West Somerset Railway's future in doubt after £800k loss

[The Stationmaster]

Do I take it that they are also spending money to replace a perfectly good colour light Home Signal?

[woodenhead]

12 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Do I take it that they are also spending money to replace a perfectly good colour light Home Signal?

It has been replaced yes, currently two in situ - the old one and the new one.

[ikcdab]

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Do I take it that they are also spending money to replace a perfectly good colour light Home Signal?

The "they" in this case is Somerset County Council who have paid for the  crossing renewal and associated signalling updates.

Edited October 27, 2021 by ikcdab

[Mulgabill]

The semaphor is, I believe, an extra compared to the old layout. Which means they can now run

from either side of the platform, to the other, without having to cross the crossing. Thereby

reducing the number of crossing operations substantially.

 

With regard the "old" colour light signal, it was an extremely complex animal, with a number

of different routes read. A complex bit of "film" can be found on West somerset rail TV on You

Tube (Explaining how signalling works, and giving a full breakdown of that signal).

 

TONY

[Mulgabill]

An update on the crossing saga

 

 

http://cgibin.wsr.org.uk/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?h=Topical%20pictures&t=pics

 

Oops!!!!!

 

They've about 4 weeks 'til trains start running, and 6 'til the grand return to Minehead.

 

At least that was the plan.

 

Two steps forward and a big one back.

 

TONY

[Northmoor]

33 minutes ago, Mulgabill said:

An update on the crossing saga

 

 

http://cgibin.wsr.org.uk/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?h=Topical%20pictures&t=pics

 

Oops!!!!!

 

They've about 4 weeks 'til trains start running, and 6 'til the grand return to Minehead.

 

At least that was the plan.

 

Two steps forward and a big one back.

 

TONY

Nothing there that should delay the reopening.  Is there any other UK heritage railway using such modern track; steel sleepers and Fastclips?  To be honest it's been overdue judging by the alarming reports about the state of their track a couple of years ago, but it isn't cheap.

[RJS1977]

I would imagine Mulgabill was referring to the photo of the barrier being bent backwards. Should be a relatively easy fix with a standard part - although I would expect the contractors to prioritise NR's crossings. However it appears from the caption to the next photo that they may already have been!

[rodent279]

I see from the same set of photos that the large Prairie has had a new brick arch fitted. Is this a new, modular brick arch design, made from fireproof concrete, or is it the same as brick arches were always made?

 

http://www.wsr.org.uk/2022/02/037.jpg

 

[ikcdab]

On 20/02/2022 at 15:05, Northmoor said:

Nothing there that should delay the reopening.  Is there any other UK heritage railway using such modern track; steel sleepers and Fastclips?  To be honest it's been overdue judging by the alarming reports about the state of their track a couple of years ago, but it isn't cheap.

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to, but the Alcombe relay has reused the old 1930s GWR steel sleepers. This bit of track has been referred to as the "tin road" for years. As such, this is a heritage piece of infrastructure which is good to see reinstated and not just chucked away and replaced with something modern. 

[Northmoor]

43 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to, but the Alcombe relay has reused the old 1930s GWR steel sleepers. This bit of track has been referred to as the "tin road" for years. As such, this is a heritage piece of infrastructure which is good to see reinstated and not just chucked away and replaced with something modern. 

So the sleepers allowed a drop in modern fastening system (to fit the FB rail)?  Even better, I agree to continue to use the existing material if it's serviceable; steel sleepers last a very long time compared to wood or concrete.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, ikcdab said:

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to, but the Alcombe relay has reused the old 1930s GWR steel sleepers. This bit of track has been referred to as the "tin road" for years. As such, this is a heritage piece of infrastructure which is good to see reinstated and not just chucked away and replaced with something modern. 

Are you sure they are1930s GWR steel sleepers?  The GWR used a couple of types of steel sleeper and the one that didn't incorporate the chairs in its manufacture used either welded or cast on chairs and had different, more rounded, top than the ones at Alcombe plus they were longer and the end was very different with a much gentler downward curvature.  Apart from the rather obvious fact that the GWR sleepers were for bullhead rail while these are obviously for flat bottom rail.   Judging by the amount of deterioration that could be found in the early 1970s in GWR steel sleepers reused on sidings I do wonder if they'd be fit to use on running lines in the 21st century especially as all the manufacturers quote a service life of 50 years, not 80.

 

Those at Alcombe do appear to be secondhand but they look exactly like the contemporary type  of steel sleeper marketed by British Steel with the same sharp curve down at the end, the same flat top and much tighter radius curve at the edge than GWR steel sleepers, the same two holes - one each side of the baseplate, and the same  baseplate and rail clip arrangement.

[guzzler17]

On 20/02/2022 at 14:30, Mulgabill said:

An update on the crossing saga

 

http://cgibin.wsr.org.uk/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?h=Topical%20pictures&t=pics

 

Oops!!!!!

 

I note that the downed tree had quite a lot of ivy growing on it.  That can help to catch the wind and in extreme circumstances bring down a whole tree.  The tree behind the running in board seems to have a good covering as well.

 

For years I've been snipping off ivy once it gets past eye level but I left the wild rose growing through the chestnut tree and guess what happened on Sunday night?

[Mulgabill]

2 hours ago, ikcdab said:

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to, but the Alcombe relay has reused the old 1930s GWR steel sleepers. This bit of track has been referred to as the "tin road" for years. As such, this is a heritage piece of infrastructure which is good to see reinstated and not just chucked away and replaced with something modern. 

 

My understanding is that these are new(ish) , specified specifically as they give better performance, and longer durability, for the marshy location. The trackwork is modern flatbottom to latest specs.

 

So the trains can get to the crossing, but there is a rather long list of "partners" who have yet to agree what to do re  the barriers.

 

TONY

ps But we are getting 9466 back for the last 2 yrs of it's ticket!

Edited February 23, 2022 by Mulgabill
ps added

[ikcdab]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Are you sure they are1930s GWR steel sleepers?  The GWR used a couple of types of steel sleeper and the one that didn't incorporate the chairs in its manufacture used either welded or cast on chairs and had different, more rounded, top than the ones at Alcombe plus they were longer and the end was very different with a much gentler downward curvature.  Apart from the rather obvious fact that the GWR sleepers were for bullhead rail while these are obviously for flat bottom rail.   Judging by the amount of deterioration that could be found in the early 1970s in GWR steel sleepers reused on sidings I do wonder if they'd be fit to use on running lines in the 21st century especially as all the manufacturers quote a service life of 50 years, not 80.

 

Those at Alcombe do appear to be secondhand but they look exactly like the contemporary type  of steel sleeper marketed by British Steel with the same sharp curve down at the end, the same flat top and much tighter radius curve at the edge than GWR steel sleepers, the same two holes - one each side of the baseplate, and the same  baseplate and rail clip arrangement.

You may well be right so I (partially) withdraw my comments! I have just checked the BoT report of July 1935 for the Dunster to Minehead doubling. Col Mount reports that the rail was 97.5lbs second hand laid with 52lb chairs on new, creosoted sleepers.  So all conventional in 1935.  I have been involved with the WSR since 1983 and for all of that time, that bit of track has had steel sleepers. The WSR has never replaced them, so I guess the steel ones were laid in by BR at some point. Maybe something to do with the marshy land?

Incidentally, when BL to NF was doubled in 1938, a one mile length was laid with "GKB 8' 6" steel sleepers".  Not sure if they are still there or not.

Ian

[Trog]

GWR steel sleepers.

[Michael Hodgson]

Probably not the best choice if you need conventional track circuiting.

[Northmoor]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Probably not the best choice if you need conventional track circuiting.

The rail sits on a polymer pad (steel rail sat directly on steel would be a very bad idea, that's just asking for fretting wear) and the Fastclip itself is also insulated from the rail foot, so you don't have an electrical path.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Probably not the best choice if you need conventional track circuiting.

That was one reason why the early pattern of steel sleeper went out of fashion although I understand that they were difficult to properly shovel pack which can't have helped.

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

The rail sits on a polymer pad (steel rail sat directly on steel would be a very bad idea, that's just asking for fretting wear) and the Fastclip itself is also insulated from the rail foot, so you don't have an electrical path.

Yes the modern British Steel design does exactly that although i wonder what the reliable life of the pads is nowadays and some older types used with concrete sleepers tended to wear and their function was lost.   However none of that matters when axle counters are used

[Michael Hodgson]

16 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

  However none of that matters when axle counters are used

 

A job title in the GWR's clerical grades?

[The Stationmaster]

1 minute ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

A job title in the GWR's clerical grades?

Only on Swindon, and other, works.     But talking of works I did come across a chap, of quite advanced years, in Cathays works whose job was polishing the white metal in axlebox bearings and I know a lady who lives in Stoke-On-Trent who worked as Sagger's Bottom Knocker in the pottery trade

[RJS1977]

26 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

 I know a lady who lives in Stoke-On-Trent who worked as Sagger's Bottom Knocker in the pottery trade

 

I've got a Blue Peter Annual somewhere where John Noakes has a go at that job!

[Trog]

3 hours ago, Northmoor said:

The rail sits on a polymer pad (steel rail sat directly on steel would be a very bad idea, that's just asking for fretting wear) and the Fastclip itself is also insulated from the rail foot, so you don't have an electrical path.

 

Some years ago there was an attempt to come up with a stiffer more wear resistant version of the rubber rail pads we were then using. Some genius at the manufacturers worked out that adding carbon black to the rubber/cork mixture then used would achieve this aim.

[The Johnster]

Well, he's probably not wrong, per se.

 

[RJS1977]

19 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Well, he's probably not wrong, per se.

 

 

Yes, it depends very much on the question he was asked.

 

If he was simply asked "Come up with a stiffer, more wear resistant version of these pads," then his answer met the specification.

 

However if he was asked "Come up with a stiffer, more wear resistant version of these pads which does not conduct electricity", then that's a different matter!

[Trog]

40 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

..................

However if he was asked "Come up with a stiffer, more wear resistant version of these pads which does not conduct electricity", then that's a different matter!

 

I just wish that I had got to see the S&Ts faces as they tried to figure out what the @@@@ was going on. As electrically conductive rubber is not going to be high on any ones list of possibilities.