[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.
Bridging The Gap is a large project by any standard. When the Great Central Railway (Link) company initially analysed the task, the idea was to tackle the entire job in one go. However the reanimation of the company in 2003 has seen a move to split the project into a set of six distinct "contracts". Each of these contracts will be able to target appropriate funding sources independently and can also be tackled as part of other projects, both on the railways and by other groups. The earlier 1996 scheme envisaged a single track link, but consideration is now being given to a double track project. However developments on the site in the years since closure may make this difficult.
Looking east along the Grand Union Canal
towpath. Note the GCR loco building just off the bridge. Photo
by Steve Hallam.
GCR bridge number 331 over the Grand Union Canal still stands to the rear of Loughborough Central's current engine shed. The bridge has not seen any traffic for several decades and is in need of extensive restoration before it can carry trains again. As an existing structure its restoration may be able to attract Heritage Lottery Fund funding.
The line between Loughborough Central and bridge 331 was originally intended
to run down the side of the engine shed as the shed itself stands on the
original double track main line formation. However the nearby tip site is
closing and suggestions have been made that the shed could be relocated there.
This would not only free up the original formation for the run to the bridge
but would also be a reason for the bridge refurbishment (the tip being on the
other side of the Grand Union Canal).
A
north-facing view showing partial encroachment of a drain in the
middle distance, left, and other buildings on Falcon Street in the
background. In the far distance, the signal heads on the Midland main
line can just be seen. Photo by Steve Hallam.
The original embankment north of bridge 331 was removed by British Rail when they constructed the chord for Loughborough South Junction. This embankment needs reinstating along its 345 yard length. The formation of the original embankment is mostly unobstructed and the land is owned by Charnwood Borough Council.
To reduce the environmental impact of delivering the hundreds of tons of
infill material required to rebuild this embankment, it has been
suggested that rail delivery to site could be used. Trains of infill material
would go onto the GCR(N) metals north of MML, the material deposited and then
transported under the MML by temporary conveyor belt running alongside
Hermitage Brook.
Looking
north along Falcon Street to the old bridge abutment at Railway
Terrace. Note how the new alignment of Falcon Street impinges on the
old line of railway. Photo by Steve Hallam.
Railway Terrace used to have GCR bridge number 329 pass over it. This
road-under-rail bridge will need reinstating. One abutment from the
original bridge structure still survives but the other was
destroyed when the embankment was removed and the road junction
widened. The road here is used to provide access to the council's
public tip and it is now slightly wider than it was when the
GCR original ran over it. The plan for this bridge now calls for a
19m span box girder construction.
View of Preci-Spark's car park.
The car park occupies the area of the original GCR
alignment between Railway Terrace and the MML
Originally the GCR formation between Bridge 329 over Railway Terrace and Bridge 328 over the Midland Main Line was carried on an embankment. This embankment has been lowered to allow Preci-Spark, a local precision aircraft parts manufacturer, to build a car park. The company also has an extension to its factory protruding into the original alignment.
In addition to Preci-Spark's factory and car park, Severn Trent Water
have an 8m wide easement for access to Hermitage Brook that needs to
be taken into account. Both of these requirements mean that the
original embankment formation can not be reinstated, but a couple of
options have been put forward to overcome this. One suggestion is to
have a brick walled reinforced earth embankment. Another possibility
is the use of a bridge over the car park. Either way the route of the
rebuilt line would need to be slightly different to the original GCR
alignment, to miss the building that was erected after closure of the
line. For these reasons it can be seen that this section will dictate
the lateral alignment of the project.
The Midland mainline seen from the Loughborough side
with the GCRN embankment in the background. Photo by Tony
Sparks.
The same area seen from the other side. Note the
incursion of the building in to the line of the old railway against
the remaining bridge abutment on the far side. Photo by Tony Sparks.
GCR bridge number 328 used to span the MML just south of Loughborough Midland's now disused southern platform ends. Bridge 328's reinstatement is the contract that most people think of when they consider Bridging The Gap. Unlike the original bridge, the new one will need to be a single 31m span in order to meet Network Rail's safety needs, and probably about 31 metres between abutments. It will also need to be higher than the original bridge was to allow for the possible future electrification of the MML, and to satisfy modern clearances.
It has often been suggested that this gap could be spanned using a second hand bridge. However this may actually turn out to be more expensive than a new build. A secondhand bridge would need dismantling from its existing location, transporting to the Gap site (probably in several sections), refurbishment (to bring it up to current standards) and then installation. The GCR (Link) having investigated the reuse of several redundant bridges has now discounted this option.
Modern thin deck bridge technology would allow prefabricated bridge
sections to be delivered to the site and would be easier to
install, whether by a big lift or as a bridge launch, as has been
used in various Channel Tunnel rail link contracts. The thin deck
technology also means that the embankments either side would not
need to be raised as much as they would using an old bridge to
allow for the electrification requirements. It is this section
that will determine the vertical alignment of the project.
The Midland mainline seen from the Loughborough side
with the GCRN embankment in the background. Photo by Tony
Sparks.
North of the MML GCR(N) already owns the embankment between Bridge 328 and its existing line to Loughborough South Junction. This embankment is still the intact original, but has already been raised slightly to take into account track improvements at this location. Pointwork has already been installed on the GCR(N) line ready to have the spur to the bridge reinstated.
As well as allowing materials to be brought to the bridge site as
detailed above, the GCR(N) plan to create a new station on the
embankment. This station, to be known as Loughborough North or
Loughborough High Level, will provide an interchange station to
Loughborough Midland, and allow passenger interchange between the
two lines, whilst they remain separate.
In the original feasibility study undertaken in 1996, accurate (but budget) costs were arrived at in order to assess the viability or likelihood of the project achieving fruition. These were calculated by our Consultants Messrs Scott Wilson Mainline, now Scott Wilson Railways of Swindon. In pre-privatisation days, this company were the Civil engineers department of British Railways Western Region at Swindon.
In the interim, many people have published what they thought were the official figures, and the stated costs were wildly different from the reality. We are now in the business of up-dating the costs and presenting a new feasibility. Since the earlier budgets many costs have increased markedly, and the creation of Network Rail as a successor to Railtrack, plus the new requirements of the Transport and Works Act, and Her Majesty s Railway Inspectorate, will have a substantial effect upon the final figure. In the light of current trends in construction costs, it is felt that a sum approaching £10 million may be more appropriate.
