In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
18:20:02 on Tue, 26 Apr 2011, remarked:
The railway only extended to Fen Drayton by then.

About here then: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/4580596

Oh dear, more track that we should have stopped people ripping up,
so they could run trains on it!

That was a railway under engineers' possession at the time.

I'd love to see them get an engineer's train down there. Were
things like the Milton Rd level crossing in a working enough
condition?

ITYF that's a common problem with railway lines under engineers'
possession, Roland! Presumably some engineers' attention could have
overcome the problems. My children travelled on it despite the fact that
the oldest was born more than 16 years after passenger closure.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at 01:36:42 on
Wed, 27 Apr 2011, Theo Markettos
remarked:
The nature trail isn't a part of the Cambridge-St Ives scheme.

Do you mean that the trackbed had never acquired the status of a
nature trail, so apart from cyclists there's no-one that worried
about it potentially disappearing?

It was still technically an operating railway until 2 August 2003, so
it wasn't officially available for walkers or cyclists.

Where was the official end of the line in 2003? The rails were
lifted beyond Fen Drayton, and the St Ives bypass was built on top
of the St Ives station site (apparently in 1980), the bypass uses
the old trackbed towards March.

The sand trains ran to Fen Drayton until the extraction company was
allowed to build a road across the fields to the A14.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 12:10:39
on Wed, 27 Apr 2011, remarked:

About here then: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/4580596

Oh dear, more track that we should have stopped people ripping up,
so they could run trains on it!

That was a railway under engineers' possession at the time.

I'd love to see them get an engineer's train down there. Were
things like the Milton Rd level crossing in a working enough
condition?

ITYF that's a common problem with railway lines under engineers'
possession, Roland! Presumably some engineers' attention could have
overcome the problems. My children travelled on it despite the fact that
the oldest was born more than 16 years after passenger closure.

Not difficult given that passenger closure was over 40 years ago. They'd
have last been able to travel on it in about 1990 I suppose, which still
gives 17 years for that vegetation to grow.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 12:10:40
on Wed, 27 Apr 2011, remarked:

Where was the official end of the line in 2003? The rails were
lifted beyond Fen Drayton, and the St Ives bypass was built on top
of the St Ives station site (apparently in 1980), the bypass uses
the old trackbed towards March.

The sand trains ran to Fen Drayton until the extraction company was
allowed to build a road across the fields to the A14.

According to the "disused stations" site:

"service as far as Fen Drayton was retained until 1992 because
of a long term contract with the Amalgamated Road Stone
Corporation of St. Ives for aggregates. In the 1970's, the train
made a return trip there every work day though this had declined
to once a week by the late 1980's."

2003 was 11 years later.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
It doesn't seem ambiguous to me (all Network Rail stuff):

"CAST.IRON trains will terminate at the west side of Milton
Road. Here two new platforms will be constructed, one for
CAST.IRON trains and one for Network Rail trains.

4.2. Network Rail Trackway

"A new 70mph track will be laid from Chesterton Junction to
Milton Road station, running parallel to the CAST.IRON access
track.

"This new Network Rail track spur will cross Milton Road to
reach the new station.... [and] will be overhead electrified.

The possible point of ambiguity being about who was paying for this. It was
clearly stated at the meeting I went to that this was included in
CAST.IRON's costings.

Theo

In message , at 21:52:50 on Thu,
28 Apr 2011, Theo Markettos
remarked:
It doesn't seem ambiguous to me (all Network Rail stuff):

"CAST.IRON trains will terminate at the west side of Milton
Road. Here two new platforms will be constructed, one for
CAST.IRON trains and one for Network Rail trains.

4.2. Network Rail Trackway

"A new 70mph track will be laid from Chesterton Junction to
Milton Road station, running parallel to the CAST.IRON access
track.

"This new Network Rail track spur will cross Milton Road to
reach the new station.... [and] will be overhead electrified.

The possible point of ambiguity being about who was paying for this. It was
clearly stated at the meeting I went to that this was included in
CAST.IRON's costings.

The estimates for Chesterton Sidings Station exceed CAST.IRON's *total*
costings for Cambridge to St Ives, and CSS needs less extra
electrification and no new level crossing on Milton Road. That's the
sort of thing which makes me sceptical about the costings and who is
paying what.
--
Roland Perry

I would have thought that the problems on the Jubillee Line were less to do with incompetent engineers, rather it is due to putting construction of the JLE out to the lowest bidder. You get what you pay for. I undertsand that the JLE has quite a few design problems making maintenance difficult. Engineers would never have built such a poor system without the undue influence of politicians and accountants.

When maintenance of the Central Line was taken in-house around 2000 it began to work properly despite issues surrounding the trains, proving LU engineers are better than contractors' engineers.

In article ,
(Steve Gardiner) wrote:

*From:* Steve Gardiner
*Date:* Wed, 11 May 2011 14:20:24 +0100

Not if the safety device which does that stopping has been
disabled.

The driver does not have access to this system.

Steve Gardiner

The driver does have access to this - it's either a sealed switch in the
cab (TCIS) or a cock (TCIC) on the front of the train (older stock). There
are certain times when this has to be cut out because of a defect. One
defect where it is cut out is when a train gets tripped and the tripcock
cannot be reset afterwards. There are many reasons for a train to be
tripped, some of which a
a raised trainstop at a signal (passing a signal at danger for whatever
reason) or being tripped on something on the track, such as an obstruction
- ballast piled too high, shoe dropped off, something thrown on the track,
body on the track, etc. If the tripcock cannot be reset, the tripcock is
cut out. If it's not cut out, the train cannot be moved.

Apparently this was the reason for the tripcock being cut out then - the
driver had to apply the rule at a signal, got tripped, and then the
tripcock couldn't be reset (it's reset by pulling on a piece of rope and
this can sometimes fail) and so it was cut out.

Roger

In article ,
() wrote:

Apparently this was the reason for the tripcock being cut out then
- the driver had to apply the rule at a signal, got tripped, and
then the tripcock couldn't be reset (it's reset by pulling on a
piece of rope and this can sometimes fail) and so it was cut out.

So his offence was not waiting for a second man?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 19:43:34
on Wed, 11 May 2011, remarked:

Apparently this was the reason for the tripcock being cut out then
- the driver had to apply the rule at a signal, got tripped, and
then the tripcock couldn't be reset (it's reset by pulling on a
piece of rope and this can sometimes fail) and so it was cut out.

So his offence was not waiting for a second man?

That's what it looks like to me, yes.
--
Roland Perry