-
Posts
9,598 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
TheSignalEngineer last won the day on February 6 2020
TheSignalEngineer had the most liked content!
About TheSignalEngineer
Profile Information
-
Location
The Dark Peak
Recent Profile Visitors
6,721 profile views
TheSignalEngineer's Achievements
24.3k
Reputation
-
I believe that Red Panda are now owned by Phoenix Precision Paints. I bought a Red Panda wagon from the H&A stand at a show about 12 months ago so hopefully they are still be available as I need another chassis for a conversion job.
-
Railway Closed for replacement of signs
TheSignalEngineer replied to Bob83a's topic in The railways of Devon
And the spell checker is no use if you use the wrong word but spell it correctly -
Colourisation: problems ahead.
TheSignalEngineer replied to BachelorBoy's topic in Modelling musings & miscellany
The colour rendition of my two eyes is not an exact match. -
BRMA awards for 2023 - the full results.
TheSignalEngineer replied to AY Mod's topic in Modelling musings & miscellany
I was referring to the danger to Hornby. I know exactly what asset stripping is, having been taken over by a large comglomorate which was in turn 'merged' with another one. They didn't know the product, didn't know the market and were only interested in getting their cut. They bought and sold companies or reorganised every few week it seemed. All turned nasty in the end as the share price crashed due to problems with deliveries on hi-tech projects. I understand they managed to find enough buyers for the various product divisions amongst competitors to pay off the debts and not go into liquidation. Fortunately I had left long before that happened. -
BRMA awards for 2023 - the full results.
TheSignalEngineer replied to AY Mod's topic in Modelling musings & miscellany
If I were at Hornby I would be more worried at who was taking an interest in the company's shares. Fortunately there's still life in the hobby, we haven't yet got to a category for Asset Stripper of the Year'. -
A couple of examples from my past. First at Langley Green Middle. It's low for sighting under the footbridge. The R/H doll used to carry the distant arm for Langley Green East. Off topic note:- Tin shed on left is Cox & Danks who cut up a few locos in the 1960s including some Kings. Next a standard GWR bracket for the Up Through line at Leamington with Gallows Bracket extemside to the left foe the Up Platform. It hangs down for sighting under the canopy. This was its replacement. IIRC the red aspects were 16'6" Above Rail Level
-
The Requirements were a minefield of Must Do, Desirable, contradiction and getout clauses. The 'Desirable Standard' structure gauge for steam and 3rd rail shown on the drawing in the Requirements was 15 feet above the running rail. Company loading gauges at the time of the 1928 Requirements varied between 13 feet and 13 feet 9 inches. The standard clearance above loading gauge was shown in the text as 12 inches. In certain circunstances this could be reduced as low as 6 inches with special permission from the Inspectorate.
-
I've just corrected the platform headroom to 8 feet as in the Requirements in 1928 and 1950. My memory let me down but it is about 30 years since I personally signed off the paperwork for one. We did tend to design to have the bottom of the structure of a colour light at a bare minimum of 11 feet above rail rather than measuring from the platform. You would always get a clever b******** who would decide that rebuilding thesubstandard platform would after all be in the project the week after the signal had been installed. One Inspecting Officer seemed very keen on what he called the Umberella Effect. That was a SPAD caused by a driver not seeing a red aspect as a city gent was holding his open brolly in line of sight.
-
It also depends where they were located if they were outside the minimum required clearance from the side of the track they could be any height. We had one at Langley Green where you could virtually step onto the landing from ground level. Different rules applied if situated on the passenger areas of a platform. In this situation the required clearance was the whole structure to be at least 6 feet back from the platform edge and providing 8 feet 6 inches clear headroom above the platform surface.
-
Leeds London Road . Yard magnets and control panel
TheSignalEngineer replied to Barry O's topic in Layout topics
Saltley men working up there? -
Another land slip
TheSignalEngineer replied to ess1uk's topic in UK Prototype Discussions (not questions!)
Drainage outside the railway is an old problem. The flooding at Walsall was usually caused by blockages of the culverts and bridges in the stream coming down from Ryecroft. In the early days of Railtrack we were asked to lead an infrastructure condition survey with emphasis on the state of signalling. We took on board experienced ex BR Pway and bridge engineers to accompany us on site visits. When I presented the preliminary report to the client I was asked what I thought were the biggest risks to the reliability of the train service as far as the infrastructure was concerned. The Railtrack man was expecting me to point out deficiencies in the signalling but I chose two other risks. One was the number of bridge bashes particularly at two locations with a lot of HGV traffic where visibility was poor and signage needed to be better. The other was the amount of waterlogged cess areas due to lack of maintenance on cutting faces and draiinage. One particular area was in Smethwick where there is a culverted stream above the railway which IIRC crosses under the cutting in a siphon. I found an historical incident during my research for possible causes. My draft note in the report was "It is possible that this comes from the lake in West Smethwick Park as this has been the cause of previous major flooding. In 1927 following heavy rain water overflowed from an undertrack culvert. It ran down the gradient (through Smethwick West) and round the curve to Galton Junction washing out the Stour Valley Line. It was estimated that 5000 tons of debris was washed into the canal. LMS Birmingham to Wolverhampton rail services were suspended for four days but complete clearance of the canal took nine weeks." I can't find my source document at the moment but I have a picture of the 1927 washout somewhere and how many hundred men it took to clear the line and replace the ballast during the four days of blockage.