I think you are correct there. Also most steam locomotives were heavy beasts, so unlike a modern DMU or EMU they could “cut” their way through the leaf accumulation on the track.
Good point, and that would also explain why leaves-on-the-line always seemed to be a London-commuter problem, given the dominance of EMUs. (I wonder if the leaf mulch cause problems with the third rail as well?)
You are all right about the “wrong” snow and the leaves being more of a real problem than they sound: it’s just that if that is the phrasing chosen to inform the travelling public, then it’s predictable that will will all laugh. Well, laugh bitterly. And grumble.
I remember travelling from Manchester to Canterbury two days into the chaos after the Hatfield crash, when all sorts of speed restrictions were in place on huge lengths of track. On the Virgin train down to London, the conductor was making regular apologies about everything, giving a decent explanation. On the Canterbury train, IIRC then run by Connex, and on several stations en route where we were stuck for a long time, there were announcements of delays due to “adverse rail conditions”, with people clearly reading off a single head-office-prepared speech which said absolutely fuck-all.
That sounds like a typical Toronto winter, now that things are warming up. We didn’t reach -20C at all last winter, and had almost no snow. Outside the city at higher elevations further from the lake, of course, it was colder and snowier.
One of the undiscussed causes of harsh winters in the UK is the Prime Minister in power at the time of a Big Freeze.
Since records began in the 17th century the 9 coldest winters (or winters during which the coldest month(s) occurred) can be broken down as follows:
Conservative PM (3)
Tory PM (2)
Whig PM (1)
Liberal PM (1)
Labour PM (1)
No PM: James II (1)
Equating the Tories with the Conservatives and the Whigs with the Liberals, my book on the chance of any given winter being seriously cold looks like this:
Conservative PM: 4/5
Liberal PM: 7/2
Labour PM: 8/1
Catholic Monarch: 8/1
As long as Tony Blair remains in power (or his party successor) the chance of any given winter temperatures plummeting to excessively low numbers for months on end is a mere 1 in 9. In contrast, under Conservative leader David Cameron we would be odds on to freeze to death between now and next March.
I can’t give political advice in this forum but the book tells the story. Either keep voting (New) Labour or try to get the Act of Settlement repealed.
Waitaminnit. In the UK, Tories and Conservatives aren’t the same? Whigs and Liberals aren’t the same? In Canada, Tory is a nickname for (Progressive) Conservative, and I think Whig is a very uncommon nickname for Liberal (more usual nickname is Grit. I think.)
Ask them to remind you about “rain” too.
The Liberal Party grew out of the Whigs in the 1830’s. In 1988 most of the Liberal Party merged with the Social Democrats to form the current Liberal Democrat Party. The use of Whig as a nickname for a Liberal Democrat is rare.
Robert Walpole (Whig) was PM in the ultra cold winter of 1740 while the Earl of Rosebery (Liberal) led the country through another freezing period in 1895.
The Conservative Party is descended from the Tories. The new name was officially adopted in the 1830s when the party was led by Robert Peel. Tory is a very common nickname for a Conservative.
The cold winters of 1795 and 1814 occurred during the stewardships of Pitt the Younger (Tory) and the Earl of Liverpool (Tory) respectively. The three Conservative leaders responsible for extremely low temperatures were the Earl of Aberdeen (1855), Benjamin Disraeli (1879) and Alec Douglas-Home (1963).
Hangonaminnitherecobber.
Contrary to popular belief it isn’talways hissing down here in Blighty.
As a matter of fact we have had a relatively dry year and It wouldn’t surprise me if a state of drought was declared at any time.
Well we do tend to panic if we aint wet through 4 days out of 7
I’m getting very confused with this weather stuff, Central Trains have started their “leaf fall timetable” which means they’ve cut the number of services on the lines I use, but they compensate by doubling the number of carriages per train.
But the timetable only goes up to December and given the state of the trees around where I work, most of the leaves will still be on them!
Oh, give me a nice wet morning, at least I know where I am with rain.
I’d add to what Chowder said, in that Amsterdam and Brussels both have on average higher amounts of inches of rainfall a year but neither of them are remarked on as rainy cities, unlike London which people are forever remarking on as a wet town (often without ever having been here). I’ve heard the comment that it rains in London every day from foreigners more than once - I’ve lived here my whole life and I can assure you that it doesn’t, otherwise it would be a marsh or sub-tropical rain forest…
There’s “measurable rainfall” about 150 days a year in SE England, two days out of five. I don’t how much rain you need to have before its measurable, but I’m guessing not very much. I would estimate that it is actually raining here about 3% of the time. That’s assuming two hours of rain in an average rainy day, which may be too high.
I meant to add that the real problem with the English climate is not the rain, but the clouds. It’s often grey and overcast or mostly cloudy. Although these last few days it’s been beautiful.
Usram Oh c’mon man, this year has been fantastic so far. Very little rain, plenty of current and altho’ it’s a tad chilly early on it soon warms up.
At the moment, here in * rainy* Manchester the sun is up, it’s warm and it’s just turned 2 in the afternoon.