West Somerset Railway General Discussion

The Thomas thing is really sad, The books are great, and I think Awdry would be very sad to see his excellent childrens books become a victim of corporate greed. I always thought that the railways helped put "flesh on the bones" of the stories, and Thomas helped the railways income. One is reluctant to say chuck out the books and bits from the shops, but it's tempting. I had my first book when recovering from measles around 1950, and in due course introduced them to my children.

Rob

 

I know he would be really upset by what has come to pass.

Folks from the Tallylyn would be best to speak for him but I was privileged to meet the Reverend Wilbert Awdrey three times, twice at preservation events and once when he visited me at Bristol Temple Meads station.

It is widely known that the stories were invented to amuse his son. It is perhaps less well known that the genesis was his upbringing in Box, Wilts, where he listened to the engines passing.

He was very supportive of the heritage movement, and the opportunity for children to get close to steam engines.

The phrase 'turning in his grave' is a bit overdone, but sometimes very apt.

Robin

 

Why the change of date for next year? Unfortunately I expect to be out of the country then.

 

The change is to accommodate the plan of the WSR Infrastructure Department to conduct a significant relay at Minehead.

We await confirmation that it is to go ahead.

Robin

 

Major track replacement/ crossing replacement works at Minehead.
Robin F

 

I see Robin W beat me to it again! Her answer is a bit more informative than mine!
Robin F.

 

Robin, as ever you hit the nail squarely on the head, theres 2 chaps who come into the pub, both into railways and they were both rather surprised when I told them the story of 'Thomas goes fishing' was actually based on the story of 60103, having the same problem when it was a Leiecster engine. At first glance it seems a bit silly but dig a bit deeper, it must have happened more than once!

 

Double track level crossing maybe

 

No.

Robin

 

I met him and his brother every year when they spent a week volunteering on light trackwork on the TR. The phrase "turning in his grave" seems entirely appropriate.

 

Short-sighted if not.

DJB.

 

Au contraire.

Unless you are going to go for double track Minehead to (?) Dunster, then double-tracking the crossing is a waste of resources. You would need signalling and level crossing controls on both roads and have to empty the up sidings at Minehead. This would also require some signalling at Dunster, probably controlled from Minehead and full track circuiting from Dunster to Minehead. The £'s are racking up?

Another feature is that SCC are responsible for the level crossing (and any renewal of it) as Seaward Way was built at their initiative. Enhancements would fall on the WSR Plc.

An interesting alternative to double track, which would deliver virtually all the advantages at a fraction of the cost, would be an 'arrival loop' the Dunster side of the level crossing. It would, in effect, provide 'Platform 3' for Minehead and a suitable place to stable the excursion stock that Minehead has to deal with on occasion.

But expect nothing but like-for-like renewal in January, if it happens.

Robin

 

I am told that if this were to happen, all future liabilities for upkeep and repair would also fall on the WSR.

Not a smart move.

 

The agreements are quite tightly drafted. I should know .

Robin

 

If the work doesn't go ahead are we going to see a revised February timetable

 

Would that be a loop just to stable/service the stock or would there be any other facilities?

 

The sensible arrangement would be a loop signalled for an arrival so that it could be held there while a train departed from the station. Watering points would be a boon as would a short cleaners' platform for when stock is held there.

Robin

 

A signalling pedant writes: if you were going to double-track Dunster-Minehead but not have a signalman at Dunster, then to get the most of it you would need full track circuiting all the way from Blue Anchor.

I suppose the alternative would be either a CCTV camera or Train Arrived Complete plunger at Dunster. Whether you accept former depends on whether you want to be a heritage railway or a tourist railway, essentially.

 

There is a particular problem with capacity at Minehead for the busier days.

As far as the train service goes, we are back to the old WSR chestnut of the need to split the BA to WN and WN to CE sections as the next improvement in capacity...not double track MD to DR.

Robin

 

My turn (again) for pedantry! What exactly is a "heritage" railway as opposed to a "tourist" one? There is hardly a line operating in the U.K. that does not have a good share of anachronisms, modernisations and modifications. Some of these are the result of the need to cope with their present day use and some because "heritage" has not really received that much attention, except in people's wishful thinking. The word sounds better than "tourist" though.

Paul H