West Somerset Railway General Discussion

What I meant was distant signals fixed at caution, You never clear a distant signal on a inner home signal into a terminus. that is why the existing two aspect signal shows Red or yellow.
If indeed there is a up starting signal (Hopefully semaphore) to protect the crossing, this would eliminate the existing limit of shunt boards.

 

Such a complex set of semaphores would presumably allow for numerous situations. How can a colour light with only two aspects address all those situations?

 

Sorry, but what I meant was that I have never seen a distant (fixed or otherwise) used under the stop signal controlling entrance to a terminal platform in any installation of relatively modern times (with the exception of Common Lane on the Gartell Light Rly, but there at least there are worked signals in advance). I know that some companies (eg the LB&SCR) did use them to indicate the status of platform occupancy, but that was long long ago.

 

Because the existing C/L signal is not that simple There is a Junction indicator to indicate when the route is set for the Bay rather than the Main. There is also a subsidiary signal which acts as both a Calling On for the two platform roads and a shunt signal for the Loco Yard or Bay Sidings routes.

 

AH,I missed the position light (Two white lights at 45 degrees shunt signal) and IIRC , there is a theatre type display that shows the route that has been set.

 

And with American "English"

 

Which has led in some instances, to a mixture of equipment rather than matching systems. Due simply to "that was what was available".
For example, some may wonder why KESR has three station with upper quadrant signals, and one with lower quadrant. Much of the routine work of heritage signal engineers seems to be refurbishment of salvaged equipment in order to provide spares for what is currently in service. The point motors for the resignalling of Rolvenden a few years ago were available, but much time and effort was spent on refurbishment for continued use, there are currently two completely different types of point machines in use on the railway, for a short period there were both types at one station.

 

This is a particular problem for those heritage railways where 'authenticity' is a key issue. For example, in its entire life the original L&BR only ever had one upper-quadrant signal, which lasted for less than 10 months - all the rest were lower-quadrant. Trying to find the parts for those is very difficult, and trying to replicate the original Evans O'Donnell signals can only be done by making new castings, so rebuilding and resignalling the entire line is likely to require a lot of expensive 'new' parts. Even the GWR is not entirely straightforward, if a railway wants to lean towards the older style of arms on wooden posts rather than use tubular posts and the later pattern of arms.

 

I seem to recall that there a total clear-out and replacement of WSR plc Board members and senior managers in 2018/9. In such a situation, it must be almost inevitable that there will be disruption and that some things will fall through the cracks between old regime and new regime.

Revolutions have costs.

 

Surely the Fixed Distant in rear of the Home Signal would mean you don't require more fixed ones on the Inner Home? That's certainly the case at Kidderminster. Fixed Distant on the approach and you can pull off to the buffer stops. Just needs a note in the local instructions that way?

 

Bring it on !

 

All other things being equal we should do things in a heritage fashion. To do anything else means you end up like the kingswear line which (in my opinion) has no heritage feel whatever. You may say that the PDSR brings in the passengers, but that isn't the point. The WSR is trying to create a feeling of a 1950 steam branch line in all of its aspects, not just the trains. Of course the trains are important, but unless they are running in a heritage setting then its pointless. You become little more than a pretty park and ride. Sticking true to those principles is what will win the day, not short term cheap and cheerful modern solutions. The loss of the Edmondson ticketing system is an example.

And wrt to the crossing. Please don't run away with the thought that SCC have been sat with their cheque books open just waiting to pay the bill. Getting them to sign up to the work was not easy and no work could start until the funding was in place. As I recall, the funding was not in place during my tenure as chairman as I remember several discussions with SCC about when they might have the money available. Sometimes they had the money, then they didn't. I seem to remember the council at one point saying they would only pay for it if the plc then agreed to pay for all future maintenance, despite it being their statutory responsibility. My point is that while you may wish to blame the plc for the current situation, it isn't as easy as that as this has been a very complicated process.

It is true that the general clear out of not just the board but of the paid staff during 2018/2019 and changes in the council staff meant this wasnt progressed as fast as it could have been.

It is deeply disappointing that ORR have rejected all proposals for emergency working of the crossing. But you have to think that if that was the answer, then maybe the wrong question was asked.

Ian Coleby

 

That is a recognisable scenario with local authority and central government finance. One of their main priorities is getting monies spent before the end of the financial year, it means that the delay to the project caused by its re-examination by the new board need not have been very long before SCC had reallocated the budget elsewhere. OTOH, if that was the case, then surely someone would have been complaining, if not on Nat Pres, then elsewhere, that the SCC were costing the WSR money.

 

It is always tempting, when disaster strikes, to look for a single cause, a single person or group of people to blame, when in reality, disasters are far more often caused by a concatenation of events, any one of which, if it hadn't happened would have meant that that disaster was averted. I'm more inclined to think that the initial delay to the crossing replacement project was just one element in the chain of events that has brought the WSR to where it is today, missing out on a whole summer of running into Minehead.

 

You had better be a bit careful about ''yah boo'' remarks regarding other lines. The WSR is not a main line but has been ''guilty'' of running Halls and Kings plus buffet cars and so on. Most unprototypical really but perhaps no worse than some others. There are few places without an anachronism of some sort.

 

Probably where the money went. Yet another'company' that have spent years selling everything they own, always bleating they are strapped for money yet do this - https://www.somersetcountygazette.c...ton-council-spends-44m-investment-properties/

 

Councils tend to have access to cheap capital but are very stretched for revenue. Spending £44m of capital to make an annual revenue return of £3.25m looks pretty sound to me.

Tom