernmost one (lower and made of brick) is still part of the national network. The other two used to go into Central station and Metrolink uses the middle one which is mainly also brick but with a metal span over the line towards Ordsall. The all-steel northern viaduct is the most visible but I'm told it is in poor condition and would be expensive to re-open even for the lighter loadings of trams (although if it was in any danger of collapsing under its own weight then something would have to be done).

When Metrolink was built it could have used either of the two viaducts not in use by the national network, and the one in better condition was chosen, as it required less work to make it usable. The remaining all-metal one has continued to deteriorate over the nearly 30 years since then.

 

[B&I]

If it's not practical to keep a disused line intact for very long, I'd rather see the trackbed employed for some easily reversible purpose, to provide justification for keeping structures in repair, and keep housing and the like at bay, with the railway retaining the right to re-enter possession on shortish notice. For example, car parking, storage, foot and cycle paths, busways, small temporary industrial or commercial buildings.

 

[randyrippley]

A good example is the Preston-Longridge line, abandoned in 1980 but the rails were left in place. The intention is to use part of the track as a tram test-bed, but the selected area, around Skeffington Road bears more relationship to a jungle than a rail line, with birch and sycamore growing through the ballast. Even after felling its impassable. Needs a major dose of agent orange, new ballast and new sleepers at a minimum. As for the tunnel near the junction with the WCML, complete new drainage would be needed.

 

[mr williams]

The Portishead line is still largely in situ despite having been closed to freight since the early 80s.

 

[Chris Hamilton]

The Coltness Branch from Garriongill Junction on the WCML in Wishaw, Lanarkshire has been mothballed for years. Previously serving the Costain Concrete works at Newmains, a couple of open cast mines, and historically as a through route to Bathgate. It also had a semi-regular use as a stabling point for the royal train when in the area, as it’s rural location in a cutting could be easily guarded.

We did still maintain the limited signalling (a berth track, a signal with associated TPWS/AWS and 3 ends of HW points) on it up until about 5 years ago, however, all of that was removed about 2 years ago.

But, about 10 years ago, while driving home from work in Carstairs, I spied a group of young men in an old battered white transit pickup, cutting up the rail where the line parallels the A73. Needless to say, they didn’t have the permission of Network Rail to do so.

 

[Chester1]

When Metrolink was built it could have used either of the two viaducts not in use by the national network, and the one in better condition was chosen, as it required less work to make it usable. The remaining all-metal one has continued to deteriorate over the nearly 30 years since then.

I think some emergency work was needed about 2 or 3 years ago when bits of the northern viaduct started to fall onto the pedestrian area and road below. It is still intact because its not worth spending money on demolishing it, I don't think there is a realistic chance of it being used to carry trains or trams for the forseeable future. There was a plan to convert it to a urban park / path but the funding could not be found. In the last two years there has been tremendous development in the area and linking the flats to the city centre and providing a feature for the city does have some merit.

Presumably if a line is mothballed then its legally still open so relaying the track would be considered as repair work and not subject to the ussual legal process for building a new line?

 

[najaB]

Presumably if a line is mothballed then its legally still open so relaying the track would be considered as repair work and not subject to the ussual legal process for building a new line?

That's my understanding - no need for an Act of Parliament as would be needed to re-open a line.

 

[Lucan]

the railway retaining the right to re-enter possession on shortish notice. For example, car parking, storage, foot and cycle paths, busways, small temporary industrial or commercial buildings.

LoL! You'd never get the line back from some of those uses, especially the cycle path.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Mothballing is Network Rail (and doubtless Railtrack and BR before them) speak for "simply left to deteriorate". Had the Leamside Line truly been "mothballed" (they do know mothballs are to preserve things don't they? Do they think it is like Private Eye's Coleman Balls?) it would probably be in traffic again for similar reasons the Boldron East Curve was reinstated for dock traffic. Frankly the term insults our intelligence.

 

[B&I]

LoL! You'd never get the line back from some of those uses, especially the cycle path.

Anything would be possible if the leases or other legal instruments enabling those uses were properly drafted

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Two short sections of the Halifax - Huddersfield line were moribund and OOU for 15 years before the line was re-opened to passengers in 2000. I'm not sure whether this line had been officially "mothballed".

Bradley Jn to Bradley Wood Jn closed to passengers in 1964 I believe. However I remember a late night Kings Cross to Bradford service still running regularly via Greetland Jn to Dryclough Jn in the late 1960's.

 

[work-traveller]

When Metrolink was built it could have used either of the two viaducts not in use by the national network, and the one in better condition was chosen, as it required less work to make it usable. The remaining all-metal one has continued to deteriorate over the nearly 30 years since then.

When 2CC was being planned, the option of running along Deansgate was considered. This would have included running over the redundant viaduct, before descending to street level at the junction of Bridgewater Street and Deansgate. However, the prohibitive cost of restoring that viaduct to a serviceable state figure much in the consideration. So the Highways Agency Historical Railways Estate continues with it's ownership of a monster liability...