West Somerset Railway General Discussion

It would have been without the "or if not interested don’t comment ." remark at the end.

 

That was @D7076 . I was referring to @1472 's comment, "Perhaps it is time to update your first hand knowledge?".

 

Hi all,

Is anyone aware of any preliminary dates for the Spring Gala?

Thx

 

I'm afraid not, if I did, it would be in the 2023 events page.

 

I do concur. It had occurred to me that this was so when the Hymeks ran both on the on the West Somerset and in Cardiganshire. However to be fair to the Hymeks they didn't and they don't have axle hung traction motors: these are an appreciable weight, at best semi sprung vertically on the rails and, to keep the gearing in mesh, unsprung across them. Inherently hard on the track they caused major problems when the US railroads dieselised, really knocked the SR permanent way about as well as giving such a rough ride in the Brighton Belle and were one of one of the reasons there were so many batches of different AC locomotives when the West Coast mainline was electrified. So some slight extra axle load may have been quite admissible.

It would be ironical if someone waved them through thinking they would strengthen the case to close the line by creating a big maintenance/renewals bill when in fact practically all the other likely alternative locomotives would have done it quicker.

 

Hi,

We are finalising Gala Dates 2023 at this evenings Gala Planning Team meeting. Expect to see something online fairly soon.

Best wishes,
Seb Welsh

WSR Steam Gala Planning Team Chairman

 

Two aspects make that clear.

(1) The weight of rail used was clearly lighter.

(2) The line to Watchet was laid out with the option for doubling firmly in mind. Watchet to Minehead shows no sign of anything but single track.

Robin

 

I now can't find the line you quote about cheapness in my book. But it is worth examining it. The WSR was 14.5 miles with an estimated cost of £160k, giving approx £11k per mile. The Minehead railway was 8 miles at £45k, thus £5600 per mile. I don't think intrinsically that one line was much different than the other in engineering difficulties. Both had cuttings and embankments and both had easy and difficult stretches. In fact Bilbrook cutting is the heaviest on the branch. So looking at the barest figures, the Minehead was cheaper than the WSR. Luttrell did gift some land to the Minehead company, but they still had to purchase 18 acres of land.
I don't think we should confuse cheapness with slipshoddery. The minehead railway was well built, but they saved money by employing a low cost surveyor, tighter curves, steeper gradients and smaller stations. They paid the contractor in shares and screwed him down in cost to the extent that he went bankrupt.

You are not right about rail weight, in fact you can't make a comparison. The WSR was laid with baulk road and bridge rail 62lb per yard. The Minehead line was laid with cross sleepers track and vignoles rail at 71lbs per yard. So you can't make an "apples and pears" comparison.

So yes, the Minehead line was more cheaply laid out than the WSR, but not lacking in build quality.

Ian Coleby

 

I haven’t quoted your book.

The build quality difference is obvious if you look at photos of the permanent way as built. The substantial baulk road is, overall, considerably more substantial than the extension to Minehead.

 

I was referring back to the quote you have from @Paul42 ..... Nested quotes!
I guess the point you make is indisputable, baulk road is more substantial which is why Brunel designed it. Nevertheless, 71lbs rail is only marginally lighter than standard 85lbs bullhead rail used latterly by the GWR and was normal for its time.
Ian C

 

good challenge! But aren't a hall and a king basically the same thing anyway?
Ian

 

What the 1.3L V XR3i?

 

More like XR3i v RS Turbo. And the non turbo would do 90% or more of what the RS Turbo could do, in the real world.

 

I'd have gone with Sierra XR4i vs Granada Scorpio Cosworth.....

 

I have been told that if a GWR driver wanted speed the loco of choice was a Hall

 

Oh, I thought they just shortened the distance between mileposts and contracted a friendly Kiwi journalist with a dodgy stopwatch ...

Tom

 

The stopwatch school of railway enthusiasm needs a degree of caution!

 

Isn't the received wisdom that the 2-cylinder locos with Stephenson's gear were better than the 4-cylinder ones for low-speed slogging? For speed, the Castles' larger driving wheels and better balancing should make them better. Why might drivers' perceptions have been different?
BTW what has this to do with a 25 mph heritage railway where the track is at present not considered good enough for either of those classes?