|
|||
author | remove search highlighting | ||
---|---|---|---|
posted: 7 Aug 2012 00:50 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
New bullhead turnouts being installed at Exeter: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/59971-good-news-from-riverside/ http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/59973-brand-new-bullhead-points/ |
||
Last edited on 7 Aug 2012 02:02 by Martin Wynne |
|||
posted: 7 Aug 2012 08:51 from: JFS
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
The unanswered question is - why bullhead??? Many thanks for posting the link. Regards, Howard. |
||
posted: 7 Aug 2012 10:00 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
JFS wrote: The unanswered question is - why bullhead???Hi Howard, Least expense I would think. The rails and fittings are probably refurbished material lifted from elsewhere, on new timbers. And using bullhead turnouts for renewal means they can be drop-in replacements for what was there before, requiring minimal disturbance to the existing sidings. The basic REA design for those turnouts is now getting on for 100 years old. There can't be many things where modern equipment is still being made to such a long-lasting design, almost unchanged. regards, Martin. |
||
posted: 7 Aug 2012 13:43 from: Simon Dunkley
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I always understood that bullhead was still preferred in areas of heavy use. I don't know exactly why, although I could speculate, nor do I know if this is still the case or ever was. Perhaps someone on here who works on the real railways can shed light on this? |
||
posted: 7 Aug 2012 14:06 from: Judi R
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
JFS wrote: The unanswered question is - why bullhead???As it says in the original post - to fit the existing geometry. Bullhead turnout geometry is very different to flat bottom geometry and it's far quicker, easier and cheaper to relay like-for-like. Flat bottom rail is stronger than bullhead and is preferred for heavily trafficked routes. Interesting set of pictures. Judi R PS: When London Euston Station was relayed in the 1960s for the electrification works, the station throat was relayed in bullhead because they couldn't make a flat bottom layout fit around all the overhead structures. Only when it was relayed again in the late 90s did we take the bull by the horns. |
||
Last edited on 7 Aug 2012 15:28 by Judi R |
|||
posted: 7 Aug 2012 16:45 from: JFS
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Judi R wrote:
I could buy the geometry argument - although looking at the acres of wasteland surrounding the few sidings that constitute Riverside these days I can't imagine that a few feet either way would be an insurmountable obstacle!. But why NEW? Although the OP suggests that the rail might be secondhand (it does not have much wear), the chairs, stretchers, the crossing and everything else is brand new. I can't believe that there aren't a few secondhand turnouts lying around (yes I can really). My sneaking suspicion is that the reasons are much more "legal" than technical - renewing "like for like" means that it does not need to meet current Standards. (which always cost a fortune to meet). This, after all, is why Stockport is signalled from mechanical boxes - it was "not possible" to meet the current Standards, so like for like it had to be. Ridiculous or what? I notice that the rodding passing under the turnout in one pic is Great Western - this particular stuff was used under rails even after channel was in general use. I suppose the insulated sole plate and stretchers are needed in case supervision of the area is turned over to the West of UK Network Management Centre located at Inversnecky or somesuch. Best wishes, Howard. |
||
Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |