West Somerset Railway General Discussion

SCC taxpayers are paying not SCC!

 

Is there a difference?

 

To operate traditional gates you need a gap in the traffic!

 

Do you really not understand the difference? SCC have no funds of their own as they all come from taxation, either local, or from central Government taxpayers. As a taxpayer both local and national I don't like to see my contribution squandered.

 

AFAICS, SCC have already decided that the crossing will be a controlled one, with full barriers, so having a crossing keeper/controller is already part of the plan. New AHBs are no longer an option. Can you cite any evidence that traditional gates are slower than full barriers?
I don't expect for one minute that we will be seeing a new set of traditional gates at Minehead, we are too far down the track for that, I am simply asking why that option wasn't considered. The only answers I have seen so far are that traditional gates are slower (without supporting evidence), that traditional gates are inferior and can only be justified in a "heritage" context (with no justification as to why) and that steam locomotives can crash through them (which gives the barriers the dubious advantage that the steam locomotive that has overrun the signals and the infrastructure are less damaged before the train hits the car/pedestrian).

Ah, SEWP! Are you suggesting that the safety/traffic/financial case would in any way be different if the Railway was paying for the crossing?

 

Traffic lights?

 

Traditional gates require considerable mechanical interlocking as can be witnessed at Blue Anchor just a few miles away. Its not just a matter of 4 gateposts & two gates but an lot of hidden locking mechanism custom made for each location. This would also need a crossing keeper (its too far from MHD signal box) , a position which getting volunteer cover for would be at best a challenge and much more likely would become another paid position or two.

 

That’s why there is no difference. Councils exist only to further the interests of their communities, which includes non-taxpayers and businesses too (including the WSR, of course).

Nor do I. Whether a council spends wisely is the stuff of local politics.

 

If an automatic mechanism (with whatever interlocking to road traffic signals, railway signals, track circuits, etc is needed) can cause barriers to descend from vertical to horizontal and in due couse to go up again, could not a very similar automatic mechanism cause traditional gates to swing from one position to the other?

 

On the KESR when I was there some years ago the train crew operated the gates on quiet days. It crosses the A28 twice From a road traffic point of view the closure time is only for the train to go across the road. No run in or out. Even on a busy road you can manufacture a gap. It does test the guards fitness nd you do need to use a door with a step to get back on.

 

And you point is exactly what? My concern is that the new crossing has been designed to the same specification as a Network Rail main line crossing where trains are travelling twelve times faster than on the WSR at that point. What I want to know is have SCC over specified it? IMHO after 35 years of local expereince, SCC don't have a very good record at specifying new, or replacement, road works correctly.

 

Post 10560 'The crossing was first installed 25 years ago so it is no surprise it needs overhauling". Would anyone like to estimate the cost of crossing keeper operated traffic lights, crossing keeper hut with communication to Minehead box, two hand operated crossing gates. Is there any change from 850K? If for example cost was 300K then 550K left to pay crossing keeper for 25 years = £22,000 per year. Person employed would get three months when trains are not running and would be spending money in the local economy (to keep Mr Mendoza happy!) If they were also a railway enthusiast they could be painting WSR carriages for a couple of months?

 

To show there is no difference.

 

Yes absolutely! And also traditional gates can be monitored remotely by CCTV they've been doing it for years! If the will is there it'll get done.

 

To whet appetites for the military train at the WSR Spring Gala, and the 40’s Weekend on 15/16 Sept here are some shots from the WSR Journal of the 1994 WSR Event.

Oh, and another shot of my private passion which should be doing a flypast of the WSR on 13 September...

Robin

 

Since the road was built as a necessity to avoid town traffic congestion a lot of new development appears to have taken place. I am pretty sure there is more to come in the near future; hence the need for this type of crossing to be installed. Obviously the SCC and local council must have had this in mind when coming to their decision.
As WSR Wizard points out the road is a fairly new addition to the landscape and there is no true 'heritage' aspect which exists.
One thing for sure is if shoppers using the supermarkets and other facilities in the area were to regularly encounter long queues of traffic, due to antiquated style barrier gates and their operation, that could cause hostility to the railway. If there were traditional gates the possibility of longer delays would certainly arise - maybe infrequent - but that, I believe, was a high priority for the SCC decision making.

 

www.railhub.co.uk/docs/somerset.pdf

Robin

 

You are so right! This subject seems to be generating inordinate quantities of harrumph.

PH

 

ORR's Level Crossings: A guide for managers, designers and operators will tell you that traffic volumes should be low at at Gated crossings. SCC's report says traffic volumes at this site have grown considerably since the AHB crossing was built in the 1990s. Since the crossing, and the road, were built in the 1990s there are surely no heritage considerations here. I don't know what SEWP means but my suggestion was meant to be that minimising traffic congestion would be a key concern for the highway authority, as well as safety. I hope value for money would be too.

 

SEWP? Someone Else Will Pay, would be my guess...