Jim Martin

A few weeks ago, I came off my bike after hitting a patch of something - I suspect that it was diesel fuel, which had then been rained on - which had been spilled on the road. The road surface was extremely slippery: far worse than ice, in my opinion (in fact, this saved me from being cut-up too badly, because I slid along for several yards on a layer of oily gunk) and while waiting for my wife I watched several cars sliding on it to various degrees. On the way to A&E, I rang the Police (this was about 8:00pm, so the council wasn't answering) and reported that something had been spilled at that location and that the road surface was dangerous. At the time, I took the view that this was "one of those things"; that whoever had spilled the stuff was long gone, unidentifiable and I'd just have to suck it up and accept some inconvenience and expense arising from the damage to me and the bike. As time goes by, though, and the costs keep mounting up, I'm becoming less keen on this idea. So far it's cost me about £300 in bike repairs, physio (for what now seems to be a torn rotator cuff), train fares (because I can't ride the bike without pain from my shoulder) and various other, lesser costs. It's currently costing me about £50 per week in physio and train fares. What I'm wanting to find out is, who is responsible for cleaning spillages off the road and when do they become responsible for it? Obviously, it's unreasonable to expect the local council (this happened in Sefton, which is also where I live) to clear a spill the very second it happens, but presumably once they're informed that the spill has happened, they have a duty to deal with it within a certain time. I'm planning on contacting my local councillor and asking them to find out whether the council Highways Department was aware that the road was slippery and when they became aware of it. This is a busy road at most times of day (for those familiar with Liverpool, I was riding up Regent Road and the spillage was at the junction with Miller's Bridge: I came off when I tried to turn right onto Miller's Bridge) so I wouldn't be surprised if someone had phoned the council before I had my accident. If they hadn't been told, I guess it's back to "Plan A" and I'll just have to stump up myself, but if they didn't act on a notification within a reasonable time, I think I'd have a decent claim against them. Does anyone have any experience in this sort of situation, and did they manage to claim compensation for a failure to make the road safe? Jim

This was a question in the London Reconnections Christmas quiz last year. The quiz is still available at https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/london-reconnections-2017-christmas-quiz/. Question 6 is the relevant one. The answers are at https://www.londonreconnections.com/2018/2017-quiz-answers/. When I was doing the quiz, I found a website that listed a surprising number of stations not served by the operating TOC, but I can't find it now. Jim <Edit>... or perhaps I can: http://www.railwaycodes.org.uk/stations/notserved.shtm </edit>

That was my original thought (there are a couple of stations which are approached on a right-hand curve in the southerly direction, so you can get a clear view of three signals); but there are some signals for up trains which are positioned outside the down slow, so I wasn't sure. Jim

I made another journey down the WCML today, only this time I was looking out for the telephones. They are indeed some distance in advance of every signal. The two things that struck me were: (1) the Trent Valley has bi-directional signalling, which I'd not really noticed before, despite using the line literally for decades. The phone between the down lines at Tamworth actually belongs to a signal for up trains (NL9464, I think), which is why it's opposite the phone for the up fast, which is for signal NL3492. (2) the provision at Tamworth is relatively extravagant. The only other phones I spotted with anything like this sort of protection were at Nuneaton. Everywhere else the telephone just stands in the 6-foot without protection on either side (apart from locations where it can be placed on a station platform: Rugeley has one phone - presumably for the down fast - between the two down lines and another - presumably for the down slow - on the platform). I'd have thought that using them would be terrifying. Jim

Some GCR locomotives did work into KX in the Grouping period. The B2 class ("Sir Sam Fay" class) 4-6-0s were well-known for operating excursions between KX and Immingham in the 1930s, where they connected with cruise ships. The B3 ("Lord Faringdon") 4-6-0s were all allocated to GN sheds (Copley Hill and KX) immediately after the grouping, specifically to operate the newly-introduced Pullman service between KX and Leeds. They stayed there until 1927 but were not regarded as a great success and later returned to the GC section. Jim

Thanks for all the replies to this. I often see odd bits of kit alongside the tracks when I'm out and about by rail, and I'm always wondering whether they are things that I could/should be modelling when I get down to building my layout. I think that there might be a couple of those disconnect boxes installed when the time is right! Jim

So the box contains a switch for simply switching the track circuit off? Jim

It's part of the SEMG website: http://www.semgonline.com/coach/coupe/index.html Jim

I thought that the Tamworth ones looked like phones, but I couldn't see why you'd have a telephone in that particular spot. I'll be travelling through there again later this week, so I'll have to look at the relationship between them and the signals. Jim

These are a couple of bits of lineside equipment that I've noticed recently and have wondered what that are. All the photos were taken from inside trains, so the quality is nothing to write home about, I'm afraid. The first shot was taken at Manchester Piccadilly, although I've seen similar things at other locations. The nearer one is labelled "KP feed", while the farther is labelled either that or possibly "KR feed". The second thing(s) are at Tamworth. The tracks here are arranged Up Slow (where my train was standing at the platform), Up Fast, Down Fast, Down Slow; so the railings separate the equipment from the slow lines but are open to the fast lines. As you can see, there's one on each side of the station. Please could someone enlighten me as to what these are? Thanks Jim

I just saw the advert for this in the NGS Journal. It's very exciting news. Ages ago, I wrote in a thread here or on NGF that if Finetrax did modern track, that would be my preferred option. Seeing as how they've come through, I think I ought to as well. Once my wife's birthday is out of the way (can't be spending on new shiny stuff for me until that's sorted!) I'll be putting in an order for some of this. Jim

Do the colours on that panel signify anything, or are they just to differentiate one track section from the next? Jim

I'm not sure if this counts as scenery, infrastructure or UK prototype, so apologies if this is in the wrong place. Is it prototypical to have a concrete crib retaining wall (ie the type that looks like a sort of rectangular grid) with a roadway immediately on top of it? I know that these walls actually extend several feet backwards, but I don't know if they're designed to support the weight of heavy vehicles bearing directly down on them. Thanks Jim

It's the other way round: the MS&L's (later GCR's) laundry was at New Holland, attached to the railway-owned Yarborough Hotel. I have a copy of this photo, which I think is from the HMRS collection.

I've been looking at the course descriptions of the University of York postgrad course in railway history (not because I plan to take it, but because I'm looking for reading suggestions). One of the modules they teach is "British Railway Workers, 1825-1921". I imagine that the reading lists for that would provide some useful information on this subject Jim

Maybe this is the answer to that "how do you know you've made it as a railway modeller?" topic Jim

Thanks very much for the info. Perhaps there's more reason for optimism than I'd thought! Jim

I'll join, once I've done my annual FFL admin. Jim

I'll be spending a week in Figline Valdarno, which is on the line from Florence to Arezzo, next month. Can anyone tell me if there's any interesting rail activity to be seen in the area? My impression, based on a study of Google Maps, is that the answer to this question is "no", but I'd be happy to be proved wrong. Thanks Jim

Tank containers come in many sizes, but this is a representative sample: https://www.tankcontaineroperators.com/tank-containers/specification/ Ethanol has a density of 789Kg/m3, so even the largest tank listed here - 26000 litres or 26m3 - would cube out at 20.5 tonnes load. Add the tare weight of 4 tonnes and you're at 24.5 tonnes gross. For context, a 26m3 tank would be an 8-foot diameter cylinder running the entire length of a 20-foot frame. You see plenty of non-cylindrical tanks which I suppose have a bit more capacity than that; but the scope for a much bigger tank is pretty limited. Jim

Edited to delete duplicate post

Edited to delete duplicate post

It's always mystified me that you can get quite a decent selection of cars for a layout set in the 1940s or 50s, while it's virtually impossible to populate a layout set in the 1970s or later - by which time cars were absolutely ubiquitous - with anything remotely resembling a realistic mix of vehicles. Jim

That's too bad. That building at the far end which towers over everything else would make a terrific model. Jim

Actually, I'm surprised that there aren't any runners beneath the jib (or whatever it is). Jim