Talk:Lickey Incline

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Trains Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Low This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
Low Importance: low within UK Railways WikiProject.
This article needs a map. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article. Once the requested map is added, remove the Mapneeded parameter from the {{TrainsWikiProject}} template call on this page to remove this map request.

Contents

[edit] Descending the Lickey - speed limits

In the 70s I often used to return on a Sunday night from Derby to Gloucester/Cheltenham, and the descent of the Lickey was often memorable. One night I'm sure that I didn't hear the brakes used at all, and the train was travelling like the clappers at the bottom! Not long after that, there was an incident, I recollect, and trains were _governed_ down to a rather tame 70mph. So, question - are the new 220s on this route speed-limited, and if so to what speed. Linuxlad 09:31, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Lickey Hills, Lickey Ridge, Lickey Country Park - ... we are grinding exceeding fine here dear chaps & chapesses! as far as the railtraveller is concerned. What she will notice (less so these days it's true), is travelling rather slowly uphill from Bromsgrove to Barnt Green, through open countryside of some pleasant character, with the prime mover on full bore. Lets try Lickey Ridge...:-) Linuxlad

Ps I'm told the speed limit down is now 80/90.

  • In LMS days descending trains were strictly required to slow to 10mph at the top and not exceed 27mph on the way down (including I presume through-braked passenger trains). Freight trains had to stop at the top to apply wagon brakes and not exceed 11mph. 213.78.101.13 12:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Steepest Sustained etc

I think we have to be careful not to overclaim for the Lickey. Firstly, numbers:- 1 in 37.7 rounds to 1 in 38 in my maths book. Secondly, I don't think the 'steepest sustained' can be regarded as unarguable. There are lines with steeper sections I gather (the old GBoR gives 3 steeper examples, one of 1 in 36 for 2 miles) - these could be _argued_ to be more steep and sustained.Conversely the Wath/Worsboro gradient up to Woodhead (for example) was slightly less steep at 1 in 40 but possibly longer - and certainly heavier work for the coal trains (often double-headed double banked, I gather) which plied it Linuxlad 12:09, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

In case you hadn't noticed, both the Cromford and High Peak Railway and the Woodhead Route are closed...
I have never seen it as 1 in 38, always 1 in 37, but if you get you're way no doubt you'll be wanting to describe the details of the vertical curve; " most is 1 in 37 but at the bit at the top it goes to in 40 for ten yards and then 1 in 50...". You're weasling your way around the subject for no good reason. Learn how to write English! Dunc|☺ 11:50, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

There are lots of gradients in and around 1 in 40 so the fact that the much vaunted 1 in 37 is really 1 in 38 IS relevant. The old Record Books were quite careful in qualifying the claim of the Lickey (*) - I suggest it behoves us to do similarly. Or do you have shares in the outcome! Bob aka Linuxlad (*They gave 3 steeper examples, neither of which were CHPR or Worsboro - namely

1) Mersey Tunnel bottom to James St station - 1 in 27;
2) two miles of 1 in 36 just south of Ilfracombe
3) Folkestone Harbour - 1 mile of 1 in 30.

Please check these out and report back if you wish to continue this issue constructively.)

Er, the LSWR main line is closed. The Folkestone Harbour branch is closed. There are more that are shorter sharper sections, elsewhere, but clearly you know what you're talking about! Dunc|☺ 12:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Just so! So why not leave it as it was - a carefully qualified claim or a qualitative one, but NOT a specious numerical one, with bad numbers to boot - Thank you for demonstrating your intelligence and patience :-)! Bob

Oh yes, too many hair-splitting qualifications would put off the less-informed visitor to the page.
I think the reason most people think of the Lickey is the fa=ct that it was and is on a heavily worked through route carrying heavy long-distance passenger and freight trains. Ilfracombe etc were not in the same league of importance. Afterbrunel 19:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge

MR 0-10-0 Lickey Banker describes a loco of which a single example was built, for working the Lickey Bank incline; I suggest it is merged into this article. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 14:12, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

No. Dunc|☺ 14:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I'd be opposed, too. Andy Mabbett 16:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Into which article? I'd be opposed anyway. Lickey Incline, Lickey Banker etc. are each sensible length self-contained articles. Chevin 19:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moorsom, the Lickey, & the CHPR

Josias Jessop is usually credited with the CHPR and his role is confirmed by the plaque on the Newhaven tunnel near Parsley Hay. But he died in 1826, apparently, so someone must have carried on. Was it actually Moorsom, as implied here? Info to CHPR Talk page please? Bob aka Linuxlad 21:25, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Moorsom probably later see CHPR talk page Chevin 09:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)