West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Er, because trees grow, you know? Even after 60 years they do.

 

I have now had the opportunity to make enquiries about what happened. There were problems at CH which are not replicated elsewhere, and came about through no fault of the plc. While I agree that matters like this should be discussed in public wherever possible, when people are involved and the extent of their individual responsibility is not clear, I consider it wrong to go into detail and applaud Paul Conibeare's measured announcement.

Readers of this thread know how much I am committed to transparency, but will also know that I spent some time redacting names from the Association's Minutes before publishing the historical record. Sometimes even when names are not mentioned too much detail enables individuals to be identified.

I am satisfied that the plc followed proper process in a difficult situation not of their making, and that this particular matter was not something to be raised at the PDG.

It could be argued that the decision by the plc to propose new agreements with all the Friends Groups is something that should have gone to the PDG (and it may have done, since I have only attended two meetings). If the plc did not consider it significant enough to put it on the PDG agenda, then someone in a Friends Group could have asked the Stations representative to raise it. Tim Stanger used to represent Stations, but retired when he moved away from Somerset. Martyn Snell, who already represents volunteers on the group, took Stations into his portfolio. I hope that Stations will find someone to represent them (and by extension the Friends Groups) in due course.

I shall assume chairmanship of the PDG from the autumn. I shall expect railwaywide concerns to be raised for discussion there by the appropriate representative.

Paul
Paul Whitehouse
Chair, WSRA
paul.whitehouse@wsra.org.uk

 

Well your the only one that brought the ones the other side of the fence up, so I've got no idea what that meant

But the fact remains that the nice rural nature of the station has completely altered in the last two years, and as most trains stop or pass through very slowly how would the signals be obscured, if anything the boiler and steam would be more of an issue than the tree, could they not have been pruned if that was such a big deal

 

Have you asked the WSR PLC for an answer? If not why not?

 

I seem that recall that maybe the tree roots were beginning to undermine the platform and points/signalling equipment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well as the trees aren't there any more it is a bit of a moot point now ain't it

 

Do you agree that safety is paramount ? Anything that might have hindered the drivers line of sight must be dealt with . Not a lot can be done about the boiler obstructing the drivers view other than the fireman keeping his eye out as is his duty , so we all remain safe .

 

So do I but I was not certain. I very much doubt that the expense would have been incurred unless there was a good reason.

 

Well if safety is paramount as you say you could run all services with DMUS to give a clearer view, but I'm sure killing trees makes more sense

 

Please answer post #4745,
.

 

Oh sorry didn't know you were a moderator

 

Stop being childish. I simply asked a question and hoped for the courtesy of a reply.

 

Since you have such a high regard for trees, I do hope you have nothing in your house that's made of wood.

 

Well I thought you were the official organ of the railway

 

Oh really, all I said was the station wasn't as nice as place to spend a few hours as it used to be because all the cover of trees has been stripped away, and please belive me when I say it really isn't just me that thinks so

 

RAOTFLOLPMP!

 

I am struggling to see how this suggestion would make a difference. There are rules about signal sighting distances and these need to be observed no matter what the motive power in use. As an active volunteer you must surely understand these things? Traditionally railway embankments have been kept cut back quite hard to prevent problems.
I'd also point out that, as quite a keen gardener myself, trees do die. They are prone to disease and can start to die back, in these circumstances they can become a hazard and need to be removed well before they fall down. As has been suggested, ask the P-way gang why the trees had to go. You may find there is a rational answer, who knows you may even find that some re-planting is planned.

 

Crowcombe looked absolutely superb in the late afternoon sunshine today. Yes, the trees have altered the appearance, but their loss doesn't alter the fact that it is still the epitome of a rural country wayside station. (My opinion only).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

A quick Search of this Forum for 'trees' revealed this, from December 2015:

https://www.national-preservation.c...ailway-operations.508987/page-55#post-1340495

 

I wonder who drove the 0935 service from BL to NF and then to Minehead today. The ride was exceptionally smooth. Sitting in the 1st class QB coach having breakfast as we glided through the Somerset contryside was a delight.