West Somerset Railway General Discussion

An interesting and informative read - thank you Chris.

>>>NOTE Semaphore signals on the Dunster side of the Xing were not proposed to be wire or motor operated. The alternative principles were to NR standards....

I'm intrigued as the possible alternatives to wire or motor operation - pneumatic perhaps ?

 

Thank you for a very full post, and detailed timeline. Reading it, I observe two things. Firstly, in the extensive credentials detailed, no mention of professional bodies such as the IRO or IRSE; second, a total focus on formal communications and formal appointments.

 

For clarity I was a member of the IRO during the period referred but not sure the relevance of this and I am not a member of the IRSE but the Board used Consultants with that and other qualifications as required.

Can I ask your qualification?

 

For railway operation or signalling, none whatsoever; my interest (and postings) on this project are borne of my like of and interest in the WSR and tendency, often critiqued by those close to me, to look closely at what people say - and do not say - for it's internal consistency and any gaps. My comment was because I was struck by the way that you cited your credentials, but that two of the major professional bodies that might have been relevant were not mentioned amongst those credentials.

 

Thanks for the full response and I apologise for all the snips above but these three comments stood out for me and it's easier to clip them rather than reproduce your complete reply.

In the first clip can you imply that the board had some input to the signing off of the funding? I understand the complete project is being funded by SCC. Are you aware of the company giving any reason for their involvement with funding? Also from that clip I note that the original scheme had reached the final approval stage. At that point I would have expected the design to have been complete and all differences resolved. It would be interesting to know the reason for the Plc failing to sign off the designs.

The second and third clips astound me. For the company to have 'lost' all of the condition reports and proposals for the existing crossing and all the design details for the replacement is astonishing. I cannot believe anyone in the management structure could be so incompetent to have inadvertently deleted or 'lost' all of this information accidentally.

Your other comment in the second clip is also interesting. "...previous Records on many matters including the Xing were either not as complete as they should have been or unknown to exist." (My highlighting) I wonder if that might be the reason for the repeated ORR visits over the past couple of years where the management have never released any details as to the reason for those visits other than comments such as:- "...a few minor matters..." needed to be dealt with.

 

That'd be the downside of 'wanting to know' ..... sometimes, you get to find out!

 

Remember the $64.000 Question. The final one??
Does the WSR deserve to survive as a Heritage Railway? I have made donations to Railways I have never even been on. I have been on the WSR at least three times and viewing the constant acrimony on this site does not particularly motivate one to donate to this organisation
On the last visit I was dismayed to ride on a tatty DMU past the linear scrapyards on the approaches to Minehead and (particularly) Dunster Stations.
Perhaps its future lies with SCC and the politicians promoting Reconnecting Britain because I fear many HR supporters have other Railways that appear(despite COVID) to be moving forward and ,perhaps therefore, more deserving of some help.

 

It does indeed present a very interesting option, but would , Should the WSR fail, The council hand the line back to NR, if they expressed an desire to reconnect it back to the network, and GWR Operate a service to Minehead? Of course, one operation that might show an interest would be Vintage trains, if they could retain the turntable at Minehead for an Birmingham to Minehead steam service in the holiday season, in between the GWR services .

 

I have To Agree With you on Scrap yard look , Especially Stone sidings opposite the minehead signal box Every time you look on the Railcam it’s the first thing that hits you . The Dmu which has sat there for yrs Now , Never likely to be restored , Trucks and wagon,s sitting Never moving .

 

A cynic might suggest that in a few years it will all be moved to Washford and hidden away behind a nice new wooden fence, to be seen only by those using the cycle path.....

 

Your probably right , I just Can’t see the point of Keeping it .

 

Some of this 'Scap Yard' are vehicles owned by The a GWR 813 Fund. We own 17 GWR wagons on The WSR. We fund the initial restoration for the vehicles with an agreement that The WSR maintain them to a standard. We,the Fund,have no say in where The WSR place them. There is no official wagon restoration group. There is no official area where they can be restored. The Wiliton Shed charges commercial rates to have them restored. May be those who moan about 'scrap yards' are willing to open their wallets and help meet the costs of restoring these ageing bits of rolling stock. An open wagon costs about £10k. A covered goods van costs about £12k, the GWRCrocodile will cost around £20 - 25k. I wait for the cheques in the post/BACS

Thank you

Nick
GWR 813 Fund Trustee.

 

Perhaps the longest post ever on Natpres ending in "End of". Someone doesn't know this forum very well ...

It will only give more ammunition to those which want to criticise (whatever their level of involvement in the railway).

We will now have hundreds more posts asking for minutae of the decision-making process - but will it actually help anyone?

 

OTOH, it is certainly in the interest of the present board to emphasise the depth of the hole from which they are extracting the WSR, the amount of effort needed to do so and the closeness to the top of the hole that they have travelled, or would have travelled if it wasn't for COVID making their efforts Sisyphean.

 

I find it surprising that the crossing report on 11/02/18 did not lead to some sort of threat analysis and action within 12 months. In the site meeting in October 19 can the PLC really have been suggesting not simply semaphore bracket signals, but the complete relocation of the signal box?

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Given the family connection to "Signals" and the Chairman, of the PLC, i would surmise that the post was meant to be supportive of the board and to throw doubt on those who are regarded as troublemakers, How ever, what it has done is to instead of silencing dissenting voices is to open up further, more damaging questions about the competency of those board members, In his desire to make people doubt the likes of Robin , who does have a BR signalling and management history behind her, and others who might be asking some very focused questions, he actually, opened up further questions about how things were being done, and shed some light, un intendedly on why ORR was so interested in the Railway, and ordered them to carry out certain works before they could open to the public,