West Somerset Railway General Discussion

"Know what [we are] doing". Wasn't Kimi Raikkonen famous for saying that?

 

Yes - but he went on the win that particular race if my memory serves me well!

 

May 11th news on the plc page shows the update that went out on the Association website April 22nd ....

 

You could always give him a ring

 

Send a telegram?

 

WSR does well with their appeal for the Coombe Florey landslip according to a report in Rail Advent.

 

A nice bit of publicity from the neighbouring county.
https://www.devonlive.com/whats-on/food-drink/south-west-train-ride-delicious-8436524

 

Ireland or France?

 

well Devon and Cornwall are different ha!ha!

 

Na, Cymru wrth gwrs!

 

I've just noticed on the Minehead webcam that the 96xx is hauling trains today. Pardon me if I've got this wrong, but I thought that it was a "red" loco, and therefore too heavy for the majority of the WSR. Does this indicate some improvements somewhere?

Steve B

 

We now have a system where each locomotive is individually assessed against the critical weight "pinch points" on the railway. The former GWR system was broad brush to make sure there was minimal chance of anyone making mistakes in route selection. With increased engineering understanding of impact, only 20 or so route miles and a very small number of locomotives, it has become possible to undertake a much more detailed weight/impact assessment. So far as we can there is however a process of continual track and bridge improvement.

 

Many thanks, and good news that such a useful loco can be used - quite a surprise to see it this morning

Steve B

 

A more cynical viewpoint some people take is is "JJP owns 9466 so he found a way to make an exception"

 

I think that's a little churlish.

The old mainline companies, responsible for thousands of miles of route and thousands of locomotives, clearly needed a relatively easy-to-apply system to define which locos could go where. The different companies did that in different ways, the GWR for example having a series of coloured codes painted on the cab sides of each type. The objective was to assist rapid decision making: you'd know in five seconds that a red loco couldn't go on a yellow route, without having to waste any time agonising over a decision. (But equally if there was an absolute need, you could work out the restrictions that might apply to allow an exceptional move to occur).

For a heritage railway, the process is very different. Firstly, and most significantly, speeds are lower, which significantly reduces hammer blow. So in terms of dynamic load, what wouldn't be acceptable at 50mph becomes perfectly fine at 25mph. (And if need be, you can further restrict a loco, either in speed or in parts of the railway it can run. For example, on the Bluebell we are currently playing host to a Modified Hall; it comes with additional restrictions relative to, say, a similarly-sized BR Std 5, notably that it is limited to 5mph through platforms, and is prohibited entirely from passing between platforms 4 and 5 at Horsted Keynes. That sort of restriction is relatively easy to manage on a heritage railway without causing significant operational problems).

The other significant difference between pre-pre-preseveration and preservation practice is that the use of "foreign" locos is more widespread in heritage service. Those foreign locos wouldn't have GWR-style route classifications anyway, so in practical terms you pretty well have to make individual decisions about individual locos every time a new one visits the line. If you are doing that, it is hardly more onerous to look at a loco like a 94xx that has the possibility of being a long-term resident as it would be to look at an individual loco booked to arrive and depart on a visiting rail tour. Once you've made the decision, you don't need to keep re-making it unless something significant changes in your assessment of the standard of the infrastructure.

So in the current case, I don't see any reason not to believe the statement made by @FrankC, i.e. that locos are treated on an individual terms based on specific knowledge of the likely places of issue on the infrastructure.

Tom

 

Not to mention that, under the regulations that railways now fall under, the decision to permit that locomotive to operate would need to be documented as within the rules - rules which @FrankC noted exist and have been applied to 9466. A locomotive owner or railway chairman would need to be very brave or foolhardy to go outside that documented assessment process, especially where the locomotive is widely known to be "heavy" for the line in question and the railway has been on the receiving end of ORR investigations.

 

Tom is, of course, right and sensible as usual. In my BR days I was involved in moves of out-of-specification loads like transformers which had to specially assessed.

9466 may well be fine over Black Monkey Bridge (the line’s ‘ruling’ structure) but its the ‘optics’ of the thing which don’t seem to have been well handled.

Caesar’s wife and all that.

 

You've hit the nail on the head there, like 50008 which was coming to the diesel gala, is the same weight as 47840 which was deemed too heavy and moved on loan to North York Moors railway.

Seems like they are playing fast and loose with what can and can't run.