Bound2Please Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 19 minutes ago, grendel said: I have been looking and I can find no modern designs for swing rail bridges - is this because with continuous rail they are no longer possible. 10 minutes ago, Baitrunner said: If a 60ft rail needs half an inch gap for expansion, does a welded rail of say 600ft need ten times this. So 5 inches using my figures? Grendel I think you have nailed it there mate Baitrunner your assumptions are not to far off from memory, i think half inch is a tad much but bear in mind the LWR can be over a mile long, and the expansion joints over 2 feet in length. 23 minutes ago, grendel said: (like the interlocking issue that Robin encountered with the road bridge). Mechanical interlocking expands and contracts on the roding that puts the pin in or out for the bridge swing. So yes the interlocking pins can become jammed due to heat or cold, all this talk takes me back to my elctro mechanical training on British Rail in 73/4 ish ....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bound2Please Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Baitrunner said: This is a great and simple explanation of how CWR cope with heat http://vinchad.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/ever-wondered-why-continuously-welded.html?m=1 Thats the old 60 ft rails mark not LWR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MauriceMynah Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 Sorry Charlie, but I have to ask... Did you read the whole article? I thought it a good, and more importantly, simple explanation as to the flaw in Baitrunners hypothesis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baitrunner Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Bound2Please said: Baitrunner your assumptions are not to far off from memory, i think half inch is a tad much but bear in mind the LWR can be over a mile long, and the expansion joints over 2 feet in length. Thanks Charlie. I did find another article that quoted over 2ft expansion gaps on an 1800ft section. So mine was a bit OTT but that's a big old gap. Sounds like we have to put up with it then. Or someone invents trackless trains or we all cut the tops off our big boats. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bound2Please Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 In the winter of 82 i think it was trains stopped running due to the rails contracting out of some expansion joints, so you see extreme cold buggers rails up on the LWR heat or cold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 are we still saying this wont sort it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 13 hours ago, Bound2Please said: I'm sure Vaughan will correct me if i'm wrong here. Were the swing bridges put in place for comercial river traffic, not pleasure craft. I am pretty sure i am correct in this thinking, so there fore pleasure boats should be thankful, for any time the bridge opend to allow them safe passage. Sorry to be late on this one but yes, originally, the railway was built across what was already an established commercial maritime navigation and so the rail company had to respect the right of navigation. Should we now be thankful? Again yes, but our whole existence on the Norfolk Broads rivers depends on the insistence on ancient rights of navigation. Without them, the RSPB would have taken over long ago. This is why I keep banging on about the rights of access to a public staithe. In this respect, the swing bridges are no different. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheQ Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 The bridges were put in place for CRAFT navigating the rivers, there was no distinction between commercial or Private Craft.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 I am firmly of the belief that there are many old laws/traditions or ways that could do with objective re-assessment, just because something has worked for the last 100 years doesnt mean its right for now. Take level crossings for instance, where it can be demonstrated that the modern day impact of a crossing far outweighs the benefit of having a train crossing at that point then the railway taking priority should no longer be accepted as justification for the delays and other economic constraints the railway may actually be in some part responsible for. Whether this means re routing track or closing stations that other infrastructure can easily cater for then I think in some cases it would be more sensible to enforce changes on network rail rather than the Government having to spend millions coming up with solutions to deal with it. Much of the day traffic is nose to tail for up to a mile south of Oulton Broad and similar from the North, it is a real inconvenience and cant be helping the local economy. I firmly believe if there was no level crossing at Oulton Broad North Lowestoft might manage just fine without this proposed third crossing as there would be atleast 1 reliable way to cross lake lothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grendel Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 when it comes to reducing pollution, just how many cars are sitting in the queues, emitting exhaust smoke at the most uneconomical speed (tickover) in those queues, to gain a pollution reduction for those using the train. A study was done in Canterbury, they shut the westgate Arch to traffic through the arch (the other direction goes around the side) and diverted it across the level crossing and around the alternate route, as an aid to reducing traffic emmission pollution in the area - the traffic would flow much better (they said) at the start of the 'trial' they changed the footpaths so that you could not drive through the arch. After 3 months the 6 month trial was brought to an end, due to the doubling of the traffic exhaust pollution levels in the roads the leading to the level crossing on each side. they had to undo the footway works and new kerbs they had installed (in anticipation of the positive results of the trial) and re-open the archway to traffic (it is now shut to busses and coaches - but then the double decker busses were special models designed to get through the arch*(about 1" to spare) and coaches were always getting stuck half way through. * the special busses were tapered at the top and the wing mirrors were narrower, if your mirrors cleared either side by 1/2" you were central in the arch and could get through. coach mirrors always hit the sides. you can see the taper from where the windows start on the top deck in the picture below. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 Alx400, comfortable vehicle on a volvo chassis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwellian Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 Wish I had a £1 for everytime I have gone through that arch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grendel Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 I drive through it every day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 There is a similar arch in Beverley Easy Yorks where East Yorkshire Motor Services had special vehicles designed to fit it. I dont believe they have any modern double decker vehicles in service that can still use it now though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 "Without them, the RSPB would have taken over long ago"... I'd love to know the basis for that assumption. In the Norfolk/Suffolk Broads area, as far as I can see the RSPB are only present at Strumpshaw Fen, Buckenham Marshes, Rockland Marshes, Surlingham Church Marsh and Berney Marshes. All of these are leased, none are owned, by the RSPB and as far as I can see, none of these reserves have any detrimental effect on the landscape or boating issues, quite the reverse in fact. They and the reserves of the Norfolk Wildlife trust, Hickling Broad, Martham/Somerton Broad, Ranworth Broad, Upton Broad & Marshes to name just a few, appear to be managed in a way that is very respectful of the 'Grazing marsh landscape' that we all love. I probably don't need to remind anyone, that in the Common Market 'Grain mountain' days of the past, many of these grazing marshes were drained and ploughed up, in the dash for subsidies, almost destroying them in the process. Raising the RSPB as some kind of 'spectre' to be feared, appears to be not based on fact, quite the reverse, both the RSPB and N.W.T. have proved to be the saviours of thousands of acres of our beautiful Broadland grazing marshes. In addition, like boating, the nature reserves bring many thousands of visitors to the Broads every year, with the financial benefits this brings to the area... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
High6 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 when it comes to reducing pollution, just how many cars are sitting in the queues, emitting exhaust smoke at the most uneconomical speed (tickover) in those queues, to gain a pollution reduction for those using the train. A study was done in Canterbury, they shut the westgate Arch to traffic through the arch (the other direction goes around the side) and diverted it across the level crossing and around the alternate route, as an aid to reducing traffic emmission pollution in the area - the traffic would flow much better (they said) at the start of the 'trial' they changed the footpaths so that you could not drive through the arch. After 3 months the 6 month trial was brought to an end, due to the doubling of the traffic exhaust pollution levels in the roads the leading to the level crossing on each side. they had to undo the footway works and new kerbs they had installed (in anticipation of the positive results of the trial) and re-open the archway to traffic (it is now shut to busses and coaches - but then the double decker busses were special models designed to get through the arch*(about 1" to spare) and coaches were always getting stuck half way through. * the special busses were tapered at the top and the wing mirrors were narrower, if your mirrors cleared either side by 1/2" you were central in the arch and could get through. coach mirrors always hit the sides. you can see the taper from where the windows start on the top deck in the picture below.But can they do it backwards?Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 2 hours ago, kingfisher666 said: "Without them, the RSPB would have taken over long ago"... I'd love to know the basis for that assumption. In the Norfolk/Suffolk Broads area, as far as I can see the RSPB are only present at Strumpshaw Fen, Buckenham Marshes, Rockland Marshes, Surlingham Church Marsh and Berney Marshes. All of these are leased, none are owned, by the RSPB and as far as I can see, none of these reserves have any detrimental effect on the landscape or boating issues, quite the reverse in fact. The large area known as Sutton Fen was purchased outright by the RSPB for the sum of £1.5m in 2007, since when visitors have been positively discouraged, as has any media interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 37 minutes ago, Paladin said: The large area known as Sutton Fen was purchased outright by the RSPB for the sum of £1.5m in 2007, since when visitors have been positively discouraged, as has any media interest. I believe Sutton Fen is a closed reserve for both ecological and safety reasons, it is an area of pristine, untouched fen and as such is extremely boggy in places. I believe the RSPB do 'guided visits' on occasions, but the fen is extremely fragile and these visits are indeed rare. My guess would be, that the lack of media coverage, is more to do with protecting the reserve from 'on the spur of the moment' visitors, but perhaps my guess is wrong and you may know the true reason... I didn't include Sutton Fen in my list above, solely because it isn't open to the public, which all of the others are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 That doesn't sound like the "national park" ethos to me.. . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 Interestingly the Victoria Road crossing in Oulton Broad has been stuck down this evening, complete with police road closed sign and 2 network rail orange suited guys leaning on the barriers. You couldnt make it up round here. What I dont understand is why the barriers at OBN need to be closed for a train that stops at the platform before the crossing heading in the Reedham direction. Is it really that dangerous for the barriers to stay up untill just before the train is due to depart. Rather than expecting everyone else to be held up while they unload prams, bucket and spades, expectant mothers and the rest of the traveling circus..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 21 hours ago, Bound2Please said: Well tell the train users the line is going back to 60ft's and see the commotion, I had a good look at the track over the two bridges earlier today and can say that or a few miles each side of both bridges the track is not welded but 60 foot sections joined by fishplates. Therefore it would look as though summer rails are indeed an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 12 hours ago, Bound2Please said: Try the railway act im sure it must be on line some where. Thanks, I was looking for something a little more "readable" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 20 minutes ago, dnks34 said: Interestingly the Victoria Road crossing in Oulton Broad has been stuck down this evening, complete with police road closed sign and 2 network rail orange suited guys leaning on the barriers. You couldnt make it up round here. What I dont understand is why the barriers at OBN need to be closed for a train that stops at the platform before the crossing heading in the Reedham direction. Is it really that dangerous for the barriers to stay up untill just before the train is due to depart. Rather than expecting everyone else to be held up while they unload prams, bucket and spades, expectant mothers and the rest of the traveling circus..... I believe there was an incident when a train crashed through a barrier that opened the road for vehicles and pedestrians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 11 hours ago, Bound2Please said: If that were that simple, it would take a plate layers gang about 45 minutes to do on each bridge. I havnt worked on the railway since 1987 as jumping out of the way of 100mph trains is a youngmans job. But now with H& S they shut it for even a simple failure. oh well progress is not always best. I went over both bridges today (twice) and the trains slow down to about 10 mph when passing over the swing bridges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bound2Please Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, Philosophical said: I believe there was an incident when a train crashed through a barrier A barrier I think not a gate quite possibly, as it has happened when a train has rolled back a foot'ish at gated crossings where the gates are opened to road traffic when a train in a platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.