[Introduction] [History] [The Work Involved] [Progress] [Gallery] [F.A.Q.] [Loco Works] [Video]
[Funding Appeal] [Emotive Reasons] [Local Support] [Site Plan of The Gap] [Links] [Contact Us]
Site last updated: 21st June 2008. See the change log for details.
The Gap is 550 metres long, running from the north end of the present Great Central Railway at Loughborough to a junction with the Great Central (Nottingham) line to the north of the Midland Main Line. The gap includes the existing Bridge 331 over the Grand Union Canal, 320 metres of removed embankment, the need to cross an enlarged Railway Terrace, the four track Midland Main Line, and the remains of the embankment to the north of this.
The gap will be reinstated by re-furbishing Bridge 331, re-instating a section of missing embankment, installing a new combination of bridges and/or viaduct over Railway Terrace, a clear span bridge over the Midland Main Line, and re-leveling the embankment between this and the existing Great Central (Nottingham) line.
The detailed design for how this will be achieved is currently under development and will be progressed as quickly as funding will allow.
The gap project is unusual in that the benefits of a railway heritage project are normally self evident. A restored (or even new build) locomotive or coach can be viewed, enjoyed and learnt from simply because it exists and works. A new shed or engineering works helps to maintain and protect heritage artifacts. However this perspective misses the real point of the gap project. This is the difference that the bridged gap will facilitate in the operation of the greater Great Central. It will enable a more compelling, true to life and unique visitor experience to be provided. By providing an 18 mile main line railway, with potentially much of it double tracked, with a connection to the national network, and located in the heart of the railway infrastructure industry, potential training and testing opportunities will arise.
The achievement of our objective will have far-reaching effects on the railway itself, the experience that we can provide for our visitors, the local community and economy, and for tourism. There is also the possibility of the greater Great Central taking on the characteristics of a community railway, in line with the recent initiative from the Strategic Rail Authority.
It will transform the two preserved sections of The Great Central Railway into one 18 mile long main line. This will provide a uniquely suitable stamping ground for larger preserved locomotives, both steam and diesel. As access to the Network Rail system becomes increasingly modernised and classic steam and diesel trains becomes less compatible with new generation stock, this facility will grow in value. The existing chord line to the national system will enhance the travel possibilities even further.
The greater Great Central will also be able to provide a more varied and thorough immersion into what large scale railway operation used to be like. So, for the railway enthusiast, the historian and anyone interested in an aspect of our past that was commonplace 40 years ago but has now almost vanished, this project offers the prospect of a truly unique experience, seen nowhere else in the UK. For the general tourist and day tripper, the bridging of the gap will provide an experience greater and more varied than either of the two presently separate railways will be able to provide. By creating a destination on the scale of the completed main line, the project will generate many journey opportunities not previously possible. Running through the heart of the East Midlands, the greater Great Central will attract visitors from a large area who will be able to access the line in a variety of ways.
The scale, ambition and novelty of the scheme will attract local and national media attention, and become a focus for heritage railways in general. This will have spin off benefits for this part of the East Midlands, raising its profile and providing a direct boost for the local economy, most significantly through building up tourism in an area not traditionally connected with that industry. The regeneration of the rail corridor will open up new attractions into Leicestershire for the people of Nottinghamshire, and vice versa. It will encourage employment on and off the railway. Similar schemes on other heritage railways have been proved to have an upward effect on local house prices and security generally, and to deter vandalism.
We are as interested in the answer to this question as you are! Frankly, until the detailed design work gets underway, our estimate may not be much more accurate than your guess. Relative to the last study, carried out in 1995, the design objectives have changed, construction techniques have advanced, and the demands of bureaucracy have become ever more onerous and most importantly, costs are ever-rising. And the situation that applies now may well have changed by the time that construction starts.
So we can be fairly confident that the final cost will not be less than the £3 million that was estimated last time, and probably nearer the £10 million mark. Of course the final cash cost will be reduced the more that we are able to attract sponsorship and support in-kind.
This question is probably more difficult to answer at the moment than that of the project cost. We believe that, if all necessary funding was available, the actual design, planning and construction would take about three years if everything went smoothly. But of course, the funding is not in place, and realistically it cannot be expected that this will be achieved quickly. In addition, of course, it must be remembered that Great Central (Link) Ltd. is jointly sponsored by Great Central plc and Great Central (Nottingham) Ltd. and that our current remit extends to investigating the feasibility of bridging the gap. Therefore we will only proceed at a pace that both of these organisations are comfortable with, consider to be appropriate, and that they are willing and able to support.
It is possible that we can make some practical and visible progress with Contracts 1 (Re-furbishment of Bridge 331) and 6 (the embankment to the north of the Midland Main Line) relatively quickly. But we can make no promises about the final completion date at this time.
A project of the size and uniqueness of bridging the gap will need to be wide ranging and professional in how it goes about raising the funds that it needs. We are investigating the obvious options of the Heritage Lottery Fund and European funding. It appears that, although they will have a role to play, they are unlikely to provide the bulk of what we will need. Accordingly we are identifying what other potential sources of funding exist, both public and private sector.
We are also looking at how we can reduce the cash cost of the project, such as by attracting sponsorship in kind. What has also become apparent is that our ability to attract the level of funding we will require will be dependent upon our ability to produce a credible business case for the bridged gap. This will be one of the main priorities of the gap team during the next phase of the project.
We will eventually need many types of help and support as the project moves forward. The most obvious is volunteer involvement in aspects such as the re-furbishment of Bridge 331 (Contract 1) and the re-instatement of the embankment to the north of the Midland Main Line (Contract 6). These will be relatively straightforward, conventional heritage railway infrastructure projects. However at the moment we envisage that the rest of the actual construction will be on a scale that requires professional, large scale contractors to do the work.
The second way in which people can help the project is by donating funds. This is especially true in the early stages of the project. This is when we need relatively small amounts of money for design and evaluation work, planning applications and various assessments. Many of these will be required before we can credibly approach sources of the larger scale funds that will be required for actual construction.
A third type of help we need are donations of benefits in kind. By this we mean materials, equipment or services that we would otherwise need to spend funds to buy in or hire. We are currently compiling a list of all the inputs that we will need to complete the project, so that we can then ask for specific support of this type.
The final type of support that we would appreciate is simply that of spreading the word about the project, so that more and more people are aware of what we are trying to do. You can also help by keeping updated about our progress, asking us questions about what is going on, and letting us know what you think.
The initial study, carried out in 1995, assumed that the gap would be bridged with a single line, to meet remaining clearances and minimise costs. However we have always been aware that the vision of the greater Great Central is to recreate a genuine main line experience. This clearly implies the use of double track, and the success of the double tracking on the GCR plc between Loughborough and Rothley underlines this.
Our current review of the practicalities of the gap project has indicated that by using a combination of reinforced embankment techniques, plus the judicious use of viaducting, we may be able to squeeze two tracks through. Furthermore the incremental cost of doing so, relative to a single track, may not be that great.A final decision is dependent upon the detailed design work that is still be undertaken, but our firm intention is to use two tracks if at all possible.
A bridge slide or launch is the technique that currently looks to be most suitable for our need to bridge the Midland Main Line. It is used with clear span bridges of the type that we anticipate using. This technique involves building the bridge on one side of the space to be bridged. For us this means either on contract 6, the northern embankment, or more likely on contract 2, the reinstated embankment between Bridge 331 and Railway Terrace.
When the superstructure is complete large jacks are used to lift and push the bridge out across the gap, half a metre at a time. The great advantage of this method is that it requires the Midland Main Line to be shut for only a short period of time, perhaps as little as one day. This would save a considerable amount of money. Another advantage of a launch option is that it would simplify the centre section of the project by using a continuous viaduct, rather than a mixture of bridges and embankment. This would echo the look of the original Great Central Railway where it passed through built up areas.
Yes and no. The original approach to bridging the gap assumed that the existing shed would stay where it is, and the line to the north would run by the side of it. There is space for one track to do this. However this would clearly be less than ideal for a main line railway.
Quite separately to the gap project, GCR plc are actively looking at the prospects of moving the shed to land currently used by Charnwood Borough Council as a landfill tip. This land lies to the north of the Grand Union Canal, between it and the Midland Main Line.
This project would require the re-furbishment of Bridge 331, over the Grand Union Canal, along with the replacement of a short section of embankment immediately to the north of this bridge. The two projects would thus share some infrastructure. In addition, the removal of the shed from its current location would enhance the ability of the bridged gap to deliver part of the vision of the greater Great Central, by enabling the establishment of a double track main line between Bridge 331 and Loughborough Central station.
Accordingly the gap team are liaising with the team looking at the removal of the shed, to ensure that, firstly, we both know what the other is doing and, secondly, we work together on issues of mutual relevance, such as planning issues.
