On 10/12/2013 17:55, Peter Masson wrote:
G Harman wrote

I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of
removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit
with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be.

The driver and fireman managed to jump out before the loco followed the
trucks into the lift shaft - very fortunately, as the loco ended up
upside down on top of the wrecked trucks.


Thanks, a quick google didn't bring up anything about their fate.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:56:36 -0600
wrote:
In article ,
(Peter Masson) wrote:

Spud wrote

Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had
been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the
90s then probably a single line connection would have been built by now
to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out
when any heavy overhauls are required.

Until the 1990s, when the site was required for building Waterloo
International, access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard.
W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI
worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C
originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist
to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were
being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the
bottom of the shaft.

Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it
was a bit short.

Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit
too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the
subconcious.

Including your school English lessons, too?

English lessons were for the idiots who couldn't handle science and maths.
But feel free to point out any grammatical errors.

--
Spud

In message , at 10:56:36
on Tue, 10 Dec 2013, remarked:
aiui the trains are no longer interoperable, even if once upon a time
they were delivered from the same production line.

What are the major differences now (other than the interior decor)?

aiui, Central has a degree of automatic operation, and a higher 4th
rail.

Depends which you think is the fourth rail. The outside (positive) rail is
the higher one and that is commonly the third.

I was under the impression that the centre rail was both the "fourth"
and the one which was higher than normal.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000
August West wrote:
The entity calling itself d wrote:

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:

Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it
was a bit short.

Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit
^^^^^
too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the
^^^
subconcious.
^^^^^^^^^^^

Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you
don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should
take remedial English lessons yourself?

--
Spud

Peter Masson wrote
G Harman wrote

I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of
removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit
with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be.

The driver and fireman managed to jump out before the loco followed the
trucks into the lift shaft - very fortunately, as the loco ended up upside
down on top of the wrecked trucks.

The end of the Star report reads:
Said Engine-driver Wheeler as he went off duty after the crash: "I had just
stopped the engine after backing the trucks on to the lift. It seemed no
time at all before we started to slide back. I gave a yell and jumped for
it."
Fireman Sutton, also going off duty, said: "It was the first time I had done
this particular job. I was on the engine platform when I felt it moving
back. I guessed something was wrong at once and jumped off as the engine
skidded back."

The Evening News has:
The driver and fireman, seeing the trucks start slipping, leapt off the
footplate just before the engine fell.

and the Evening Standard has
Fireman A. W. Sutton and Driver A. Wheeler jumped clear before the engine
followed the trucks.

All three papers have a picture of the engine lying wheels up at the bottom
of the shaft (which doesn't look so deep when it's full of locomotive); the
Evening Standard also got a picture of the top of the shaft. Either the
Evening News got to the scene before the others or someone in their art
department drew in some clouds of steam...

(all courtesy of an envelope of apparently random cuttings left by my
father)

wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000
August West wrote:
The entity calling itself d wrote:

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:

Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it
was a bit short.

Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit
^^^^^
too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the
^^^
subconcious.
^^^^^^^^^^^

Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you
don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should
take remedial English lessons yourself?

Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling.

On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:45:20 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000
August West wrote:
The entity calling itself d wrote:

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:

Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because
it
was a bit short.

Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit
^^^^^
too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in
the
^^^
subconcious.
^^^^^^^^^^^

Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you
don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should
take remedial English lessons yourself?

Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling.

Nope. Missing it out in a contraction is a spelling mistake, not grammar since
the grammar doesn't change without it as there is no version of "it's" without
an apostrophe.

Even there was , you still goofed on 2 out of 3. Back to school for the pair
of you.

--
Spud

On 2013-12-11, d
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:45:20 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000
August West wrote:
The entity calling itself d wrote:

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:

Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because
it
was a bit short.

Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that
^^^^^
bit too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something
^^^
in the subconcious.
^^^^^^^^^^^

Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you
don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should
take remedial English lessons yourself?

Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling.

Nope. Missing it out in a contraction is a spelling mistake, not grammar
since the grammar doesn't change without it as there is no version of
"it's" without an apostrophe.

Even there was , you still goofed on 2 out of 3. Back to school for the
pair of you.

A nice illustration of the depth of your ignorance. "it's" with an
apostrophe is always and without exception a shortened "it is". "its"
without an apostrophe is a possessive pronoun, like his and her, as in
"the dog retreated to its kennel".

Apostrophes are used for contractions like "it's" and "you're" and
"can't".

Apostrophes are also used for the possessive form of nouns like "the
cat's whiskers" and "the dog's breakfast" and "the dogs' breakfasts"
(and moves depending whether the owning noun is singular or plural and
whether the plural does or does not end in "s").

Apostrophes are not correct in non-possessive plurals, though using them
there is now a very common mistake.

Also,

Even there was ,
^ ^

are not spelling mistakes, Whether they are grammar errors or not might
be debatable, but they are definitely errors.

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry

wrote:

there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe.

Oh dear, your English lessons really were truncated. As a matter of
interest, is English actually your first language?

On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:

there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe.

Oh dear, your English lessons really were truncated. As a matter of
interest, is English actually your first language?

*shrug*

There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school
than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. I gave up english
as soon as I could.

And if there are an errors in the above I don't give a flying **** not that
you can tell the difference between spelling and grammar anyway.

--

Spud