West Somerset Railway General Discussion

So? It's still related to the WSR, therefore if folk want to discuss it they can. Free world and all that...

 

Because, quite often, that is only part of the story. Level crossings are usually maintained by the railway, whoever foots the bill for installation. If they aren't working and open to road trafic, I can't see the WSR hanging around waiting for SCC to get around to fixing them.

 

I'm not sure as I think we are still under the warranty period at the moment but there is a service level agreement in place with the supplier.

I thought it was just as a matter of interest as to what these things generally cost and how big a dent its putting in the SCC rate payers pockets?

I would love to get to the bottom of this question. There was a substantial lobby at Swanage that wanted to see traditional crossing gates at Norden but were told that regulations prevented the installation of any new traditional crossings.

All sorts of factors were cited such as cars hitting the gates, gates hitting cars, cars hitting gate keepers, time taken to open and close affecting road blockage time, difficulty of automating the crossing, difficulty of repairing the crossing in event of car hitting it, non compliance with modern standards etc etc etc. And then you go to another railway and see their brand new traditional crossing?!

As SCC seem to be running and paying for this project I cant see them going for anything out of the norm.

 

I tend to agree but it might be better aired in the group about providing direct services to Taunton. Presumably there is now a legal requirement for ALL new, or replacement, crossings to comply with NR standards. If it stops the idiots zig-zagging then maybe it is worth it. Perhaps the mods would consider moving the discussion there if they think it appropriate.

 

If it failed shut then the WSR have no obligation to repair and probably no legal right to interfere with SCC property.

 

The responsibility is not standard.

 

I think if you start here:

http://democracy.somerset.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=614

& read the four attached documents, the majority of these questions are answered.

 

Noted. Most interesting.

 

If you read the SCC document you will see that the WSR looks after the maintenance of the crossing not SCC

 

Noted. Sounds like a bad deal to me. OK regarding the track bed but not the gates.

 

When the Kent & East Sussex Railway extended its line across the marshes to Bodiam they had to pay for the road crossings including the gates, and there were quite a few crossings.

 

Sounds sensible to me. WSR maintains the barriers and SCC pays the cost. If anything goes wrong we contact our own skilled technicians and have the crossing back in action before SCC could fill in the job form. Otherwise we have to man the crossing until it's repaired.

 

Now you know why the subject is being discussed!

 

I'm frequently employed in the infrastructure side of the rail industry and have found the numerous posts about PW track bed maintenance on the WSR very useful in many many ways. In the remote locations where I often find myself it is common to see crossing points with a beware of trains sign and little else in the way of accident prevention devices.

This thread is about the Seaward Way crossing, located in Minehead, a part of the WSR, managed by the WSR and totally unrelated discussion wise to the thread of providing direct rail services to Taunton. Therefore matters concerning the updating of the crossing to NR standards are obviously being debated within a relevant thread

Moving the thread to the Direct Minehead To Taunton discussion thread is therefore a somewhat inappropriate suggestion. Such a move will merely give certain well known (all WRS topic) pundits the opportunity to further engage in slagging off poor Mr. Mendez.

On the subject of Mr. Mendez; I completely accept that Mr. Mendez does not have a clue about the technicalities and economics of railway operations and is advocating rail development projects that are financially non viable in all respects. However, reading his many communications both on railway restoration matters and on issues concerning the economic development of Minehead's central business district and its surrounding settlements, the man comes across as a very sincere and correct person in many instances.

Sadly, although he is totally adrift with issues concerning the WSR, many of his other campaigns concerning rubbish removal, increased parking time for visitors, location of street markets and the like appear to have some value and relevance to Minehead's continuous struggle to remain an ongoing successful centre of commercial activity.

Some of the recent jubilant comments concerning his departure from the chair of MCOC were unpleasant to say the least. The man may be seen as a menace by some people .........but at the very least he comes across as a sincere menace who does not deserve the ribald comments thrown in his direction by certain members of the pundit community.

Jamie.

 

Maybe because when MRL get their 'no brianer' commuter service and the signal boxes have to be closed and replaced by control from Exeter [because the volunteers won't turnout at 0600 to open the gates for the incoming ecs for the first departure from Minehead] it may be of interest to know how much it will cost to replace the Blue Anchor crossing with automatic barriers ?

 

Noted and apologies.

 

A good point (no pun intended). What puzzles me is why SCC are responsible for the installation but not the maintenance. Am I correct in thinking the crossing was installed because of a new road? Are SCC going to replace the other crossings on raw WSR?

 

The MD barriers are probably not down as long as you imagine, as the sequence is triggered by trains activating track circuits either side of the crossing - probably 30 seconds at the most. They rise again when the train clears the crossing track circuit.

 

A personal view. The crossing was first installed 25 years ago so it s no surprise it needs overhauling. As the SCC paper explains, the footfall and road traffic levels have greatly increased and so a review of safe working was also much needed. The crossing gets a lot of use - besides timetabled trains, it also sees shunting movements, for example, the loco of a Down train arriving at the Bay platform will need to go over the crossing twice to run over to the shed (and then when finished on shed, back again to hook up to its stock). Back in the early 1990s, the WSR did not want the crossing and tried to persuade SCC to build a bridge but to no avail.

The £850K price tag is one for SCC to deal with, not the WSR. The working arrangements, ref maintenance, have been in place for over 25 years, written into a variant of the main lease I understand.

Personally I am pleased to note extra barriers are planned. The Minehead Signalman has some control over the otherwise automatic crossing.

As a Guard, I recall being instructed on the workings of the then new crossing (at that time there was no road in place either side, just marshland!) and the spanking new 'Christmas Tree' signal, by none other than the then Operating Superintendent, R. White.

Steve