West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Good idea. I'll check what the Plc think.

Steve

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now #110

Dunster 1959 / 2017

Locos captured alongside the goods shed. An ordinary Branch passenger train in 1959 and s driver experience train (hence no passengers) in 2017.

1959


2017

 

Steve
I was indeed very vocal about the One Railway concept all those years ago when the charity was trying to put one over on the WSRplc and the WSR
The One Railway concept was not one (Railway) organisation but all WSR organisations working as One (Railway) for the benefit of the WSR.
The great thing about the partnership approach is one organisation may be able to check the excesses of another part of the railway family ( I first heard this phrase at one of the WSRA AGM or EGM and it still makes me cringe!)

I am confident that we now have the right leadership of the WSRplc and WSRA and we need to give them time to recover lost ground and time, attended to the urgent matters and move forward in an organized and productive matter.

There will always be change and a need for change, sometimes this has to be driven by public criticism because all else has failed but I believe that quite lobbying has to be tried first and public outbursts need to be proportionate to the risk.

If the WSR freehold had be sold in 2014 the WSR would be in a very different place, the freehold being with SCC is another element of the protection that a partnership approach provides (for the next 125 years)

Thanks for the offer of a cuppa, Milk no sugar please

Jeff Price

 

The pannier is a little way from home, a Yeovil shed plate.

 

I believe I'm right in saying that I've read that some of the loco diagrams of the time meant a loco would work the Yeovil to Taunton turn, then Taunton to Minehead and then back to Yeovil. If so it would make sense to see a Yeovil engine on the branch, no doubt somebody with better knowledge than me could throw a bit more light on the subject.

 

From the outside, this seems wise counsel given the upheavals of recent years. However, I also note that a number of other successful preserved railways have either unitary organisations, or charitable bodies owning the operating company. I observe, in passing, that both types of structures have significant protections for the preservation ethos of the railway even if neither are wholly proof against either excessive "commercial" focus or, worse, individuals acting in the wrong way. On the former, other threads on here illustrate facets of the the tightrope that needs to be walked; I think the WSR has enough experience of the latter for many lifetimes.

Again, from the outside, I find the presentation of the "partnership approach" somewhat dispiriting. I can see how it can engage not just the members of the railway family but also other bodies; however, I regard the reliance on a further body to "check the excesses of another part of the railway family" as being something of a counsel of despair. Surely, it's better to focus the organisation on creating ways of working and a culture that prevents the need for checking such excesses in the first place?

 

It would certainly help change the general outlook on the railway - suggest to anyone the GWSR trust selling a coach to the PLC and all you'd get is some funny looks, and people asking "well what does that achieve!?"

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

Absent the situation where the railway was about to lose a valuable piece of kit (and query why the Trust would be minded to that), what would it achieve?

 

Would that not have been it's duty for the day - Yeovil - Taunton , Taunton ~ Minehead and return ?

Paul . K







t

 

It just seemed a bit long for a regular pannier trip from Yeovil and return. What would be the normal power on this turn?

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now #111

Dunster 1956 / 2017

From under the station canopy, looking towards Minehead.

It is unlikely that the signal box will ever return to Dunster, but the rest of the scene could be recreated.

1956


2017

 

I never know dunster had a signal box. are there any signal crossing signs that were on sale at dunster still available.

thxs

 

I can't answer that but some daily turns even for the smaller locos were way in excess of what we now expect, not least because of double shifting and being a 24 hr a day railway then. For example details were published in the Great Western Journal of a 14xx daily diagram which involved a single loco covering well over 200 miles in a 24 hr period.

 

I have to say that Dunster looks so much better back in 1956 than it does now, as do most of the other stations on the line. The main feature that really stands out are the level crossing gates. Why did these have to be removed? They are still in use at Blue Anchor.

 

One of the last metro tank class engine workings was an auto coach train from Taunton to Frome and back. This will be about 50 miles each way.

 

It must be very depressing for Dunster station staff who, having recreated a perfect 50's wayside station on their side of the track, have to look out on what is basically an untidy junkyard.

 

I don't buy the 'the P.Way are too busy to keep their yard tidy' stuff. I am very busy professionally but my house isn't knee deep in discarded clothes.

There are better options for the P.Way Department on the Railway. If 'Dunster Goods' was in prospect, there would be no shortage of volunteers to help with the move and to help create the heritage jewel that Dunster should be.

Robin

 

I'd have replied earlier but I have been away.

There is no daily or any other hire fee. This coach is used by the WSR plc without charge, irrespective of days used or mileage travelled, although they have recently made an offer to pay an annual fee. A window was broken but I understand it was promptly repaired.

The problem we have on the railway is the lack of covered carriage accommodation, and we hope we may have a solution to that but it will take some time. Meanwhile it is generally accepted that Minehead is a safer place than Bishops Lydeard, but neither place is ideal.

Paul

 

What I do know is , when visiting my grandparents in Watchet in their house at the top of Swain Street opposite the station in the late 50s early 60s I only remember seeing Pannier engines with four non corridor carriages Sundays to Fridays . On Saturdays we would see wat I now know to be a Prairie with six on . I do think you are right about Yeovil to Minehead being too much for a Pannier without a visit to the shed . In fact I do know when I caught the Minehead train at Taunton there rarely was an engine on , even in those days I knew we weren't going anywhere without an engine on the front . Of course I maybe totally mistaken but I bet there are plenty on here that can put me right .

 

There certainly was in the mid 50s and onwards a through engine working from Yeovil to Minehead. Memory from past reading says it was an am departure, ie probably either the 09.56 (arrival Taunton 10.53) or 11.39 (TN 12.43) ex Pen Mill, this would then presumably continue on the 12.15 and 13.46 respectively Taunton to Minehead. This I believe was normally a 57xx Pannier. Mileages Pen Mill-TN and TN-MD 21m 64ch and 24m 60 ch.

Panniers often worked longer distances than these eg Hereford - Brecon 39 miles, usually with 4 coaches, at peak times more.

57 xx , coal,capacity 3 tons 6 cwt, water 1200 gallons, at 50lb/mile, coal c.130 miles, water c.35 miles

Michael Rowe

ps An after thought. Pre 1923, at least one of the Midland Railway Swansea to Hereford via Brecon and return (79.25 miles each way) through services was entrusted to a Johnson (c1886) designed Swansea allocated 0-4-4 tank throughout. These had a 16sq.ft firegrate (ie similar to 57xx) and initially water capacities of 1150 gals, later locos had 1220 gals.