Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jul 19, 2006 14:49:00 GMT
Ok then, how about somewhere around washford, in the sidings there (is that where that new bit of track is going?)?
|
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jul 19, 2006 14:59:01 GMT
The answer to this problem is so simple. The exact location of the plate is......
....fixed to the surface of a sleeper.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jul 19, 2006 19:09:41 GMT
On a purely literal basis CSLR can't be faulted..........
WSR runs on mainly wooden (new) sleepers, some concrete from a BR experiment in the 50s and one stretch on steel (tinplate, Hornby!) sleepers from another experiment in the 40s (see - NOTHING is new!).
When the extra sidings were being put in at Bishop's Lydeard some years ago, for the first time second-hand sleepers were bought since they were not running lines. They came from London Transport......the rest you can work out!
So, the exact location is the lead to Nos 1&2 up sidings, Bishop's Lydeard, West Somerset Railway.
The really odd thing is that I have walked that route to pick up my train many times in the last 10 years since the sidings were installed, but Monday was the first time I spotted that plate.
BTW - photo taken on the amazing camera that is built into the k750i phone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2006 19:18:16 GMT
Okay. It's obvious as to the clues that this plate is on a wooden sleeper between two stations on the WSR... Just *how* exact do we need to be? Between the two stations, xxx yards from x station ...?
I'll let everyone else who hasn't yet entered have a bash at deciphering the location.
good luck guys and gals!
EDIT: oops, must make note to read thread properly before posting. Looks like Phil gets to keep his £10...
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jul 19, 2006 21:53:23 GMT
Looks like Phil gets to keep his £10... I don't give away my cash THAT easily (I have scottish blood in me: not much but just enough.......)! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2006 21:54:59 GMT
I don't give away my cash THAT easily (I have scottish blood in me: not much but just enough.......)! ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jul 19, 2006 23:02:01 GMT
I don't give away my cash THAT easily (I have scottish blood in me: not much but just enough.......)! You also gave us all a clue that really did make it 'Impossible':- Factually you have it correct - the plate was NOT removed whilst resleepering, which is why it is hundreds of miles from its stated location. The distance by road between the original location and Bishop's Lydeard is barely 160 miles (even less if you travel in a straight line)   Although, maybe a junkie crow flying via the Met Bar and some of your distant Scottish relatives could notch it up a bit. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jul 20, 2006 1:52:40 GMT
Well I was getting closer - it's a shame you (Phil) revealed all before I got to Bishops Lydeard ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jul 20, 2006 6:59:08 GMT
The distance by road between the original location and Bishop's Lydeard is barely 160 miles (even less if you travel in a straight line) Although, maybe a junkie crow flying via the Met Bar and some of your distant Scottish relatives could notch it up a bit. Ah, but to a scientist 160 does qualify as 'hundreds' - 1.6 hundreds to be exact. Sorry if that added confusion though. |
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jul 20, 2006 8:24:14 GMT
The distance by road between the original location and Bishop's Lydeard is barely 160 miles (even less if you travel in a straight line) Although, maybe a junkie crow flying via the Met Bar and some of your distant Scottish relatives could notch it up a bit. Ah, but to a scientist 160 does qualify as 'hundreds' - 1.6 hundreds to be exact. Sorry if that added confusion though. Which just goes to prove why - For every thousand scientists out there getting it wrong, there is a little man in a shed somewhere getting it right.I suspect that the scientist that dreamed up the 'hundreds' rule was probably on the same hallucinogen as the crow. |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jul 20, 2006 9:30:58 GMT
Blame it on Napoleon and the metric system!!
For example the exact meaning of 1.9 kilometres is '1.9 thousands of metres', and 21 microseconds means '21 millionths of seconds'
Before metric, each unit had its own specific use, including such things as furlongs, chains and guineas.
|
|
|
|
Post by CSLR on Jul 20, 2006 10:19:33 GMT
Blame it on Napoleon and the metric system!! For example the exact meaning of 1.9 kilometres is '1.9 thousands of metres', and 21 microseconds means '21 millionths of seconds' Before metric, each unit had its own specific use, including such things as furlongs, chains and guineas. But is was not Napoleon that introduced legislation that tried to force us to use the metric system. I still prefer the measuring system that uses, feet, inches, chains, rods and poles. But then again, what was wrong with the Megalithic yard? |
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Jul 20, 2006 10:36:57 GMT
what was wrong with the Megalithic yard? As long as the Megalithic yard owner's dog was properly under control, nothing. ;D |
|
