|
Disruption at Feltham
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:07:01 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Bruce wrote: On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:07:19 -0600, wrote: Hmm. Looks to me like part of the top of the arch was filled with rubble. LSWR jerry building? The spandrels were always filled with rubble. Next question? Now that it's failed, does that make it a cockup spandrel? Trust you to come up with that. ;-) |
Disruption at Feltham
"Richard J." wrote in message
... J. Chisholm wrote on 19 November 2009 12:13:06 ... Bruce wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:14:48 +0000, "J. Chisholm" wrote: I don't go with 'constant change' theory. More like a typical foundation that has been undermined by a particular rainfall event. That's precisely why I stated "It is probably a result of scour under the foundations as a result of the extreme flows of water." You obviously didn't bother to read that. However, you quoted it in your reply. Do you make a habit of replying to postings you cannot be bothered to read? Why? Sorry. No need to be agressive... I read the last para which implied a different mode of failure, But the "last para" was in response to my speculation about what led to the earlier brickwork replacement at the top of the arch, i.e. a different event to the recent collapse. Incidentally, was the rain in the Feltham area really that extreme last week? (I was several hundred miles away at the time.) There is another photo, of unsupported track, presumably above a point further along the tunnel, at http://rail-news.com/wp-content/uplo...Feltham-v2.jpg (The report containing that photo is at http://rail-news.com/2009/11/17/100-...-flood-damage/ ) Now at http://rail-news.com/2009/11/19/100-...damage/--David Biddulph |
Disruption at Feltham
"David Biddulph" groups [at] biddulph.org.uk wrote in message
... "Richard J." wrote in message ... J. Chisholm wrote on 19 November 2009 12:13:06 ... Bruce wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:14:48 +0000, "J. Chisholm" wrote: I don't go with 'constant change' theory. More like a typical foundation that has been undermined by a particular rainfall event. That's precisely why I stated "It is probably a result of scour under the foundations as a result of the extreme flows of water." You obviously didn't bother to read that. However, you quoted it in your reply. Do you make a habit of replying to postings you cannot be bothered to read? Why? Sorry. No need to be agressive... I read the last para which implied a different mode of failure, But the "last para" was in response to my speculation about what led to the earlier brickwork replacement at the top of the arch, i.e. a different event to the recent collapse. Incidentally, was the rain in the Feltham area really that extreme last week? (I was several hundred miles away at the time.) There is another photo, of unsupported track, presumably above a point further along the tunnel, at http://rail-news.com/wp-content/uplo...Feltham-v2.jpg (The report containing that photo is at http://rail-news.com/2009/11/17/100-...-flood-damage/ ) Now at http://rail-news.com/2009/11/19/100-...damage/--David Biddulph It's done it again. :-( I wish OE didn't keep gluing my sig to the end of a link. Should be http://rail-news.com/2009/11/19/100-...damage/--David BiddulphRowing web pages athttp://www.biddulph.org.uk/ |
Disruption at Feltham
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Bruce wrote: On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:07:19 -0600, wrote: Hmm. Looks to me like part of the top of the arch was filled with rubble. LSWR jerry building? The spandrels were always filled with rubble. Next question? Now that it's failed, does that make it a cockup spandrel? LOL! -- We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile. |
Disruption at Feltham
Bruce wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:18:36 GMT, "Richard J." wrote: I wonder why it was necessary to renew so much of the brickwork at the top of the arch (different colour bricks obvious in photo). This is pure speculation, but I'm wondering whether there was some earlier instability of the foundations that resulted in some movement higher up, which was just patched up rather than properly investigated. More likely, a combination of gradual long term settlement of the structure (it appears to be very old) and frost damage to the brickwork. Elsewhere on the South Western Division, I've seen an ex-LSWR bridge where the facing bricks have been replaced (untidily) with modern ones in just this way. The old ones were showing frost damage (not bad for 150 years) but the structure appears sound. This is just replacement of individual bricks, not whole courses. I get the feeling it's a one-size-fits-all replacement programme, hence the miscoloured bricks. Theo |
Disruption at Feltham
In article ,
(Theo Markettos) wrote: Elsewhere on the South Western Division, I've seen an ex-LSWR bridge where the facing bricks have been replaced (untidily) with modern ones in just this way. The old ones were showing frost damage (not bad for 150 years) but the structure appears sound. This is just replacement of individual bricks, not whole courses. I get the feeling it's a one-size-fits-all replacement programme, hence the miscoloured bricks. It's probable that bricks of the original colour aren't available. For some reason that's a big problem these days. We can't even get matching bricks for a housing scheme near me built in 1975, let alone matching 150 year old ones. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Disruption at Feltham
Latest report is that normal service will resume tomorrow morning:
http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/eng...9548b8faaad06\ 961215 Network Rail's press release shows the track work in progress, I can't work out from the pic if they've laid two tracks or just the one. Can anyone clarify? http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...ID=4827&NewsA\ reaID=2&SearchCategoryID=8 Paul S |
Disruption at Feltham
On Nov 22, 4:27*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: Latest report is that normal service will resume tomorrow morning: http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/eng...a1c9e4a1d13495... 961215 Network Rail's press release shows the track work in progress, I can't work out from the pic if they've laid two tracks or just the one. Can anyone clarify? http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...aspx?ReleaseID... reaID=2&SearchCategoryID=8 Paul S Try this link: http://tinyurl.com/yfhofpb CJB |
Disruption at Feltham
"CJB" wrote in message ... On Nov 22, 4:27 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: Latest report is that normal service will resume tomorrow morning: http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/eng...a1c9e4a1d13495... 961215 Network Rail's press release shows the track work in progress, I can't work out from the pic if they've laid two tracks or just the one. Can anyone clarify? I'll let you know tomorrow. Looks like the commute will take a little longer than usual, but not as long as it did last week. : ) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk