GWR header image


 
Appeal banner

Update on Gotherington Slip


article by: Darren Fairley
posted on: 10 June 2010
updated on: 21 August 2010

/media/139600/gotherington slip_thumb.jpg/media/139607/image002_thumb.jpg/media/139614/image003_thumb.jpg/media/139621/image004_thumb.jpg/media/139628/image007_thumb.jpg/media/139635/image010_thumb.jpg/media/139642/image016_thumb.jpg/media/139649/image019_thumb.jpg/media/139656/image021_thumb.jpg/media/139663/image025_thumb.jpg/media/139670/image026_thumb.jpg

The slip - the facts

Although there seems to be little new external movement around the area of the running line the slip is a major one.  Monitoring has already recorded significant movement deep in the core of the embankment, far greater than happened on a number of the Severn Valley Railway's slips prior to their catastrophic failures following heavy rain in 2007.

Bore holes are being inserted to assess the below ground movement and to decide how best to arrest or repair the damage dependant on what is found. The area affected is much longer and deeper than the slip at Cheltenham two years ago and there are in fact at least four more separate areas of movement along the entire length of the loop embankment, which is about 500 yards long.

There is no doubt that we made the right decision to stop trains when we did. The ground has sheered between the running lines in an arc round previous BR repairs. The main line support would have deflected with continued train movements and the additional damage that would have resulted would have made the reinstatement works much more difficult and expensive. The area which was repaired by BR when the railway was still operational has not stood the test of time. The bore holes have established that ash fill was used and is much deeper in the loop section than on the main line - showing the repair was a patch and make-do.

The present slip is clearly related to British Railways repairs and has been affected by poor ground drainage in the area.  Water on the east side drains diagonally, following the furrows of the mediaeval 'ridge and furrow' farmland over which the line was built and through the area that has slipped. The very cold winter and snow loading has also been a factor. Whilst badgers are in the area and there is some rabbit damage, we are confident that animals are not responsible for the slip.

The repair will be a major engineering work. It is not just a matter of digging out and replacing the damaged embankment. The existing embankment under the running line is now fragile and the track sits on the edge of a sheer face fracture in the embankment.

What happens next?

The ground level surveys are complete and they are some of the most detailed I have seen.  They show a number of reasons why the water sits were it does and what we will need to do to rectify the situation. For example, a pond on the east side is 1.5m higher than the point at which water is percolating out on the opposite side; the water is travelling directly along an ancient furrow with no active drainage to intercept it and the clay is therefore starting to slump again.

Soil samples are being taken and analysed to best decide what system(s) will be employed to arrest further movement and just how far down the excavation works will need to extend. Each of the slips could have a different mechanism / method applied to them and we will be able to choose the most cost effective option when the report is completed and conclusions presented. The site works will be concluded at the end of May and a report issued with options and assessment mid June.

We will now start removing the signalling cables and fittings as they are now becoming stretched and likely to be damaged with further movement. 

Once the final bore holes have been completed, we will be able carefully to remove the loop track work. This will have to be undertaken in a manner which prevents the bore holes from being damaged, probably by unclipping and dropping the sleepers and then pulling the rails out from either end. We will not be able to use a road rail machine from the running line directly at the slip site due to risk of topple as there is no support to the shoulder of the track.

Repairing the embankment

The insurance loss adjuster has visited site and has agreed to fund a major part of the repair claim. The repair options have not yet been concluded but it will nevertheless be a major civil engineering undertaking and as such will be subject to optioneering and tendered to give us the best repairs, at the best price. The works will be broken down into suitable packages, but the main slip and drainage repairs are clearly not within the scope of our volunteer workforce.

It has already been established that early work will be required to establish new drainage and it is likely this will have to be undertaken before the main repair starts. We have also identified other areas where drainage improvements are an absolute priority and these could be undertaken within existing budgets if efficiencies are identified from doing them at the same time.

Conclusion

I can not at present give an indication how long the repairs will take, as it will depend on a number of factors including what repair options we choose. However do we have one of the best engineering contractors dealing with the slip and as such I have full confidence in the monitoring works and assessment that they are undertaking, based on my own experience of dealing with similar works on the main line. 

The accompanying photographs underline the severity of the slip and have been annotated to show how and where the damage has happened.







21 comments for “Update on Gotherington Slip”

  1. Gravatar of Andy BryneAndy Bryne
    Posted 10 June 2010 at 10:55:53

    Many thanks for a very comprehensive update on what is clearly a major civil engineering issue/challenge for the GWR. Communication is everything and I think you have given us an excellent insight into just how serious this slip is and why. Clearly its not an insurmountable problem but it is a good example of how running a heritage railway isn't just "playing trains." The good news is that the right decision was made and that upon rectification, the line will be even better.

  2. Gravatar of Maurice MilesMaurice Miles
    Posted 10 June 2010 at 13:12:00

    Many thanks for this comprehensive update. Hopefully there will be regular similar updates as work progresses?
    Finally the 175 Gala was magnificent despite the slip issue. My wife and I and no doubt thousands of other visitors had a very enjoyable day.
    Thanks to everyone who organised, ran and provided help.

  3. Gravatar of GWSR WebmasterGWSR Webmaster
    Posted 10 June 2010 at 13:29:33

    As soon as I am given further updates they will indeed be published on the website. I realise there is a huge amount of interest in the slip so I shall be trying to keep everyone as up to date as possible.

  4. Gravatar of matthew ormstonmatthew ormston
    Posted 10 June 2010 at 16:45:25

    Excellent report.
    My last visit was just before the slip for the diesel gala in march and it certainly wont keep me away,will be there for the summer diesel gala (just love your class 24).
    thank you for the updates and im sure the problem will be put right,however long it takes me and others will keep on visiting regardless.

  5. Gravatar of Danny ScrogginsDanny Scroggins
    Posted 10 June 2010 at 20:41:28

    I was very pleased to see how the best was made of the shortened line at the GWR 175 Gala. There can't be made occasions in the year when there are four locomotives all in steam at Winchcombe at the same time (plus one more on static display)! Very well done to the gala organisers for making the embankment problem into an opportunity to put on a new, different and interesting show!

  6. Gravatar of SteveSteve
    Posted 12 June 2010 at 23:05:24

    Thanks for the update- alas this seems common on parts of our line- see the photo from 1979 on this link:


    http://www.hondawanderer.com/Hunting_Butts_1979.htm

  7. Gravatar of Bernie HollandBernie Holland
    Posted 12 June 2010 at 23:29:00

    Obviously the Cheltenham end of the line suffered a bit because of this problem, it is clear that considerable thought and planning resulted in a totally unique presentation and thanks to Bryan & Savita at Gotherington we were able, as Danny Scroggins so aptly puts it, to transform this problem into an opportunity to put on a new, different and interesting show. Furthermore, it was also a brilliant move to set up the auto-train shuttle between Toddington and Stanton Fixed Distant as this gave passengers a taster of things to come when we arrive at Broadway. Returning to the landslip, this indeed is going to be a major undertaking as both lines of track will have to be lifted completely in order that a proper culvert can be constructed to direct the water flow over which a proper formation will have to be laid, this time using the proper materials instead of doing it on the cheap like British Railways did. If this had happened in the 1950s when heavy trains were passing over Gotherington Bank at speeds of up to 60 miles per hour then there really could have been a major disaster. Even if it means putting the Broadway Extension 'on hold' for a while, I feel it would be wise to focus on the rebuilding of the embankment at Gotherington as soon as possible. After all, we don't want anyone at Bishops Cleeve to get any notion that the railway has closed down and then start extending their back gardens across the track, as was the situation some 30 years ago when the track had been lifted by B.R.

  8. Gravatar of Colin VaughanColin Vaughan
    Posted 13 June 2010 at 22:12:57

    I agree with Bernie Holland regarding the urgency in starting work to alleviate the problem ASAP.
    Regarding the Bishops Cleeve situation, maybe a bit of contact with the Local Press might be worthwhile, so that nobody is any doubt regarding the future of the GWR in that area.

  9. Gravatar of paul sharplespaul sharples
    Posted 16 June 2010 at 23:32:55

    thanks foor this comprehensive update

  10. Gravatar of Bill BlakeBill Blake
    Posted 24 June 2010 at 21:52:24

    Full marks to Malcolm Temple for keeping us all up to date. It is becoming very clear that this is a major problem at a time when money is getting very tight. And it is much more expensive than first envisaged. I favour concentrating on completing the line to Broadway thus recovering the lost track milage and putting the embankment repairs on hold. This would allow us to continue to offer a good run to customers and give more time to find the money we need to reinstate the line to Cheltenham. Perhaps the chairman to Network Rail could be persuaded to donate all or some of his bonus to fund this.

  11. Gravatar of Steve Emerson Steve Emerson
    Posted 25 June 2010 at 14:34:11

    Bearing in mind that 25% of tickets now come from the Racecourse Station,and that the Racecourse caters for those who rely on public transport,any backpeddling on restoration south of Gotherington would be extremely foolish in terms of lost revenue,goodwill etc.
    Furthermore the timescale for reaching Broadway is far in excess of returning services to the south.Remember how long it took to actually reach the racecouse after the mid 90's press day with the 14xx at the R/C Station.

  12. Gravatar of Southern Man in ExileSouthern Man in Exile
    Posted 30 June 2010 at 11:06:28

    Is this not a fantastic opportunity? I propose a mini-gala based on three things:

    1/ Reinstate the second platform at the Racecourse.
    2/ Have a two train push-pull service from the Racecourse to just short of the landslip (one train from each platform).
    3/ Invite people to walk through Hunting Butts tunnel.

    As an alternative, pull all the stock currently in Hunting Butts tunnel into the runaround loop at the Racecourse. Run a push-pull service: Racecourse-just short of Gotherington landslip-Hunting Butts tunnel-Racecourse.

    Any thoughts?

  13. Gravatar of AndyAndy
    Posted 01 July 2010 at 15:57:31

    I hope that any solution to this does not ignore the considerable in house expertise in sorting out slips. Outside contractors have a vested interest in putting in high bids once insurance companies are involved. This is not rocket science, it is a clay embankment. It is perfectly possible to repair this slip with the railway working to an engineers brief, just as we did at Cheltenham Race Course. You could probably knock a zero off the bill by doing this...

  14. Gravatar of David FrenchDavid French
    Posted 02 July 2010 at 13:59:32

    A walk through Hunting Butts tunnel sounds like a nice idea but is not very feasible in practise as (a) it's chock full of junk - correction - stored rolling stock and (b) the southern portal is sealed off by a very tall fence to prevent trespass.

    I would query the need to construct a new culvert through the embankment at Gotherington. It just needs the excavation of a new ditch along the length of the Cotswold side to intercept the run-off from the fields and direct the water into the culverts that are already there.

  15. Gravatar of Bill BlakeBill Blake
    Posted 02 July 2010 at 16:49:18

    I am grateful to Steve Emerson for introducing the facts about the value to our railway of Cheltenham Race Course Station. I was not aware of this. But facts have to be faced and we are NOT responsible for the landslip. That said, perhaps we could invite vintage bus owners to lay on buses from Gotherington to the race course on race days. That would offer customers a steam train and vintage bus journey thus making a virtue out of necessity. They would make money and so would we.

  16. Gravatar of Lynn ClaridgeLynn Claridge
    Posted 04 July 2010 at 22:11:20

    I'm sorry that this has happened at Gotherington but totally agree with David French. We know from Stanley Pontlarge that many culverts, installed when the railway was built in the 1900s, have not been cleaned out and maintained causing a backlog of water that creates problems elsewhere. The railway line cuts across many water courses and had the drainage ditches at the base of the embankments and the culverts been maintained to the degree of earlier times perhaps the embankment at Gotherington wouldn't be in the predicament it now is.

    My husband's grandfather was a ganger on the stretch of line from Winchcombe tunnel to Gotherington from 1906 unti his retirement in 1930 and I'm sure he must be spinning in his grave with the explanations that are given at the moment. Part of his daily duties was to walk the length of his section; also part of his duties was to oversee the cutting back of trees and scrub and keeping the grass mown - which helped to tie in the embankments - and that the same ditches and culverts were cleaned out regularly.

  17. Gravatar of Darren FairleyDarren Fairley
    Posted 23 July 2010 at 09:45:14

    I hoping to put a new undate on progress very shortly that will answer many questions that have been asked over the month.

    Just a few points I would like to clarify in the interim:

    We will not be needing a new culvert at Gotherington, we have three in the area which are free flowing, but need to replace the lineside drainage to them which has expired after 100 years of battering.

    The culverts on our railway are examined and are being cleaned out as and when required - we have more culverts now than when we inherited the railway as we have found more that were not in the BR records that we were passed to us.

    With respects to contractors putting extra '0's on their bills, whilst the percept is that this happens - this is not happening here and it is frustrating to think that people honestly think that we would allow that to happen as a Board. We wouldnt authroise the repairs if it did. Each item of work is broken down and measured - and there are schedules of rates will be assessed as tenders reviewed - as normal industry practice.

    Rest assured it is not just a simple case of a big standard repair to a clay embankment - if not we would be digging right now. Of note - Cheltenham slip was managed by the same Engineering consultant that we are using for Gotherington (and was used by SVR) and the works were tendered in the same manner and undertaken by contractors for us. The work was value engineered and only authorised when we were happy that we were getting a good price and a good solution.

    The slip repair will be extremely resource hungry both in terms of manpower but also large plant and equipment that we would not normally be certified to use ourselves. Cheltenham was only 50m long. At 250m long the embankment at Gotherington is not a small task to take on remembering that the problem is the whole embankment and not just the 20m section that is visible.

    We also need to strike a balance over what we do internally with making sure we have the volunteers at hand to maintain the day to day running of the railway.

    I fully understand why all the questions are being raised and will endeavour to answer more in a new update soon.

  18. Gravatar of Bob GriffinBob Griffin
    Posted 24 July 2010 at 10:37:00

    Why not a diesel operated shuttle at weekends from the racecourse to the the Gotherington slip to help increase revenue ?

  19. Gravatar of Darren FairleyDarren Fairley
    Posted 26 July 2010 at 12:46:31

    Hi Bob, great idea and one I favour, along with a whole load of other options for South end of the line. We are looking into a number of ideas and combination of activities that will compliment the remaining operational service. Below is an example of what we have to consider with each idea:

    We are looking into the options and trying to balance the positives and negatives for all of them as we decide what to do going forward.

    Positives are something new and novel for a limited period and keep teh South End of the line active.

    Additionally those that would at present turn away from Cheltenham would at least spend a few pennies (ok wrong phrase!) rather than nothing, or at best then move on to Toddington and either pay for a normal ticket.....(or would we then have to offer a discount....same value as the novelty ride on a full ticket?...so either way a few extra customers either way.

    A couple of snags for example is how we service and keep secure anything at the Cheltenham end (We have already had problems with stock at the tunnel end being vandalised for example). Crewing in addition to the normal service whilst we are additionally top and tailing teh normal service may prove problematical.

    With the novelty value - would more then divert away from Toddington to just pay a few pounds rather than going to Toddington and as such we loose even more revenue. This could be more damaging than just the loss of those that would travel at Cheltenham.

    Should a loco have a major problem or need a major service we would have to swap it over.

    The biggest hurdle is how we get anything up there in the first place with no loading pad for road delivery.

    Please dont see thes comments as dismissive just a demonstration of what we are considering with each and every option. All these things come at a price and if the end benefit outways the cost we could see a whole manner of activities up there - anything could be possible!!!!!

  20. Gravatar of Andy StratfordAndy Stratford
    Posted 29 July 2010 at 23:09:23

    As a possible solution and tempory fix until the line closes for it winter shut down, could the present running line not be slewed over away from the fault as the embankment seems to be wide enough even if it required extra ballast. at least then your back upto full revenue with trains running from cheltenham and all major engineering then carried out in the closed season

  21. Gravatar of Darren FairleyDarren Fairley
    Posted 01 August 2010 at 08:59:31

    Andy, the first option considered was keeping the railway open but doing such a move.

    Note the sketch on the left of the report that shows fracture if it were slewed over further into the curve the outer shoulder would still not be supported as we would not get 45 degree minimum slope support because the sheer runs 5-7m deep. Since we started monitoring movement we have found mow definite and continued movement in one section of the mainline as well.

    Additionally if we did slew we would then be moving the track too close to the inner shoulder and could damage the side of the emankment that is very steep and not support additional load. Further heavy activity on the embankment will disturb the damage already there.

    The photos only show the visible slip. There are three other areas of movement on the rest of the embankment that are not shown.


Comment on this item