Jump to content
 

Southern Railway in the 1950s and onwards


Nearholmer
 Share

Recommended Posts

OK, picking up on JP's wise suggestion of a new thread for "The Southern Railway Management Team in Exile".

 

So, nationalisation didn't happen.

 

Whither the Southern?

 

No date limits, but let's start in the 1950s.

 

Seconds Out! Round One! Ding Ding!

 

We are currently on the Western division, assuming that the Eastern and Central have been fully electrified, except for a few tiny sprigs, which use DEMUs for passenger services.

 

Diesel locos:

 

- the 1600hp prototypes were only a route to a decently-powered main-line loco. By the mid-50s 2000hp was perfectly do-able, so I'm assuming that locos of that size are inter-running with BB on the heaviest trains out of Waterloo, with some 2400hp ones on order;

 

- there is a smaller diesel-electric loco for "anything a mogul can do", either from EE (a bit like a Class 20 with a cab at each end) or Sulzer (think Ireland), the first ones come out at about 800hp, but by the end of the 50s, they are being built at c1600hp (Oh, that's a Crompton!);

 

- SR remains " electric mad", with all sorts of bits interchangeable across the fleet, and MU capability between all the post-war stock, except the SUBs;

 

- big trains to Exeter get the big diesels, then through portions go on behind the small diesels, and purely local trains are all DEMUs;

 

- one freight concentration depot per 20 mile radius, with road distribution onwards;

 

- coal sidings remain, but are being replaced with coal concentration depots;

 

- the GWR has gone bankrupt (twice since the War), and it's SW routes are now run by a company that is 52% owned by the SR, and run as a puppet-state from Waterloo.

 

Kevin

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Western Division perhaps offers the most interesting speculation. But even the other Divisions might have seen some interesting advances in EMU designs if not held back by BR levels of investment.

And they would have that distinctive Bulleid look rather than BR Mk1.

Edited by Joseph_Pestell
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, maybe I was being a tad provocative with my GWR suggestion, but given the "thin-ness" of traffic west of Exeter, and the near-duplication of routes, something would surely have happened between the SR and GWR in that area. There were tentative plans for a merger or agreement between the LSWR and GWR over all this even back as far as 1912-13.

 

So, I'll behave myself, and suggest that there is a truce, and some kind of deal that upsets the Monopolies & Mergers Commission over traffic to Plymouth, but the North Devon and Cornwall coasts are the big issue: how to profit from the holiday traffic, while skinning-back the fixed costs, so that they don't kill the operation for the other 325 days of the year? It's the Cambrian Coast problem.

 

The interesting EMUs would have been whatever the equivalent of the EPBs was. Would the SR have gone for sliding doors and open saloons? Probably, but the economics would have been "dicey", because door-gear was still expensive to buy and maintain in the early 50s, and they needed an awful lot of cars, quickly. The Kent Coast stock I don't imagine being much different from CEPs. And, there wasn't really technology better than d.c. traction-motors, camshaft/resistor control, and EP braking, until the 1970s.

 

K

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the Southern Railway have been as technically conservative as the Southern region was? The spread of electrification was basically more of the same with some evolutionary improvements in rolling stock and operational practises.

 

How would the channel tunnel link have looked if it were the SR?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Well, maybe I was being a tad provocative with my GWR suggestion, but given the "thin-ness" of traffic west of Exeter, and the near-duplication of routes, something would surely have happened between the SR and GWR in that area. There were tentative plans for a merger or agreement between the LSWR and GWR over all this even back as far as 1912-13.

 

So, I'll behave myself, and suggest that there is a truce, and some kind of deal that upsets the Monopolies & Mergers Commission over traffic to Plymouth, but the North Devon and Cornwall coasts are the big issue: how to profit from the holiday traffic, while skinning-back the fixed costs, so that they don't kill the operation for the other 325 days of the year? It's the Cambrian Coast problem.

 

The interesting EMUs would have been whatever the equivalent of the EPBs was. Would the SR have gone for sliding doors and open saloons? Probably, but the economics would have been "dicey", because door-gear was still expensive to buy and maintain in the early 50s, and they needed an awful lot of cars, quickly. The Kent Coast stock I don't imagine being much different from CEPs. And, there wasn't really technology better than d.c. traction-motors, camshaft/resistor control, and EP braking, until the 1970s.

 

K

 

I'm not sure about sliding door stock. Slam door suburban stock could seat 120 per carriage (probably an average of about 90), way ahead of anything one can do with sliding doors. But I think they may have come up with a VEP equivalent earlier than they did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zomboid

 

Two thoughts:

 

- the SR had proven that steady evolution, near-rigid standardisation, and a tight eye to costs, blended with good opportunity-spotting, and brilliant marketing, worked a treat, so why divert from that?

 

- what great technical innovations are you thinking of? I can only think of 25kV OHLE electrification, and they couldn't, feasibly, have applied that to KC electrification (in say 1950-52). To Southampton and Bournemouth (c1960), still d.c., I think, to avoid the cost of dual-systems Waterloo-Woking, but maybe 25kV. To Salisbury, whatever had got to Basignstoke. To Exeter and beyond: diesel, the traffic is too thin for electrification to pay.

 

JP

 

You could well be right on the slam vs sliding question, as I said, dicey economics, and customers who want to sit down from Dorking, not stand up.

 

K

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think prior to nationalisation the Southern was home to a lot of innovation - certainly Mr Bulleid wasn't shy of trying new stuff, and no doubt would have had a hand in what was going on. I doubt they'd have used a different voltage, but might have been earlier adopters of things like silicon rectifiers (to be honest, I don't know how early BR were in that).

 

In other considerations, I highly doubt the route over Dartmoor would have closed, nor would the singling west of Salisbury, but whether much of the Padstow or Bude lines would have made it I somewhat doubt. The various other lines crossing Dorset, Hants and Sussex might have fared better too. Some would have gone, but I expect at least one of the routes to Midhurst would have lasted, as would the Mid Hants.

 

And what about the Joint lines? SDJR and MSW? Would the GWR have allowed Weymouth to become a Southern destination?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The power supply department of the SR was always about "neck and neck" with LT, putting both at the "leading but not bleeding edge" to borrow modern phraseology. Both trialled, then adopted, mercury-arc rectification at about the same time, ditto diode rectifiers. There was one trial diode substation in KC Phase 2 (details here http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/features/historical-features/kentcoast.html ), and, given the overall progress in the technology, I doubt that a continuing SR could have got there much sooner. Similarly with oil-filled HV cables, remote control equipment etc. BR(S) kept up pretty well.

 

I do think that serious consideration would have been given to 25kV, but if I'm right that electrification west of Salisbury could never have been justified, then they would probably have stuck with conductor rail d.c., because of the "network" benefits and the fact that conductor rail can be slapped down very easily, without disrupting traffic or incurring clearance costs.

 

I'm with you that some thinning of the network would have had to take place - sparse population densities, consideration of the arrival of better buses/roads, then private car ownership, and gradual loss of holiday trade. 'Nuff said.

 

I think the SR were quite heavily into bus companies, through part-ownerships, so I imagine something like the County Donegal, with a railway line providing a spine for road transport over a wide area.

 

K

Link to post
Share on other sites

That could have been a proper integrated system then, had the SR run buses to connect with trains on the main routes. Would probably have doomed more of the minor branches though. Would even Barnstaple have survived once freight dwindled, given that a bus could actually serve the villages and towns rather then a station in the valley (as at Eggesford/ Chulmleigh)? I guess that would depend on how bus technology developed as much as anything else.

 

If the company was run on purely commercial grounds, it's not impossible that there would be less of it left now than there actually is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed.

 

Sitting in 1955, I'm thinking seriously that we might not be able to make a railway pay long-term in North Devon and Cornwall, so maybe we drive costs down hard in these areas (cut staffing to the bone), and pull out altogether if either a major traffic source (think I holiday travel) dries-up, or a major chunk of infrastructure needs heavy expenditure (think Meldon Viaduct). Maybe we try to sustain to Ilfracombe, run busses from Barnstaple, and cede Padstow to the GWR (served via Bodmin).

 

What We really need to do is hold a gun to the head of the county council, to get them to either subsidise rail services, or improve the roads, which we will then run busses on.

 

K

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no reason the Southern withered arm could not have thrived well into the 1970s, much of the route has lousy road access even today.

 

The real problem was nationalisation, the Government could not pay what it owed for the war work the railways did so it had to nationalise and with that came reckless investment with no regard to a return on that investment.  

 

The southern got off lightly, saddled with 50 or so coal gobbling Pacifics it could well have done without which mainly replaced perfectly good economical and fast Adams and Drummond 4-4-0s. Most days there were two turns west of Exeter requiring 7p power, the Brighton Plymouth and a fast freight.

 

Excess staff became a problem, but only after a shortage of staff mainly in the London area.  The Southern avoided massive investment in shunting and hundreds of obsolete diesels which crippled BR.    If only common sense had prevailed, the T9s had been maintained and M7s 02 s etc continued at work reinforced by SRCR 0-4-4Ts displaced by electrification up till the 1970s by which time reliable Diesels, maybe even 75 mph road switchers to replace 60 MPH tanks instead of 30 Mph Gronks and wagon load freight may have continued.  The Southern had a tiny number of 0-6-0T shunters in the West , didn't really go in for shunting as a hobby/fetish like some other outfits and was actually well placed by 1/1/1948 for a bright future

Link to post
Share on other sites

DCB

 

"There is no reason the Southern withered arm could not have thrived well into the 1970s, much of the route has lousy road access even today."

 

I honestly don't agree. The lack of road access is a cause/affect (chicken or egg) of the fact that population densities are low. Put another way, nobody much lives there, and it is exceedingly difficult to make a railway pay in that environment, especially given good bus-services and rising car-ownership.

 

My gut feel is that, with a tight focus on profit, the SR would probably have tried very hard to cut costs and generate income, but if/when it couldn't generate enough, it would have closed bits with unsentimental swiftness. Starting with the NCR, which was a romantic lost-cause from the outset.

 

K

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Without doubt, more could have been done in the 1950's to streamline operation of rural lines and, therefore, reduce costs. Whether that would have been enough to save a line such as Halwill Jct to Wadebridge is questionable.

 

We tend to forget that back in the 60s people travelled a lot less than they do now. If these rural lines had survived the Beeching Axe and lasted until the 90s, traffic might then have started to increase to levels that made it more realistic to keep them going. But even today, many rural lines only keep going at the cost of high levels of subsidy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The thread started with discussion of what Southern motive power would be with particular reference to DEMUs and diesel-electric locomotives.

 

Given the weight of diesel engines relative to power, I think that a mainline DEMU would have to be a six-car unit. A Driving motor at one end with just a couple of bays of passenger accommodation, a large guard's/luggage compartment and the engine room. Then First Corridor, Buffet Second, Second Open, Second Corridor. And finally a Driving motor second open with perhaps another small guard's compartment. All of course in standard Bulleid pattern 64' design.

 

If I could pick up the right Bachmann Bulleid stock cheaply enough, I would be quite tempted to have a bash at it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that Plymouth, Tavistock, Okehampton and Crediton would have been enough to make it worthwhile attempting to compete with the GWR beyond Exeter, even if Meldon had started to look expensive. The branches though, I just don't see it. A GWR branch serving Bodmin, Wadebridge and Padstow seems more likely to sustain itself than the Halwill route, and Bude is tiny even now. Maybe the Barnstaple line as far as Bideford would work, so long as the people in the area want to go to Exeter rather than Taunton.

 

The SW main line beyond Salisbury could well have ended up like the GW line after Newbury, with very few stations but faster trains, in an effort to compete for the Plymouth and Exeter to London traffic, but that would depend on what the GW would have tried to do as well.

 

Traction wise, I wonder if they wouldn't have just got some 1600hp diesels to haul EMU stock beyond Salisbury - I think the conductor rail would probably have got that far once the Bournemouth line was electrified, to effectively eliminate non-electric traction from the SWML.

 

We'll need some electric locos as well then, primarily for freight, I think 2500hp in a Co-Co body would have been possible by the mid 50s as road power, and maybe another class of 1500hp road switcher electrics for shunting and the lesser routes. For the far west there would have to be some diesel road switchers for freight and shunting, which would have about 1500hp and could run in pairs for heavier trains.

 

I can see the Southern being able to compete with the Americans for speed when it comes to eliminating steam traction, much more than any of the other big 4 companies.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Zomboid

 

Your motive power roster is looking very like mine (we're only 100hp apart on the bigger diesel, and spot-on with the smaller one).

 

Fun as it might be to create a six-car mainline DEMU in model form, I'm sceptical about its place in the plan, preferring to schlep EMUs from Salisbury to Exeter, and Bournemouth to Weymouth with diesel locos.

 

For the (very few per day, even on Saturdays) through trains from Waterloo to west of Exeter, I think I will loco haul all the way, either on DE all the way, or by making some of my big diesels as EDs, so that they can run on the juice where it exists.

 

I really don't see that we can compete with the Paddington route for London-Plymouth traffic (SR tried, and failed, with the Devon Belle), because our route just takes too blooming long, so we try to eke the route out on purely local/regional traffic, driving economy, and being prepared to withdraw if that doesn't keep the numbers in the black.

 

K

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My electric locos will have ETH (we've ditched steam heat and vac brakes when we sold the last steam engine to the GWR in 1953...), so they'd run any loco hauled passenger trains where appropriate. Changing locos being a bad thing is only a recent development, so we'd be switching traction at the end of the 3rd rail. But if trains from East of Salisbury to beyond Exeter are rare, I don't see why we couldn't drag EMUs; if its good enough to get to Exeter...

 

Obviously our competitor on the SW traffic will be doing their own thing, but with our modern traction and high quality coaching stock, we could be offering 90mph running on much of the route to West, and there may be some opportunity to complete with our offering being a shining beacon of modernity. (If the GWR has any sense they'll be focussing their competitive efforts on the West Mids, surely more lucrative than Devon...). I'm not sure I'd write our offering off because of the Devon Belle - that was a Pullman train, which is possibly a bit too exclusive.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I suspect that Plymouth, Tavistock, Okehampton and Crediton would have been enough to make it worthwhile attempting to compete with the GWR beyond Exeter, even if Meldon had started to look expensive. The branches though, I just don't see it. A GWR branch serving Bodmin, Wadebridge and Padstow seems more likely to sustain itself than the Halwill route, and Bude is tiny even now. Maybe the Barnstaple line as far as Bideford would work, so long as the people in the area want to go to Exeter rather than Taunton.

 

The SW main line beyond Salisbury could well have ended up like the GW line after Newbury, with very few stations but faster trains, in an effort to compete for the Plymouth and Exeter to London traffic, but that would depend on what the GW would have tried to do as well.

 

Traction wise, I wonder if they wouldn't have just got some 1600hp diesels to haul EMU stock beyond Salisbury - I think the conductor rail would probably have got that far once the Bournemouth line was electrified, to effectively eliminate non-electric traction from the SWML.

 

We'll need some electric locos as well then, primarily for freight, I think 2500hp in a Co-Co body would have been possible by the mid 50s as road power, and maybe another class of 1500hp road switcher electrics for shunting and the lesser routes. For the far west there would have to be some diesel road switchers for freight and shunting, which would have about 1500hp and could run in pairs for heavier trains.

 

I can see the Southern being able to compete with the Americans for speed when it comes to eliminating steam traction, much more than any of the other big 4 companies.

 

There is an issue about how much current one could draw from a 650V third rail but just from the perspective of loco engineering the French CC7100 developed in the late 40s had more than 2500hp (4680 according to Wikipedia). Some of the CC7100 were equipped for third-rail pick up on the line from Chambery to the Italian frontier at Modane (Maurienne).

Edited by Joseph_Pestell
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

JP

 

The SR main-line power supplies were rated to supply 12 car trains (14 for KC) running at the then commercial speeds, so current supply wouldn't have been a problem.

 

Shoegear designs, to get all that current onto one loco, might have been a bit challenging, but the "Hornbys" managed it at c1500hp, and the KC locos had a short-term rating over 2500hp, so I think it would have been do-able.

 

And, if it was a mega-problem, they could have put shoes on the coaches, and jumpered to the loco.

 

K

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Don't forge that Bulleid was a constant tinkerer. Would he have managed to get Leader beyond attempts at proof of concept? if so, then we could have seen those working in various places?

 

Leader may have had some advantages over conventional steam locos. But it still had many of the drawbacks so I think he would have opted for electric and diesel-electric (or been ordered to do so).

Link to post
Share on other sites

JP

 

The SR main-line power supplies were rated to supply 12 car trains (14 for KC) running at the then commercial speeds, so current supply wouldn't have been a problem.

 

Shoegear designs, to get all that current onto one loco, might have been a bit challenging, but the "Hornbys" managed it at c1500hp, and the KC locos had a short-term rating over 2500hp, so I think it would have been do-able.

 

And, if it was a mega-problem, they could have put shoes on the coaches, and jumpered to the loco.

 

K

4REP units were 3300hp, though they had plenty of shoes. Delivering that kind of power at 750V shouldn't be a major issue on the supply side at least. Gapping would be more of an issue though.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, Mr Bulleid, brilliant, brilliant man! (Imagine gentle shaking of heads)

 

But, the Board wasn't entirely distressed when he left to head-up the new jointly-funded National Locomotives Testing facility, where his creative talents can probably be best deployed.

 

Mr Ivatt has proven to be an absolutely excellent appointment, with his greater sympathy for Diesel motive power, although, in view of his maturity, we don't expect him to remain in service much beyond 1952, and we are thinking carefully about the respective roles of the CME and the Chief Electrical Engineer, where Mr Cocks continues to do an excellent job. It may be, that in future, we opt to appoint a CM&EE, with electrical and mechanical assistants, at a slightly more junior level, to get balance.

 

K

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Far be it for me to comment on these ramblings,  but I will!  Au contraire with everybody else,  IMHO SR would have dumped everything further west than Salisbury!  It only went into darkest Cornwall to unite with the B & W tracks just because it was theirs anyway.  Never contributed a heck of a lot before or since which can be said of much of its lines West   Whatever made them think the NCR would ever make a reasonable profit wending its way from one hamlet to another trying to emulate the GW with its coastal holiday haunts.  It didn't go for freight; Delabole slate, some china clay the GW didn't get to and the odd general merchandise hardly paid the wages.  As has been mentioned, the plum port of Plymouth was too much further over the Moors to be competitive and look what happened to the short lived Ocean Liner traffic.  Exeter was served handsomely by the GW, providing a quicker service to the Capital, and everything between there and Salisbury was of little consequence plus the branch lines to the coast were an added expence.  It is a wonder in this day and age why SWT still bothers as they gave up on the Cornish business ages ago and it will be interesting to see how the Plymouth, Okehampton, Exeter revival fares, if it ever comes to pass.

 

Sure the old SR served a lot of places and was much loved no doubt, but that was an era before buses, cars and freeways which is the reasoning behind these comments.

 

Brian..

,

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...