NYMR news and updates.

[Dave S 56F]

Is there a plan for when the N.Y.M.R. start supposedly running steam train heritage services back to whitby in March 2026 for bridge 42 at Grosmont over the river mursk esk?

One of the civil engineer management has said about proping up bridge 42 over the river possibly damaged by the 10,000 train movements per year to fro whitby and possibly scouring from the river eroding the base of the millstone buttresses could be a possibility to carry out work on the bridge base buttresses and that restoration work on the bridges mortar cement can be carried out while the bridge is propped by scaffolding tubing during the next 2 months.

However, the civils manager has said they don't know yet how much long term repair work would cost to carry out the masonary work repair although N.Y.M.R. have got a ongoing fundraising public page on their Web site for this and possibly money in their coffers to go towards it paul middleton AKA piglet did discuss in a A.G.M. concerns over bridge 42 months ago as well.

The Worst case scenario also mentioned is that either trains can only be top and tailed from Pickering to Goathland steam diesel and this could reduce the N.Y.M.R. annual income for paid station staff and engineers and train guards and drivers firemen on the N.Y.M.R. also as well its been said that bridge 42 could be closed until 2027 season no trains to whitby until a proper masonary repair has been completed. Unless trains can be restricted by speed going over bridge 42 if propping up is allowed. I've got my information from national preservation north yorks moors discussion thread and steam trains site from Facebook. And feel very supportive of how to try help the N.Y.M.R. as my uncle once lived at Glaisdale Station House.

P.S. as well I once asked a guard on the N.Y.M.R. who I've known 10 years or more who has been a worker there from the beginning of the preservation N.Y.M.R. society how big were steam locos on the N.Y.M.R. line when trains ran from York and he said big locos like A4 60007 4.6.2 Pacifics were not allowed and A1 A2 and A3 pacifics due to the weight restrictions seen as though the north eastern railway had a small engine policy anyhow. And the biggest locos in British rail days and L.N.E.R. former days he remembered going to whitby locomotives on the Rillington jct to Whitby line were B16 and B1 locomotives. So possibly running large locos over bridge 42 could have been the straw that broke the camels back.

 

[Notabene]

Flying Scotsman alone made sixteen trips across the bridge each day working three return trips in its autumn visit.

 

[Belperpete]

The Worst case scenario also mentioned is that either trains can only be top and tailed from Pickering to Goathland steam diesel and this could reduce the N.Y.M.R. annual income for paid station staff and engineers and train guards and drivers firemen on the N.Y.M.R.

There was discussion on here about possible temporary solutions, and whether it is actually necessary to top and tail. As you say, it would involve significant extra expense, and at a time when the loss of the money-making Whitby services is likely to see a significant loss of income. The moderators have moved it to a separate thread in the speculative discussion area:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ing-a-temporary-platform.297450/#post-7638440

 

[Egton]

Is there a plan for when the N.Y.M.R. start supposedly running steam train heritage services back to whitby in March 2026 for bridge 42 at Grosmont over the river mursk esk?
One of the civil engineer management has said about proping up bridge 42 over the river possibly damaged by the 10,000 train movements per year to fro whitby and possibly scouring from the river eroding the base of the millstone buttresses could be a possibility to carry out work on the bridge base buttresses and that restoration work on the bridges mortar cement can be carried out while the bridge is propped by scaffolding tubing during the next 2 months.
However the civils manager has said they don't know yet how much long term repair work would cost to carry out the masonary work repair although N.Y.M.R. have got a ongoing fundraising public page on their Web site for this and possibly money in their coffers to go towards it paul middleton AKA piglet did discuss in a A.G.M. concerns over bridge 42 months ago as well.
The Worst case scenario also mentioned is that either trains can only be top and tailed from Pickering to Goathland steam diesel and this could reduce the N.Y.M.R. annual income for paid station staff and engineers and train guards and drivers firemen on the N.Y.M.R. also as well its been said that bridge 42 could be closed until 2027 season no trains to whitby until a proper masonary repair has been completed. Unless trains can be restricted by speed going over bridge 42 if propping up is allowed. I've got my information from national preservation north yorks moors discussion thread and steam trains site from Facebook. And feel very supportive of how to try help the N.Y.M.R. as my uncle once lived at Glaisdale Station House.

P.S. as well I once asked a guard on the N.Y.M.R. who I've known 10 years or more who has been a worker there from the beginning of the preservation N.Y.M.R. society how big were steam locos on the N.Y.M.R. line when trains ran from York and he said big locos like A4 60007 4.6.2 Pacifics were not allowed and A1 A2 and A3 pacifics due to the weight restrictions seen as though the north eastern railway had a small engine policy anyhow. And the biggest locos in British rail days and L.N.E.R. former days he remembered going to whitby locomotives on the Rillington jct to Whitby line were B16 and B1 locomotives. So possibly running large locos over bridge 42 could have been the straw that broke the camels back.

Restrictions on types of locos back in NER/LNER/BR days was do to tight curvature on some corners - not weight. The 10,000 train movements per year actually relates to all loco movements over the bridge - including light engines to / from the mpd - and seems to be an uninformed guess by someone in Park Street. 6,000 to 7,000 movements a year seems more likely. The problem with the bridge is the weakening of the arch [formed of 8 layers of bricks] due to mortar being leached out over many a decade by percolating acidic rainwater.

 

[Worf]

To add to NYMR problems, I see some scum have stolen lead from Pickering Station roof.

Lead thieves steal from North Yorkshire Moors Railway

Lead was stolen from the roof of Pickering Station and the two men caused damage to the building.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[YorkshireBear]

To add to NYMR problems, I see some scum have stolen lead from Pickering Station roof.

Lead thieves steal from North Yorkshire Moors Railway

Lead was stolen from the roof of Pickering Station and the two men caused damage to the building.

www.bbc.co.uk

Keighley station was targeted within weeks of Network Rail finishing their work, only it wasn't real lead, which they only noticed half way through and left the roof leaking.

Lots of scum out there.

 

[Harpo]

Keighley station was targeted within weeks of Network Rail finishing their work, only it wasn't real lead, which they only noticed half way through and left the roof leaking.

Lots of scum out there.

Reforming the scrap metal cash trail doesn’t seem to have had much effect.

 

[Egton]

Bridge 42 to be propped - allowing normal services to start March 28 - awaiting quotes from 5 contractors for full repairs to bridge next winter

 

[YorkshireBear]

Not an easy prop that with a river below.

 

[cats_five]

Their website has a news article on how they are thinking of propping it, and that they plan to start services as planned at the end of March.

Link deleted - the point of it was the graphics.

 

[35B]

How they are thinking of propping it:

We're Proactively Propping Bridge 42 To Ensure 2026 Season Opening

We are pleased to confirm that Bridge 42, a key structure on our line, will be temporarily propped to allow safe operation of trains for the start of the 2026 season.

www.nymr.co.uk

And where are they with the permissions that they will need?

 

[cats_five]

And where are they with the permissions that they will need?

As they plan starting operations on 28th March I presume they have them / can get them by then.

 

[NER1621]

And where are they with the permissions that they will need?

What a curious observation. I’m pretty certain that those involved in the NYMR are aware of the laws surrounding listed buildings.

 

[35B]

What a curious observation. I’m pretty certain that those involved in the NYMR are aware of the laws surrounding listed buildings.

Given the backdrop to this, and the vital importance of reopening, I would hope so - not to mention the requirements that bodies like the EA might also impose. But my concern is not with compliance, but schedule.

Given the statement from the NYMR's civil engineer includes the line "final cost of the project with propping and full repair works will be confirmed once we have received all final surveys and quotations" (my emphasis), I'm quite impressed that they've got so far forward with permissions before any contractor has been appointed or methods and detailed plans agreed. In that situation, I am concerned that 7 working weeks from today to 28th March) is a really quite short time to get all the permissions in place in time to do the work itself - hence my question.

 

[Belperpete]

Given the backdrop to this, and the vital importance of reopening, I would hope so - not to mention the requirements that bodies like the EA might also impose. But my concern is not with compliance, but schedule.

Given the statement from the NYMR's civil engineer includes the line "final cost of the project with propping and full repair works will be confirmed once we have received all final surveys and quotations" (my emphasis), I'm quite impressed that they've got so far forward with permissions before any contractor has been appointed or methods and detailed plans agreed. In that situation, I am concerned that 7 working weeks from today to 28th March) is a really quite short time to get all the permissions in place in time to do the work itself - hence my question.

Two of the four support piers appear to be directly in the river bed. As you say, the work to install them and their foundations will therefore likely require approval by the EA, who will want to ensure that the work has no impact on river flow, water quality, river life, etc. I would expect input would be needed from the appointed contractor. As you say, the timescale for this looks incredibly tight, if the railway hasn't even appointed a contractor yet.

Just building an access route to bring in men and materials to the work site under the bridge could take some time, and likely require EA and other approvals.

I am not a civil engineer, but putting one of your three main load bearing supports directly above a joint in the main beams does not seem a good idea to me. It will be interesting to see if the appointed contractor follows this design.

 

[railfan99]

A friend who has take others on the NYMR said that of the substantial number of English heritage railways on which he'd travelled, the volunteers largely were not just elderly but also not overly welcoming and most of all, lacking knowledge.

He also commented on the poor condition of some carriages.

It is 2013 since I have been on this railway so lack recent experience.

In the same breath he said that the Great Central Railway and Severn Valley Railway were far better re the above aspects.

 

[Iskra]

A friend who has take others on the NYMR said that of the substantial number of English heritage railways on which he'd travelled, the volunteers largely were not just elderly but also not overly welcoming and most of all, lacking knowledge.

He also commented on the poor condition of some carriages.

It is 2013 since I have been on this railway so lack recent experience.

In the same breath he said that the Great Central Railway and Severn Valley Railway were far better re the above aspects.

I tend to visit annually although one year I did get 5/6 visits in (no prizes for guessing which season that was). I last visited in November for 9F/Flying Scotsman, and I don't find this to be the case at all. I think some of the older hands are classic Yorkshiremen who can have a bit of a wry, dry sense of humour, which could perhaps be misinterpreted by non-locals.

The coaches are all fine on the inside, and the LNER set is sublime. I have found on some visits that the carriage windows could have been cleaner, and I have fed that back which was received amicably and they have taken visible efforts to improve this.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Given the backdrop to this, and the vital importance of reopening, I would hope so - not to mention the requirements that bodies like the EA might also impose. But my concern is not with compliance, but schedule.

Given the statement from the NYMR's civil engineer includes the line "final cost of the project with propping and full repair works will be confirmed once we have received all final surveys and quotations" (my emphasis), I'm quite impressed that they've got so far forward with permissions before any contractor has been appointed or methods and detailed plans agreed. In that situation, I am concerned that 7 working weeks from today to 28th March) is a really quite short time to get all the permissions in place in time to do the work itself - hence my question.

It's feasible, just very demanding. As long as they get their ducks in a row and have had some pre consultation advice it is possible. Which if they are committing to it I can only assume they have.

 

[35B]

It's feasible, just very demanding. As long as they get their ducks in a row and have had some pre consultation advice it is possible. Which if they are committing to it I can only assume they have.

I hope so. But I remain to be convinced, and fear a visit of our friend “unforeseen circumstances” in connection with bureaucratic delays.

 

[Harpo]

I hope so. But I remain to be convinced, and fear a visit of our friend “unforeseen circumstances” in connection with bureaucratic delays.

Bureaucracy should be no issue for any heritage railway that’s made it a primary activity.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I hope so. But I remain to be convinced, and fear a visit of our friend “unforeseen circumstances” in connection with bureaucratic delays.

Oh 100%, if they have a good working relationship with the EA, plus maybe a bit of political pressure in the right places then they have a fighting chance. But they will need luck at every stage.

Particularly as recently the EA Flood Risk Activity Permitting has now gone to a national central team with only the application advice being local, this has (shock to no one) led to delays in the process. General turn around is at best 12 weeks, which means unless they started as soon as they shut the bridge (with Christmas in the way), then it is tight.

And you can't use emergency either to speed things up, as this isn't an emergency, an emergency has a risk to life. This does not, the line is shut, people are safe.

I share your scepticism is basically!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Feb 2026 ==

Bureaucracy should be no issue for any heritage railway that’s made it a primary activity.

I would say the bureaucracy of working in and around the rivers should be an issue unless they want a nice fine. Which I believed is the bureaucracy that 35B is referring to.

 

[35B]

Bureaucracy should be no issue for any heritage railway that’s made it a primary activity.

There is a difference between making bureaucracy an activity, and being able to effectively navigate bureaucratic processes to get a result. It is the latter that I think matters.

I share your scepticism is basically!

 

[Egton]

Two of the four support piers appear to be directly in the river bed. As you say, the work to install them and their foundations will therefore likely require approval by the EA, who will want to ensure that the work has no impact on river flow, water quality, river life, etc. I would expect input would be needed from the appointed contractor. As you say, the timescale for this looks incredibly tight, if the railway hasn't even appointed a contractor yet.

Just building an access route to bring in men and materials to the work site under the bridge could take some time, and likely require EA and other approvals.

I am not a civil engineer, but putting one of your three main load bearing supports directly above a joint in the main beams does not seem a good idea to me. It will be interesting to see if the appointed contractor follows this design.

There is a vehicle ford crossing the river 100 yards upstream of bridge 42 - a potential access point ?

 

[D Mylchreest]

There is a vehicle ford crossing the river 100 yards upstream of bridge 42 - a potential access point ?

I tried that many years ago (at least 15). I drove up full of confidence, threw out the anchors at the last second and backed off. Not recommended unless you've got a Land Rover.

 

[Grumpy]

A friend who has take others on the NYMR said that of the substantial number of English heritage railways on which he'd travelled, the volunteers largely were not just elderly but also not overly welcoming and most of all, lacking knowledge.

I don’t understand the reason for this post. However NYMR used to have (I’m not sure of the current situation) the services of a member who had been the Eastern Region’s Bridge Engineer. Hardly lacking knowledge.

 

[35B]

I don’t understand the reason for this post. However NYMR used to have (I’m not sure of the current situation) the services of a member who had been the Eastern Region’s Bridge Engineer. Hardly lacking knowledge.

I believe the engineering leadership has changed in the last year or two. Certainly, the names mentioned when the Bridge and Wheels campaign was running are now not heard

 

[Trainlog]

A friend who has take others on the NYMR said that of the substantial number of English heritage railways on which he'd travelled, the volunteers largely were not just elderly but also not overly welcoming and most of all, lacking knowledge.

He also commented on the poor condition of some carriages.

It is 2013 since I have been on this railway so lack recent experience.

In the same breath he said that the Great Central Railway and Severn Valley Railway were far better re the above aspects.

I will have to disagree on that one. When I visited the line in September, I found it very welcoming, and I was able to look at the footplates of multiple locomotives throughout the day.

I do agree that the Severn Valley and the Great Central are also very friendly/welcoming lines, though.

 

[alexl92]

I don’t understand the reason for this post. However NYMR used to have (I’m not sure of the current situation) the services of a member who had been the Eastern Region’s Bridge Engineer. Hardly lacking knowledge.

My understanding is that the current 'Director of Civil Engineering' is not actually a Civil Engineer but more of a Project Manager with experience of managing Civils projects.

I am absolutely open to being corrected if this is incorrect.

 

[Notabene]

The propping looks to be a very expensive structure.

On the trains: I went in 2025 several times. The general state of the carriages was good, cleaner and better presented than for years. The buffets, however, are not comparable to WSR, SVR or KWVR, here I found the presentation was pretty basic. However, it was welcome to see there were refreshments on Whitby trains and the staff were making a good effort.

 

[Ryry]

Any ideas whats locos are destined to run at the start of the seasons. Class 31128 is currently not on the nymr