Proposal to reopen Kemble-Cirencester branch

[jimm]

I've been wondering about this - I can see why a short branch might be seen as attractive as a cheaper option, but given the primary benefits of rail are usually seen only over longer distances, I can't see this making sense unless part of a wider long-term scheme to restore the link between Cheltenham and Swindon, abet connecting to the Golden Valley line into Swindon.

It would have more potential by virtue of covering a wider area, would be more direct to Swindon (and its connections), and would serve Blundon (pop. 12k+) directly. If capacity on the Golden Valley line isn't an issue and the increased costs don't stack up against the wider coverage, then rebuilding the branch as planned, but with the station aligned for an extension towards the former line to Cheltenham would seem a *much* better idea than a sharp turn and terminating in the middle of nowhere to avoid a simple bridge over Spratsgate Lane, surely? Even a station on the south side of Wilkinson Road would seemingly make more sense.

Getting protections into the council's development plan could suffice to work towards eventually reacquiring a corridor back from further development through the industrial estate to the former site of Watermoor, and then it's not that many buildings to acquire and you've made it to the former trackbed north out of town, even if you have to build the line up on a modern-style viaduct to account for the modern road layouts.

Unless you have something grander in mind, I just can't see how such a short branch can wash its face, and I'm not even sure a grander scheme could wash its face either. :/

While I am sceptical about the possibilities for the branch - but think it is worth further study - the idea that reopening the Midland & South West Junction route makes any kind of sense beggars belief.

The 'middle of nowhere' you describe - actually on the edge of Cirencester - could soon be slap bang in the middle of 2,300+ new houses. Whereas the middle of nowhere that the MSWJ ran through almost the entire way between Cirencester and Cheltenham - bar Chedworth, population 800, and Andoversford, pop. 550, will be staying that way as part of the Cotswold AONB.

Blunsdon station, in the finest tradition of so many built in the Victorian era, is nowhere near the community it purported to serve, so would be no use whatever to the people who actually live in Blunsdon these days. Before Swindon expanded to the north west in recent years, this station certainly was in the middle of nowhere.

 

[MarkRedon]

From a newspaper article, it would seem that there is both more substance to this proposal than was first apparent and a degree of enthusiasm which includes people of some power and influence:

http://www.gloucestercitizen.co.uk/...ble-proposed/story-29279221-detail/story.html

Rail services between Cirencester and Kemble could return under ambitious plans to restore the line more than 50 years after it closed.

Plans are being considered to run a eco-friendly train between Kemble and the 2,350-home Chesterton development being planned on the outskirts of Cirencester.

If the plans come to fruition, trains could be running on the track [in] between three to five years.

The article mentions the involvement of the Warwick Manufacturing Group, which is a University of Warwick department which is also active in proposals to create a light railway serving Dudley.

The suggested timescale would appear to be a little on the optimistic side.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
More information concerning the Warwick Manufacturing group very light rail proposals can be found on their website, http://www.verylightrail.com/:

A vehicle with a weight of less than 1 tonne per linear metre is considered as being very light weight by current standards. It offers many advantages over traditional rail systems. These include the following:

• vehicles with low axle weights (around 4 tonnes),
• self-powered vehicles with energy recovery and storage systems as standard,
• reduced capital cost and installation time for track infrastructure
• reduced infrastructure operational and maintenance costs.

There is a lot of potential for VLR vehicles to be used on disused branch lines across the UK, many of which have been closed since the early 1960s.

The obvious problem with this kind of proposal in the context of a new branch railway is that very light vehicles are unlikely to be permitted to venture onto conventional Network Rail metals because of their failure to meet existing crashworthiness regulations. Such a branch line would therefore not permit through running from the national network. However, such a problem might also be an opportunity: to envisage reopening proposals with very much lower capital costs than have been associated with, for example, the Borders Railway.