Talk:Lickey Incline

message: 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)
thread_title: Descending the Lickey - speed limits

message: 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)
replies: text: No. Dunc|☺ 14:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be opposed, too. Andy Mabbett 16:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 

message: 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)
replies: text: Moorsom probably later see CHPR talk page Chevin 09:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  UPDATE: The Lickey Incline article includes a reference to the following paper: Hodgkins, D.J., (1983) Captain Moorsom and the Attempt to Revive the Cromford And High Peak Railway, Derbyshire Archaeological Journal Vol 103 Pp 137‑159 Chevin (talk) 15:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Moorsom, the Lickey, & the CHPR

message: Class 150s are certainly not banned from the lickey, as I had one over it yesterday on the 1613 off Bromsgrove, which according to driver is booked a Class 150, as it does Stratford - Worcester Shrub Hill via Moor Street then Shrub Hill - Birmingham New Street via Bromsgrove,Lifford East Junction,Bordersley Junction and Proof House Junction. 94.192.241.209 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 20:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Class 150s Not Banned

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lickey Incline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050201053246/http://lickeyarchive.photobook.org.uk/ to http://lickeyarchive.photobook.org.uk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm particular concerned the need to WP:VERIFY is continuing to be ignored and looking particularly in the section "Operation in steam days" there is multiple issues of use of failure to cite, non-wikilinked railway technology and reading (Maggs,2013,Ch. 5 "Working the Lickey Incline") possible discrepencies.  This section is likely to be subject to a heavily pruned re-write to that which has been or can easily be cited.  Thankyou.08:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues July 2020

message: Per  in which the summary was dubious and in view of the longer explanation at  I am minded the suggestion that this story rooted from a Stretton suggestion may be true, and may need to thank  pointing this out.  I have therefore removed the claimed performance of the Bury 0-4-0 in climbing the Lickey as that comes as part of the same claim.  I understand it to be the case P. C. Dewhurst did do some theoretical comparisons of contemporary locomotives against the Norris Type A extra bank locomotives in a presentation to the Civil Engineers.  I  need to look at this more fully.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bury challenge claim 

message: - this is definitely supported by Casserley, I need to dig it out and check the page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  GWR 9400 class