If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by gwr4090, Nov 15, 2007.

  1. Jon Lever

    Jon Lever New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    109
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Bookseller
    Location:
    West Dorset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes, certainly after closure of the through route, but they definitely worked passenger trains between Aber and Carmarthen pre-1965. Two photos on p21 of Hugh Dady's 'The Heyday of The Hydraulics' showing workings in Dec 63 and Summer 64, for example.
     
    30854 likes this.
  2. Aberdare

    Aberdare New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    1,531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Somerset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Without being able to go back 90 years in time and discuss with those in charge for the reasoning, why the branch was Blue capacity is pure speculation.

    In the 1930's traffic would presumably have been easily handled by the available panniers, small & large prairies, moguls which were all under the nominal 17 tons 12 cwt Blue limit. Probably some of the rail in use at that time would still have been lighter than the premium standard of 95 lbs/yard of the period. Certainly the 45 foot (plus extension ramps) turntable at Minehead precluded the operation of tender locomotives longer than a mogul, why increase route availability to Red when no Red tender locomotives could be turned at Minehead anyway?

    In the 1930's a provisional scheme was drawn up to replace the existing Minehead turntable with one of a larger capacity. this would have been not just 55 foot diameter but 65 foot diameter and capable of taking any GWR locomotive. This increase in capacity was presumably considered to avoid the need to use the inconvenient ramps, but why not 55 foot diameter? Was this to meet an immediate need to operate larger tender engines or an excessive dollop of forethought to allow for future demand?

    By the 1960's BR was content to run locomotives with higher axle loads (Hymek) and even an empty Duchess of Hamilton. Through and stopping trains also ran at 55mph with the 61xx prairies which had a rather excessive 3.52 tons per wheel hammer blow at that speed giving a total individual wheel load of 10.5 tons. By this time all rail would have been replaced with GWR OO or 95 lb rail and the original WSR wrought iron bridges replaced with standard steel plate girder bridges.

    In the 1990's when the route category was raised I was not part of the process but I do know that major surveys were under taken to rail, sleepers, culverts and bridges by experienced consultants approved by HMRI. Around this time nearly 10 miles of life expired timber sleepers were replaced with good condition concrete sleepers and that every length of rail on the running line was measured for rail depth in 3 places, rails which were not suitable for the increase in axle load being changed. From memory culverts were the greatest concern, some being lightly built and only inches below the bottom of sleeper level, many of these were dug out and replaced.

    For current relays the WSR is replacing (except in public areas) bull head with modern brand new flat bottom materials. The change is predominately due to modern mass produced materials being cheaper per mile than specially made new bull head rail and sleepers. The resulting increase in maximum axle loading is just a useful bonus, as the most tired sections of track will be receiving attention first it is probable that before too long all will be again suitable for a higher nominal axle load.

    Regarding the quality of workmanship of the West Somerset Railway (Norton Fitzwarren to Watchet 1862) against the Minehead Railway (Watchet to Minehead 1874) I have never heard of any suggestion that one was built more cheaply than the other, certainly the Minehead Railway had the problem of crossing the marshes between Dunster and Minehead and needs regular attention. in addition the original wrought iron bridge between Watchet and Washford is still in use whereas the 3 similar bridges of the old WSR were replaced in GWR days.

    Andy.
     
    SebWelsh, Faol, Mike West and 15 others like this.
  3. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,065
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The thing about statistics is that you have to interpret them properly. The above is an example of not doing so, in my view.

    Bishops Lydeard (BL) is not a destination; it is a transit point. The higher volume of tickets from BL is almost certainly because that is where the line starts if you are a visitor from anywhere in the UK other than Somerset.

    Were the line to start at, shall we say, Williton then the share of ticket sales would increase.

    The data from Minehead is more genuine. It's highly unlikely that anyone would visit the line by driving to Minehead to board a train. Were you to be on holiday in Minehead or living locally then almost certainly that is where you would start from.

    So looking at ticket sales to consider whether a shorter length of the WSR would be more economically viable is just not going to help.

    Sorry to pour water on this one. I doubt if the WSR has anything approaching the data it needs to work out whether a shorter length of line will help them in the immediate future. Personally, I think it would but reasoned guesswork is not how to run a railway even though it seems that in its history that's exactly what has been going on.
     
  4. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,186
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    I wonder if rather like Clan Lines trip over the S&D just after closure they probably were not that bothered on a line with a limited life
     
    Hirn and Matt37401 like this.
  5. MG 7305

    MG 7305 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    153
    Dear Andy. Very many thanks for your explanation.
     
    hyboy, Steve and Aberdare like this.
  6. Bayard

    Bayard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    1,826
    Likes Received:
    3,871
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    However great the loss of traffic, it would always be better than the 100% loss of traffic which would be caused by bankruptcy.
     
  7. Paul42

    Paul42 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,922
    Likes Received:
    3,829
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    East Grinstead
    In Ian Coleby's book it mentions it was more cheaply laid out, but it could be referring to the original scheme for the extension to Minehead, rather than the line to Watchet. It is not clear.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2022
  8. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,065
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    They say that nobody in their right mind buys a house with a flat roof. There is a sense that when the WSR came into being I suspect that nobody looked long and hard at what they were committing to. No tunnels or long viaducts. What's not to like?

    Down the line - (sorry about that) - reality is becoming apparent. And the longer the line the more there is to look at. At least the WSR doesn't have its line sliding towards the River Severn!
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Bridge loadings do seem to be a bit of a black art, depending on who assesses them. When the NYMR started running to Whitby, Bridges 45, 46 and 52 had a 10 mph speed restriction on them for Black 5's, the S15, Standard 4 4-6-0 and the B1. Then, one day, the restrictions on bridges 45 & 46 were lifted. What had been done to them? Nothing, but they had been re-appraised. The same eventually happened to Br.52. In a similar vein, when Taw Valley first came to the NYMR, North Yorks Highways originally wanted a road closure and the low loader trailer winching across Crambeck Bridge until it was pointed out by the haulier that other, similar weights had been taken across it without any such restriction.
     
    flying scotsman123 likes this.
  10. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,944
    Likes Received:
    6,303
    Not really. If the loss of traffic was greater than that which was required to provide a sufficient component of the funding needed sustain the reduced length line then the only effect would be a postponement of bankruptcy.
     
  11. Matt37401

    Matt37401 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    15,328
    Likes Received:
    11,666
    Occupation:
    Nosy aren’t you?
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Al I’m not sure what your last sentence is supposed to mean, much as I’m critical of the SVR and certain aspects of its current management, I really don’t think you can fault those in charge of its Permanent Way and Infrastructure.
    I really don’t want want to turn this into a willy waving contest but, how many A4’s, Britannia’s and 56’s have been able to visit Somerset this year?
    It’s well known what a problem Sterns is but at least the SVR manage’s to keep on top of it.
    Despite slipping towards the Severn one railway has been able to take advantage of looking after its infrastructure, another has not.
    Do we have to bring the obvious example of why 6960 moved down to Shropshire up?
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2022
  12. Bayard

    Bayard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    1,826
    Likes Received:
    3,871
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Surely a postponement of bankruptcy is better than instant bankruptcy. It is not as if instant bankruptcy provides a better outcome. Where there's life, there's hope.
     
  13. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,065
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    My comparison with the SVR was to make precisely the point you are making.

    As I recall it, the problem at Sterns has been known about for some time and has been dealt with progressively by the SVR. In the case of the WSR, I've no idea when anyone woke up to the infrastructure and subsoil issues along the line. But there has been no sense that this has been a priority. Now it is and the level of financial commitment that is needed seems crippling.

    And hasn't the GWSR dealt with major earthworks problems in its time? Why has the WSR seemed to miss all the obvious priorities?
     
    The Dainton Banker likes this.
  14. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    On the historical point (and I wonder if @Jimc could help?)

    A hunch: by the early 1930s the GWR had stopped building 43xx 2-6-0s, and soon afterwards started renewing older examples of the class as 4-6-0s. That plan was interrupted by the war, but had the war not intervened, it seems that the whole, or most, of the class would have been replaced as they came up for renewal.

    Given that, I wonder if there was an associated plan that any turntable needing replacement would, if space allowed, be built suitable for 4-6-0s, i.e. of 65ft diameter?

    There is an echo in there of the current WSR issues, which is that future-proofing infrastructure to a higher standard is not too expensive if you do it as part of a long-term plan. The story of how the GWR ended up, almost by stealth, with bridges strong enough for a "King" is well known. It happened over several decades as and when bridges were renewed. Had Collett said in 1930 "I want a much heavier loco, can you upgrade the p/way?" it would have been very expensive. But if the p/way engineer thinks "in twenty years time, we are likely to need heavier locos" and works to that premise, it is not much more cost than you would be committed to anyway. Provided you can wait for the renewal to take its course ...

    As for the WSR: if I am reading your post, and an earlier one from @Robin Moira White correctly, there aren't a great number of bridges that are at issue. The significant problem seems to be rail condition, which it sounds are being upgraded using heavier section rail already. So to me the railway needs a rolling programme of rail renewal, and the ability to take heavier locos will happen more or less automatically, with perhaps just the odd bridge and culvert to be rebuilt. Lots of the discussion about "red route" feels like people are assuming it is an either / or choice; or that it has to happen in a very short period of time. But instead, if you say "all future renewals will be to allow red route locos" and let it take 10 or 15 years, then it needn't cost significantly more than you would need to spend on rail renewal anyway.

    Tom
     
  15. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    As somebody who regularly footplates on both the SVR and WSR I think you need to take a trip now on both to decide which is currently the roughest ride and which has the greatest number of restrictions per mile.
     
    JBTEvans, Maunsell907 and WSR_6960 like this.
  16. Aberdare

    Aberdare New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    1,531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Somerset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Ref turntables and 4-6-0's you are correct, although Manors can be turned on a 55 foot turnable it's a bit of a tight squeeze.

    The WSR is generally free if serious earthworks and major structures. The problematic or "dodgy" bits can be defined as follows:-

    Bridges and culverts. All underbridges are single span steel or stone, culverts are of mixed construction.
    Of the 4 steel bridges only the one over the West Somerset Mineral Railway at Watchet needs careful monitoring as it is the original wrought iron span, built to suit broard gauge track but modified for standard gauge in 1882. This bridge has been strengthened and fully repaired around 2010. The stone wing walls have showed signs of movement in the past.
    Of the stone bridges it is 'Black monkey" between Washford and Blue Anchor which has received most monitoring attention. Movement dating back into BR days and perhaps earlier has always raised concerns by any Civil Engineer upon seeing it for the first time. For the entire life of the present WSR it has been subject to various tests to detect further movement, I have not heard that any has been found. I understand that this and possibly other bridges are due to have to top of their arches exposed for examination before too long.

    Cuttings. The deep cuttings at Washford and Crowcombe have both suffered from minor slips over the years and their sides required regular inspection, plus cleaning of the top ditches/drains. Changes of weather patterns may present additional difficulties in future years.

    Embankments. I am not aware that any embankments have ever given problems but two locations between Williton and Crowcombe are monitored because of their angle.

    Minehead - Dunster marsh. When the Minehead Railway was built, and mostly paid for by the local "lord of the manor" the route took it away as far as possible from Dunster Castle on land that was made of drained salt marshes. This surface is prone to settling over time and occasional attention with a tamper is required. The 1.5 miles affected is gradually being replaced with all new deep ballasted continuous welded flat bottomed rail which so far has resolved the problem in the sections done to date.

    Doniford cliffs. The line has always been close to the cliff tops at Doniford and on occasions the GWR, BR, Somerset CC and Environment Agency have all undertaken sea defence works over the years. The railway is on the front line for about 1/4 mile but due to defence work the sea has made limited progress in the last 100 years. Erosion has been halted by the expedient of heavy rock armour in places, fortunately there is a convenient railway to bring in further supplies if required. The WSR has transported approximately 120,000 tonnes of limestone rock armour over the years to protect both itself and local communities from the sea, and will probably continue to do so occasionally.

    Tunnels, viaducts, causeways, high retaining walls. None thankfully.

    Generally the infrastructure is manageable, mostly easy, just a lot of it. That's why we love it and our visitors do too. Nothing that is truly worth having is easy but the rewards are beyond compare. If every heritage railway came out of the same mould life would be boring.

    Andy.
     
  17. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Wheelbases from GW weight diagrams:
    King - 57'5.5"
    Castle - 54'6.5"
    Hall - 53'4.5"
    Grange - 53'4.75"
    Manor - 52'1.75"
    These are of course the nominal figures from wheel centre to wheel centre. I imagine that in the real world the flanges need to clear the stationary rails, never mind any issues of balancing. It seems to me entirely feasible that 55ft turntables were in mind when the Manor was designed.
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  18. Pete Thornhill

    Pete Thornhill Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Administrator Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    7,498
    Likes Received:
    5,455
    Surely that would make sense given the reason they were built - to provide a replacement for 43xx moguls on lines which the heavier Granges & Halls were prohibited. Logic would say you design something compatible with the existing infrastructure.
     
  19. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,065
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    That's a pretty comprehensive overview. Thanks.

    All the more surprising therefore that there is such a debate about the condition of the line and whether or not it can take all locomotives. On the face of it, the original line was suitable for what used to run on it and with regular maintenance and upgrading, paying particular attention to the more problematic parts, it should still be fine.

    Maybe the problem was the point at which aspirations went beyond what travelled this branch line without any thought as to the consequences.

    That's not really down to any of the volunteers or people associated with the line who post on here is it?
     
  20. Pete Thornhill

    Pete Thornhill Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Administrator Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    7,498
    Likes Received:
    5,455
    Well we know the SVR has plans for repairs. I’m still unsure what the long term maintenance plan for the WSR is in that respect which is a concern especially as it’s not clear how it will be funded.

    The railway might be okay for now but will only deteriorate if no proper plan is in place, at one stage a million pounds a year for five years was mentioned, that seems to have gone quiet so not really sure what to think looking at the longer term rather than current condition.
     
    35B, MellishR and The Dainton Banker like this.

Share This Page