Talk:Telford Steam Railway

Map

Map added WaltTFB (talk) 22:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Coalbrookdale Station

Clearly WaltTFB is not familiar with today's restrictions that pertain to stations built on an incline. Had Coalbrookdale station never closed it would retain its grandfather rights. Such rights were extinguished upon closure and the incline is so steep a derogation would not be obtained. It would require a significant amount of civils to reduce the incline through the platform(s) to make it possible to re-open the station to passenger traffic. Not impossible, but very difficult. Hence the use of the word "hampered".7severn7 (talk) 12:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

From http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Rail-42925/tt0196_1.pdf

5.6.2. Wherever practicable platforms shall be constructed on the level, but nevertheless on a logitudinal gradient not steeper than 1 in 500.

Would Mr Oldford please note that this item is subject to HMRI and is no concern of his. Could I ask him, again, to go way and play in his usual pen at Bridgnorth. Yet another nom de plume is fooling no one. Who else would add an item on steam locomotive cylinder materials elsewhere???Green Gronk (talk) 23:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

As I pointed out on your talk page, that is a withdrawn document, so doesn't make your case. More importantly it doesn't specifically discuss the situation at Coalbrookdale, so you cannot use this reference to justify your addition to the article - that would be synthesis. Finally, you might like to consider other recently restored railways such as the Welsh Highland Railway that have re-opened long-closed station that are on steeper gradients than 1 in 500. Your claim that grandfather rights will not apply isn't necessarily correct. Thanks, Gwernol 10:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The more recent RSSB document which I sent you is current and refers to UK standard gauge railways. Having lived overseas for such a long time you are clearly no longer familiar with the UK railway situation.7severn7 (talk) 18:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't make this a personal issue. The country where I live has very little to do with my ability to access information and keep up with the UK rail scene. The real issue here is that you do not have adequate sources to justify the claims you are making. Please provide sources if you are going to make these claims. Sourcing and verifiability is one of the core content policies of Wikipedia. If you are not familiar with this, please make sure you read WP:V.

More specifically, you have not addresses the issue of original research. While the RSSB specification says that in general, new stations should not be built on gradients as steep as 1 in 100, that does not mean that specific exceptions won't be granted. Indeed Beddgelert station on the Welsh Highland Railway is an example. After being closed since 1937, it is reopening next year on a gradient of 1 in 43. It is clear that your interpretation of the regulations to mean "no station can ever be re-opened if it is on a gradient greater than 1 in 500" is flawed. It is also your interpretation of a primary source and therefore is original research. If you can located a published, independent, secondary source that specifically says that Coalbrookdale station cannot be reopened, then you can include this in the article. Until then, please do not add your own theories to articles. Thanks, Gwernol 13:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Lightmoor Junction Signal Box

I have added a short section regarding the lease of Lightmoor Junction Signal Box from NR. This was further reported by The Shropshire Star newspaper on 12 August. Effective date of the lease was 1st August 2008. Green Gronk (talk) 16:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

History of the Line

Interestingly, the line directions were changed from when the line was originally built as the up direction (towards London) from Lightmoor Junction was originally via the former Severn Valley line.

The above would be a good addition to a section detailing the history of the line. It doesn't relate to the current operations or future ambitions of TSR WaltTFB (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

WaltTFB; I have created the start of a section on the line's history. Feel free to edit and include the above passage into it.7severn7 (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, any further details you can add would be greatfully receieved. Still trying to work out a more elegant form for the above. WaltTFB (talk) 20:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

7severn7, I'm afraid I do not understand your recent addition regarding up/down line changes. I don't want to delete what you have said but simply don't understand it. Could you please try to revise and clarify it?Green Gronk (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Green Gronk, I think perhaps you are right. I've worded it badly. The line direction between Buildwas and Lightmoor was counter-intuitive inasmuch as the line going down the hill was the Up Line (towards London) and the line going up the hill was the Down Line (away from London). Strange; but true. 7severn7 (talk) 18:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

7Severn7. I see what you mean now, but there must be hundreds of places on the network where the upline is downgrade and the downline is upgrade, so is it so remarkable? It is certainly not a unique feature.Green Gronk (talk) 09:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Green Gronk. I agree there are many places where the upline is downgrade and the downline is upgrade however it is unusual for the up/down line designations to be changed.7severn7 (talk) 13:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

7Severn7. Having picked up Ken Jones book to browse, I find that on pages 140/141 there is a reproduction of the Wellington and Severn Junction Railway working timetable of 1869. According to this Craven Arms to Wellington trains are Up trains, Wellington to Craven Arms trains are Down. The WTT of 1892 reverses the direction though it has been restored to original by the time the WTT of 1928 was published. It cannot therefore, be allied to the closure of the SVR.Green Gronk (talk) 09:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)Green Gronk (talk) 20:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Since writing the above this morning I have seen the original signal box diagram from Horsehay and Dawley Signal Box (Not a print, the actual framed diagram removed from the box). This indicates up to Wellington, down to Buildwas. This is dated 1924. Green Gronk (talk) 17:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)Green Gronk (talk) 20:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Green Gronk. Thanks for the additional/correct information. I wasn't aware a change of line direction had occured twice. 7severn7 (talk) 09:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Note to 7severn7. The report on "fencing" activities in the Shropshire Star that you cite is erroneous in several important facts and has no place on Wikipedia.Green Gronk (talk) 09:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC) My appologies for reproducing what must have been untruths from the local paper. The Star must be very good with Photoshop.7severn7 (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC) The Shropshire Star are famous for their photo captioning. They even managed to get the two Coalport Stations confused a few months ago! This was well reported on an internet forum.Surely time for the NoB bump?Green Gronk (talk) 19:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sir Lamiel Platford, isn't it rather strange how quickly your posts get reported on NoB? Methinks your cover is slipping!! It's not wheely that difficult to work out who you are!! You could also try a google search on yourself, and find out that some of the non railway forums you post on give your email address, Mr Oldford. Please note this page will shortly be completely revised by people who really know what is going on, and any further contributions from you will be deleted immediately.Green Gronk (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

At one time there was a change in the up/down direction at Lightmore Junction. I.e. At one time you went up towards Madeley Junction and up towards Buildwas. The most recent change in declared direction means the whole line between Madeley Junction and Buildwas is now consistent. Green Gronk, you seem to object to some interesting facts being included in the history of an otherwise humdrum line.7severn7 (talk) 08:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

No, Mr Oldford, I object to the way that you amend this page then draw attention to it, using one of your many psuedonyms, on the NoB thread of the SVR forum. Please go away and post there. I will continue to delete anything you post here. Your actions have been noted by Wikipedia and will shortly be notified to the SVR webmaster, though I'm sure he must already be as fed up with you as everyone else is. BTW It's spelt Lightmoor. Regards Bob BaileyGreen Gronk (talk) 09:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

With regard to your latest NoB post as Plato, the identity of 7severn7 is clearly proven here

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.telecom/2005-12/msg00426.html Green Gronk (talk) 10:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Careful Bob; it proves no connection with Plato as such. See you at Horsehay. Filofax Phil (talk) 07:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Que?Plaitoe (talk) 10:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

A case of mistaken identity? How embarassing! Clay toe (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC) All getting a bit silly now??Hollybush Road (talk) 19:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)