West Somerset Railway General Discussion

It is, but where changing from BH to FB involves changing the fittings (as it does in LT tunnel sections) then it is likely to be cost effective just to change the rail for a long time to come. I understand a lot of BH was replaced in the Scottish Highlands for much the same reasons - good condition conventional track fittings.

Robin

 

A policy which, though economically and practically logical, begs questions about the nature and purpose of preservation, which probably belong in another thread with wider scope than the WSR.

 

Didn't Mr Wilcock lament the lack of 'clickity clack' on certain sections of the SVR Eg Foley Park Tunnel being one, and being told something like 'if you bloody like it that much, how's about you get your backside over here and help bloody maintain it then' (Paraphrasing, words used may have been a tad stronger)

 

Well, it probably depends on the shape. I.e. if one cuts a V-shaped notch, yes, that would definitely introduce a stress concentration point, and a crack inducement point. (Think Comet windows.) But if the dip is C-shaped (and the join back to the flat is also curved - i.e.upside-down C's; and you'd probably want to polish the entire section), no stress concentration. Of course, you'd still get a shock load peak as the wheel 'fell' into the notch. You could minimize the consequences of that by putting a sleeper underneath each notch, so the rail couldn't flex as a result of the load peak. So then you'd only have local deformation (probably elastic). And if the notch wasn't very deep, that would also minimize the load peak.

Still, the noise would quite possibly be different. So one would have gone to considerable trouble for ... the wrong noise!

Noel

 

I have just checked my engineering calendar after reading the above as I would hate to miss an anniversary on the 2nd of April but I see it is still July in Somerset.

The calendar had a photo of City of Truro in lined out BR Black - very nice, I expect it will be booked for the forthcoming Back to Black themed WSR gala


Jeff

 

We try not to mention them!

 

Any marking or scoring of the rail head is bad news.
On renewal sites around the country special protection has to be laid down before accessing R/Rail plant that has steel Cat type tracks to avoid marking the rails. Otherwise any rail lengths affected may need to be replaced.
Other sources of marking such as from wrong use of, or type of, rail handling equipment can also result in rail replacement.

 

Is CWR heritage? Well I have a book from the late 40s, The Permanent Way. Highly informative but not too technical. Use of CWR is mentioned in the book therefore if we consider the BR Standard steam locos as heritage and CWR use predates the formation of BR it too must be heritage.

Dons tin hat and dives for cover

 

CWR was in use pre-WW2

Robin

 

A most interesting item of news appears on Mr Edge's superb website relating to Maps. http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm Folk may find this of value.

 

It is. But that's part of my point - what is the heritage that is being represented on a preserved line? And by using practices not found on those lines in the "preservation" era in order to save maintenance costs, are we compromising preservation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Devils advocate time because I do appreciate the sentiment. Financial viability must come before preservation - without the first the second is not possible. Although that is a very black and white way of looking at it.

 

Well I did say it was a black and white way of looking at it! More viable perhaps?! If a saving can be made then I guess a railway needs to look at whether it justifies a compromise to any preservation ideals. (Not specific to any railway...)

 

I reckon it's a value judgement, and (IMO) not an easy one.

CWR is lower maintainence - i.e. money, and more importantly, volunteer hours. Those are a relatively fixed resource (I don't expect there are a lot of people who are interested in doing rail maintenance, but nothing else). So not using CWR means one has to forego other things one could do with those volunteer hours.

Which is 'worth' more: the clickety-clack, or whatever else one could be doing with the resources needed to maintain non-CWR? It appears a lot of places have decided that they'll live with CWR...

Noel

 

Folk advocating retention of 60ft lengths track also need to factor in the increased wear and tear on locos and rolling stock caused by all those joints. This particularly becomes an issue with dipped joints resulting in increases in broken springs, broken rivets and bolts, frame cracking and other defects. We want the locos an stock to be immortal - one way of considerably helping towards that is long lengths of well maintained CWR!

 

Which is why I tread lightly in this area, as a non railway volunteer who is acutely aware of the difficulties of finding money and effort.

I actually approach this from the perspective that preservation involves more than just vehicles and route, so see importance in the craft skills and constraints on operation that doing things "the old way" imposes.

At some point the risk is that "preserved railways" cease to be "preserved" and degenerate into pastiche.

The WSR does not, though Paul Theroux's visit in the early 1980s demonstrates the risk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have started a thread under - PRESERVATION OR PASTICHE - T
to free this thread for WSR maters - I put it in the heritage thread