West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I have no wish to single out ST, but these photos are a good example of what the Heritage Committee should be reviewing.
I'm sure five Beware... signs are not needed & surely the one on the car park fence should say Stogumber.
I'm trying to find a similar photo from long ago - no success so far.
Sample ideas attached.

 

The Station had planned to review its crossing signage this winter. The likely approach had been to remove the red and white non-authentic signs created some years ago on a limited budget and replace them with authentic GWR signs, (original or replica) either mounted on the fence, or, more likely prototypically on old rail posts. Of course, there would have been appropriate consultation with WSR ‘authorities’.

That process was trumped by the unheralded arrival of the new signs which gave great offence, both for what they are, and the manner of their arrival.

As previously stated, it is to be hoped that discussions approached with a more normally consultative spirit can lead to a risk-assement based acceptance of GWR style signs and so removal of these hideous impositions.

Robin

 

The sign on the car park fence always said ‘Beware of Trains’ on both sides, never Stogumber. It was provided because the foot crossing to the platform was crossed just inside the fence by the good shed Siding. It also served to warn members of the public either coming up the path from the village side of the station or off the platform that train movements might be encountered.

See photo.

Robin.

 

On the other hand you don't want a group of 'yes men'. There has to be some challenge to make sure all the checks and balances have been carried out properly and whatever is proposed (even if it's just "Do nothing") is properly justified.

 

When is the goods shed & sidings going to be reinstated at Stogumber?

DJB.

 

Are you offering funding?

 

3/6d a wk for a year.

DJB.

 

Whats the date of the photo - I see that baulk track still survives

 

Indeed they are, and they spoil the look of the station. Even if you ignore the style of them, two on each side of the crossing, one behind the other, does seem a bit excessive. But they do provide a useful reminder for those who missed the sign at the entrance. (not sure if I should have put a smiley after that sentence)

 

Much as it would be nice to see Stogumber returned to its original appearance with the rebuilding of the goods shed, that would mean loosing the beautiful picnic area that the friends of Stogumber have created. And that would be a sad loss.

 

That's an awful lot of your pocket money !!!

 

By that token perhaps you should run train services with sprinters and move on all those LMS, S&D and GWR main line jobbies. After all, sprinters are more authentic for branch lines in the west country...

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

‘1930’s’

What you are interpreting as baulk track is the track laid with drainage in front of the cattle dock, I think.

Robin

 

Rather than do that, why not rejoin, and help us all work together to build a better West Somerset Railway?

Paul
Chair of Trustees
WSRA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Now THERE’s a good idea...

Robin
(WSRA Life member (but time off for good behaviour))

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now #151

Roebuck Gate Crossing 1989 / 2017

The power of volunteers. Here a largely volunteer group, led by John Henbury who was then in charge of WSR permanent way, minister to the crossing.

We are fortunate to retain our volunteer permanent way gang, who need to be nurtured and supported. Heritage Railways only exist because a core of employees organise and lead an army of volunteers. We forget that at our peril.


Copyright Malcolm Short / Robin White

1989


2017

 

Better still, and cheaper, how about the goods siding at Crowcombe?

 

IMHO as I see it the more a thing costs the better it has to be at CH, not right but at least better because it's expensive ....

 

https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...and-oldest-youngest-towns-manchester-minehead

I was reading this article on the completely unrelated subject of generational inequality and about half way down it mentions the WSR (you can tell the writer has no idea about railway preservation).

Apparently the Chairman of Minehead's Chamber of Commerce, Alex de Mendoza, wants rid of the WSR and to replace it with a 'Minehead-Taunton Rail Link', I.e. literally getting rid of all the steam engines and run a Sprinter up and down every hour....what planet is he living on? As Britain's longest standard gauge heritage railway, the WSR brings thousands of visitors in to Minehead who wouldn't otherwise come. Part of his reasoning is that a better rail link would help tourists get to Butlins, but the entire concept of Butlins is pretty much dead in the water thanks to package holidays etc. Not saying that it isn't viable, but I don't think it's enough of a justification. Hopefully this man isn't is in as influential a position as his title suggests.

 

I understand your concern reading this unpleasantly toned article. I suppose bearing in mind Minehead's demographic, and the way they voted in the referendum, the Grauniad would be only too keen to do a hatchet job on them, and the WSR it so sneeringly describes.
There's far, far too much Ill will and resentment in society already, and its just being fed by poisonous hacks like this.