Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Why does it mention Rutland? 
 

Anyone who fancies adding in “specials” now has a draft WTT to try it on, and will discover that it isn’t easy finding paths on a singleminded railway with oodles of junctions.

 

If we have fruit, or quick-wilting vegetables, to ship-out, what is really needed is a train early-evening going to the metropoli (sp?) “beyond”, that can take either entire van loads or a good number of baskets and crates. Then a local service to connect into it.

 

I would probably extend the shift of the loco that has been pilot all day at CA, and have that run about the place with a few vans, connecting at either BM or AC with this putative long-distance train. The timing of the mixed can easily be held-back to suit.

 

I had, somewhat carelessly, assumed that the fruit growing district would be that served by the BLT, for no better reason than that the BLT was a mirror of the W&UT which did serve a fruit-growing district.

 

Sheer laziness and lack of originality on my part, I'm afraid.

 

If that were to remain the case, the traffic could come off the BLT at AC and be attached there to a train to the Great Beyond (a GER service to the Smoke , and, indeed, the traffic would probably use GER Westinghouse fitted Sundry Vans on the BLT).

 

HOWEVER, I suspect that my lazy assumptions lie exposed; the district between Bishop's Lynn and wherever Castle Aching is said to lie is probably somewhere in the area of Grimston and Pott Row, noted by Kelly as mostly light and gravelly soil, with some sand and chalk, with chief crops of wheat, barley, oats, turnips, 'mangold-wurtzel' (note spelling), and grass.  

 

I am insufficiently familiar with this stretch of land, but it doesn't strike me as particularly promising orchard country.  I would be happy to learn more.

 

Victorian market-gardens and commercial orchards were more likely, I suggest, to have been found in areas of heavy clay soils in the south and east Norfolk, as orchards were favoured by such soils in the Fens; I am familiar with the orchard country lying between Wisbech and Lynn, but I suspect I am wrong to have assumed its continuance on the lands to the east of the Great Ouse, where the soil is light and sandy in contrast. 

 

We must look elsewhere on the system for our fruit!

 

EDIT: Post crossed with that of Wagonman, who has confirmed that the BLT ran on the wrong side of the Ouse for fruit!

 

 

1 hour ago, petethemole said:

I would expect grain traffic to be dominated by barley for brewers.  A local maltings would receive grain in and ship malt out (like Snape).  Some wheat and oats would be milled locally for the local market but bagged grain to larger mills out of your area would probably be loaded in sheeted open wagons in your period.   A good resource for the number of active mills in Norfolk is:  http://www.norfolkmills.co.uk/mills.html

A lot of the local windmills appear to go out of business in the 1890s.

 

 

 

Yes, and these things are planned for Achingham, which has extensive rail-served maltings, inspired by the set-up at Dereham. 

 

1809211214_Dereham(4).jpg.d3d4f65e5cb266bc58691cc03b842937.jpg

 

I had also wanted to put a watermill on the outskirts of Achingham, with loads in and out carted by road. 

 

My favourite has to be:

 

1935595200_BurnhamOveryLowerMill(26).JPG.efd74cf6dad9ed54e5b6a4980b29ec29.JPG

 

 

1 hour ago, jcredfer said:

When I was posted, or working, in Norfolk, the presence of vast acres of Sugar Beet was very evident.  {As, at appropriate times, was the reek from the Beet extraction factories!}

 

 

 

38 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Sugar beet seems to have been a post-Great War innovation, in response to sugar shortages due to the difficulties of import during the war. I'm fairly sure it can be discounted as a traffic for 1905. If there is some experimental gentleman farmer in the area, he's probably doing his own processing.

 

And, yes, I think we established at some point that sugar beet was in its pioneering or experimental phase at the time, rather than the ubiquitous crop it subsequently became.

 

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Sugar beet seems to have been a post-Great War innovation, in response to sugar shortages due to the difficulties of import during the war. I'm fairly sure it can be discounted as a traffic for 1905. If there is some experimental gentleman farmer in the area, he's probably doing his own processing.

 

Apologies, you are perfectly correct, The Beet industry was indeed commenced during the Great War and the factories were developed in the early Twenties.  :blush:

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Sugar beet seems to have been a post-Great War innovation, in response to sugar shortages due to the difficulties of import during the war. I'm fairly sure it can be discounted as a traffic for 1905. If there is some experimental gentleman farmer in the area, he's probably doing his own processing.

 

Unlikely that any individual farmer would be able to extract the sugar and crystallise it successfully.   On the face of it a simple extraction process is anything but and it seems is only likely to be successful on an industrial scale.  

 

There was a program some years ago on the TV where two teams of young scientists competed.  One to get sugar from beet and the other to get sugar from cane.  The caners succeeded but the beeters failed to get the sugar to crystallise.

 

 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Grimston and Pott Row are on what I would call a chalk based soil. I've not seen any evidence of orchards or anything other than 'normal' arable farming in that area. From memory lots of barley were grown there when I was a lad...

 

Andy G

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, uax6 said:

Grimston and Pott Row are on what I would call a chalk based soil. I've not seen any evidence of orchards or anything other than 'normal' arable farming in that area. From memory lots of barley were grown there when I was a lad...

 

Andy G

 

That certainly fits what Kelly's Directory claims for that district; light and gravelly soil, with some sand and chalk, with chief crops of wheat, barley, oats, turnips, mangold-wurzel, and grass 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been to and fro along there a few times over recent years, and my memory is of fairly gentle, but quite long, hills, pasture and arable fields, gradually becoming more wooded as you go North. I seem to recall one small orchard (domestic scale) near a church as you approach a crossroads, and seeing some root crop being heaved out in huge volume quite close to CA (parsnips, I think, but I was more concerned about whether the driver of the truly humongous tractor and trailer had seen me, than in the actual crop!).

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I’ve been to and fro along there a few times over recent years, and my memory is of fairly gentle, but quite long, hills, pasture and arable fields, gradually becoming more wooded as you go North. I seem to recall one small orchard (domestic scale) near a church as you approach a crossroads, and seeing some root crop being heaved out in huge volume quite close to CA (parsnips, I think, but I was more concerned about whether the driver of the truly humongous tractor and trailer had seen me, than in the actual crop!).

 

The sort of country the Bishop's Lynn Tramway is supposed to traverse. 

 

Here is the view along the Lynn Road to Roydon.  It's arable, with heathland - Roydon Common - to the right and there are plenty of woods, and the road climbs through the trees in the distance.  I do worry about Toby coping with those gradients!

 

 1661722652_LynnRdlookingWtoRoydon.png.67d71ca459f9d8889523c72f761ee0c3.png

 

Moving further east, here is a minor road to the south of Grimston.

 

784038727_MassinghamRdSofGrimston.png.a3cc7569c2346065101ecce5fbb8a2a7.png

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving on .....  Hillingham

 

1945154600_Routes-Copy-Copy.jpg.75ed66690399215d24a4fbdbd66d588f.jpg.d554859e19170f869918eb0ff6f410d1.jpg

 

 

This is where the WNR  descends a hill to cross the M&GNJ.   

 

239725064_Picture6-Copy.png.5a37b686e05b83f232c4b0d70d0c346c.png

 

Here, we are here standing on the road, looking southwards. The old course of the Joint is represented in ochre.  Clearly the WNR will need to be on an embankment at this point in order to bridge the MGN and the road.

 

78636483_Picture4-Copy.png.3fd7ec9c268005da23562f165e04f5b1.png

 

Looking north from the same spot on the road, we see the course of the WNR with the village of Hillingham top right of the picture. 

 

1423353467_Picture5-Copy.png.ef41cc787cfbadb78eddbfc944ebd87b.png

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 5
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, Edwardian said:

1308838743_Farm-LandUse1903.png.5ebdcab95e3b1243648e502f4aaed09c.png

EDIT: The reference to Rutland is intriguing; typo?

 

I suspect so: even now, that would be almost 3 inhabited houses per person, and back then, 4 or 5.

It’s also only about 94,000 acres…

 

Edit: the quoted acreage is about right for Norfolk. 

 

Edited by Regularity
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so much a reflection of current modelling efforts (still chomping through Cambrian Kits WN wagons), but an effort to complete 'the learning' in relation to the planned Midland train.

 

The current plan is to have a fictitious portion of "the Leicester", comprising a clerestory 6-wheel full brake (Slaters) and two Ratio Clayton bogie clerestories.   Suitable motive power would ordinarily be M&GNR (and I'd ideally like a Johnson C Class 4-4-0 for this), but can be a MR locomotive if necessary.

 

For this we have settled on long-time Leicester resident, 890 Class 2-4-0 No.69A.

 

In the past Stephen has helpfully provided notes on how this locomotive likely appeared in 1905 (the photo we have of her at South Lynn shows her late 1906 to 1907 condition, he has reasoned).

 

Here is another class member that hopefully better reflects the condition we're aiming for*:

 

434561314_890Class24-0No.899atGloucestercirca1905.jpg.0095fb111a5616f61aecd3c9f5913055.jpg

 

Further, Stephen has kindly instructed me in the differences between this loco and whatever Johnson 2-4-0 Ratio thought it was modelling HERE

 

He closed with the line, "That's enough for now; I'll come back to the tender later".

 

So, please might I now trespass further on his knowledge and generosity by asking what I need to know about 69A's tender? 

 

 

* If not, I apologise, but I am in no position to second guess the Midland Railway Society website!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
Picture
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some further thoughts on services.

 

1. Double-track section

 

Kevin has, I think anticipated, the need for a double-track section.  

 

I suspect this is mere necessity:

 

(i) Both WNR longer distance services (from Norwich, Bury and Cambridge (GE) and GE services from London) join the Birchoverham - CA line at Aching Constable North Junction (ACNJ)

(ii) At Hillingham, they are joined by services off the MGN (longer distance from Leicester (MR) and from Boston (GNR) and MGN from South Lynn)

 

It is suggested that the track is doubled from ACNJ to Birchoverham Market, thus:

 

690987495_Routes-Copy-Copy-Copy(2).jpg.dcd06ef2cfc9485d75f2df8197d5bf86.jpg

 

I trust that a short double-track section does not do violence to the character of the WNR.

 

2. The longer distance WNR services

 

I posit three routes. It will be seen from the version of the system map below that, in order to plot distances, I have named the two junctions for their approximate Real World locations and added this in green to the map. Average mainline speed for a passenger train is assumed to be 30mph.

 

570410314_SystemMap-Copy-Copy.jpg.c162ffb6928bdce4d4d4c3505b2a02b5.jpg

 

Norwich West - Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea (62 miles):
Norwich West – Cockley Cley Junction: 27 miles
Cockley Cley Junction – Wormegay Junction: 10 miles
Wormegay Junction – ACNJ: 10 miles
ACNJ - Hillingham - 5 miles
Hillingham -  Birchoverham Market: 3 miles
Birchoverham Market – Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea: 7 miles

 

Bury Mildenhall Road- Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea (62 miles):
Bury Mildenhall Road - Cockley Cley Junction: 27 miles
Cockley Cley Junction – Wormegay Junction: 10 miles
Wormegay Junction – ACNJ: 10 miles
ACNJ - Hillingham - 5 miles
Hillingham -  Birchoverham Market: 3 miles
Birchoverham Market – Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea: 7 miles

 

Cambridge (GE) - Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea (63 miles):
Cambridge (GE) – Magdalen Road (GE): 34 miles
Magdalen Road (GE) - Wormegay Junction: 4 miles
Wormegay Junction – ACNJ: 10 miles
ACNJ - Hillingham - 5 miles
Hillingham -  Birchoverham Market: 3 miles
Birchoverham Market – Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea: 7 miles

 

Any thoughts welcome. 

 

3. Stock for the longer distance WNR services

 

Perhaps we should assume two trains, for each route, with spare locos and sets stabled at Aching Constable? 

 

Norwich services will require the small 4-4-0s, and perhaps also Cambridge. Bury can remain the province of 2-4-0s/0-4-2s. 

 

static-assets-upload12951769604562950179.jpg.3959c6403b141ca557253ccd225febf6.jpg

 

For carriage stock, I have assumed 6-wheel coaches of c. 30'-32'.  These should represent an evolution in style from the 1870s 4-wheel coaches.  I favour an 1880s style that has the more modern recessed waist panels, yet retains square lower window/panel corners with larger radius top corners. Similar, but different, from GER stock.

 

1280px-GER_Third_1380_2019.jpg.535c3344fe25942fab9eed5d7ae4a530.jpg

 

Then there should be some 1890s stock in the 'universal style' of small radius corners to all lights and panels. All this stock will be built, and will remain, with gas-lighting.  Journeys are no more than about 1 hour, so there is no need for lavatory accommodation.  There is no need for any corridor/semi-corridor coaches or any 'on board' catering. The Hattons Genesis generic 6-wheelers would be a perfect source for these.

 

H4-6T-501A_web1.png.fbe05f9da8c53ab4bddce0e146f780b7.png

 

Suggested formations are:

 

Luggage Brake / Luggage First-Second Composite / Luggage First-Second Composite / Third / Third / Brake Third 


Luggage Brake / First / Second / Third / Third / Brake Third 

 

Again, any thoughts welcome


 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kingfisher9147 said:

There has been some brass kits of gnr coaches on ebay of late. Could you not adapt ratio kits. Worsley works or 3d print might be the only other option. For tram style coach, Bachmann Thomas range might be useful. 

Mike 

 

Thanks, muchly.

 

The Plan so far:

 

- Tram Stock: GER stock is W&UT, so D&S and Eveleigh Creations etched kits.  WNR stock will derive from plastic tram kits!

 

- WNR 4-wheelers: Mainstay of WNR local/branch coaching stock will be the 3D print MC&WCo 1870s coaches, and I have a cunning plan forming with regard to Worsley Works LT&SR body kits.

 

- WNR 6-wheel coaches for the longer distance services will be largely a mix of further 3D print commissions and Hattons Genesis

 

- WNR 4-wheel stock for the minor branches: An assortment of surviving 1860s Joseph Wright/MC&WCo WNR coaches and second-hand 1860s ECR/GER coaches

 

- GER coaches are D&S and, mainly, Eveleigh Creations etched kits.  I am planning a bit of a session on those next month.

 

- GNR coaches: I will try the Diagram 3D layered card body kits as a basis

 

- MR Coaches: Slaters and Ratio plastic kits

 

- MGN: A mix of MGN stock (which will probably have to be scratch-built, and MR Clayton 6W and the aforesaid GNR 6W coaches

 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

It is suggested that the track is doubled from ACNJ to Birchoverham Market, thus:

 

O dear. I did warn you. Where did the money for that come from? Have you been approached by that plausible gentleman Kevin Staats Forbes? Did he say anything about you not wanting to fall into the hands of that shark Watkin? 

 

The WNR has, as I understood it, preserved its independence by keeping well clear of high Victorian railway politics - but independence always comes at the price of penury.

 

11 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

A mix of MGN stock

 

A tautology!

  • Like 2
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had further thoughts on stock.

 

Looking at Kevin's timetable for the BM - CA - Achingham services, I've been thinking of suitable stock, which hopefully can encompass what was already in preparation.

 

1782998409_Routes-Copy-Copy.jpg.c923f883565a45f3150637e69561cbae.jpg

 

To recap:

 

- Kevin managed to fit two services, working the BM - CA - Achingham route from opposite ends. 

 

TimetableDiagramV2-ColouredV2..jpeg.807ebb25088d007aa25b33b2028ac17a.jpeg

 

For these two services (mid blue and dark red above),  I offer Set A and Set B as detailed below.

 

- I had wanted such through services, but had nevertheless assumed (and started to work on) a CA - Achingham branch set, that now may be redundant.  Here below given as Set C

 

- Kevin at one point suggested a shuttle between CA and AC, using old converted stock as a motor train. I proffered the 1905 Pickering Steam rail-motor, as supplied to the K&ESR. Alternatively, we could put Set C on this duty. This could be extended, as per the light blue service on the TT diagram, to work Achingham - CA - AC.

 

Set A, a set of late 1870s-1880s coaches (gas lit):


-    Luggage Brake, 26’                          1877-86 LT&SR Dia 29, 15’ w/b (Worsley Works)
-    First (4-compt.), 26’                         1876-77 LT&SR Dia 2, 15’ w/b (Worsley Works)
-    Second (5-compt.), 28’3’’                1876-77 LT&SR Dia 13, 15’ w/b (Worsley Works)
-    Third (5-compt.), 25’9’’                    1876-77 LT&SR Dia 12, 15’ w/b (Worsley Works)
-    Brake Third (2-compt.), 24’9’’         1877-78 LT&SR Dia 19, 14’ w/b (Worsley Works)

 

Notes on Set A:

(i) History: The dates given relate to the introduction of the stock on the LT&SR. In the Achingverse, they represent stock built by the WNR in the late '70s to early '80s as a development from the early 1870s stock purchased from the Metropolitan Carriage & Wagon Co (MC&WCo), featured in Sets B and C below. 

(ii) Models: Worsley Works makes etched brass body kits for all of these, save for the Full Brake Diagram 29, which today Allen Doherty has kindly agreed to produce at my request.  It may be possible to use the 3D-printed MC&WCo chassis with these etched bodies, which aids uniformity in the stock and would relieve me of a lot of the work. 

 

Set B, a set of early 1870s coaches (gas lit):


-    Luggage Brake, 21’                 1872 Freelance MC&WCo, 12’ w/b 
-    First (4-compt.), 26’                1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set First, 15’ w/b
-    Second (5-compt.), 26’’          1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Second, 15’ w/b
-    Third (5-compt.), 23’8’’           1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Third, 14’ w/b
-    Brake Third (3-compt.), 25’   1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Brake Third, 15’ w/b

 

Notes on Set B:

(i) History: These are derived from the 1872-1873 10-coach close-coupled Block Sets built for the LSWR by MC&WCo.  Weddell thinks these were to a MC&WCo design, subsequently adopted and modified by the LSWR for similar Nine-Elms built sets (see Northroader's 7mm Third Brake). Hitherto I was going to confine these coaches to branch lines (as pretty elderly by 1905) and use an 1880s and an 1890s set of mainline 4-wheelers; the latter with Hattons generics.  Actually, I'm feeling very happy about the idea of 5 of these 1870s shorties trundling along the mainline behind an 1860s-70s Sharp Stewart 2-4-0.

(ii) Model: These are being drawn as a commission. So far we have produced the 1871 Composite (see below), into which all the development work has gone until we have now, I think, reached a successful production print. Thereafter the drawings will be adapted to produce the other classes of coach, including a freelance Luggage Brake in the same style. These will all be produced as long-buffer coaches, not as supplied to the LSWR as close-coupled.  In common with the LSWR coaches, they have been converted to gas lighting.

 

Set C, CA to Aching Constable set of early 1870s coaches (oil lit):


-    Luggage Brake, 21’                          1872 Freelance MC&WCo, 12’ w/b 
-    First-Second (4-compt.), 24’           1871-74 MC&WCo, 13’6” w/b 
-    Third (5-compt.), 23’8’’                    1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Third, 15’ w/b
-    Brake Third (3-compt.), 25’            1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Brake Third, 15’ w/b
 

Note on Set C:

Simply an abbreviated version of the 5-coach Set B, with the First and Second Class coaches swapped out for an 1871 MC&WCo First-Second Composite.  These were supplied as loose coaches to the LSWR and had long-buffers accordingly. Later (certainly by 1883), they were inserted into the Block Sets to form 12-coach sets. 

 

As previously indicated, we can keep by an additional couple of the 1872-73 MC&WCo Block-Set Thirds as strengtheners.

 

Set A and a strengthening Third would be stabled at Birchoverham Market, along with a 2-4-0 tender engine.  

Set B and a strengthening Third would be stabled at Achingham, along with a 2-4-0 tender engine.  

Set C would be stabled at Castle Aching, along with an 0-4-2 tank engine.  

 

A similar Set to A may be stabled at Norwich, to work the local stations, so would not concern us. A spare 'local' set of coaches can be stabled at Aching Constable, allowing one set to be in the works while 4 sets are in service.

 

The main running shed for the western portion of the WNR is adjacent to the AC works, so will supply locomotives to the BM, CA and Achingham sub-sheds for the local workings. 

 

Unless and until Birchoverham Market is modelled, which would engage the through stock, it is likely that the above 3 sets and strengtheners would be the totality of the coaching stock required for a CA layout, with two Sharp Stewart 2-4-0s and the Neilson 0-4-2T for the passenger work.  

 

AlbertE1.jpg.9a3ca0aa0f2963f249e2c98156db6081.jpg

 

1116830766_CVHR0-4-2TNo1asbuilt.JPG.d3e7560c15f5dbb6e46f0b3903989abb.JPG

 

If anyone has any comments, now would be the opportune moment ...

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
Further information
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ChrisN said:

My thoughts are, Is that too much 2nd class accommodation for 1905?  My feeling is that it was dying by lack of use.

 

Could be, and I confess that it is a rather Victorian level of service, which to some extent is intentional; it is the WNR Holding Back the Tide! The MR was an outlier abolishing Third in 1875.  The GE did so, IIRC, in 1892.  The Great Western did not do so until 1912, and, as I've said before, if it's good enough for the GWR ....

 

You point is about proportions, however, and what we are seeing in those formations is the WNR continuing to adhere to the proportion of accommodation appropriate to the different classes at the period the coaches were introduced, rather than as would have changed in favour of Third by 1905. I see that, I'm just in denial!

 

I think, though, despite you being right, I'll stick to the rather conservative approach maintained by the Directors of the WNR. Second is provided at the costs of more Third Class accommodation, but still giving only the same number of compartments as First, save in the case of the Seconds.  The prototype LT&SR Second was downgraded to a Third, or it and the MC&WCo Second could have one or more compartments downgraded; perhaps a 2/2/2/3/3 Second-Third Composite, leading to a rather generous compartment or two for Third Class passengers? In any case, Third Class compartments are still the more numerous and, of course, also more populous.  

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 2
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
21 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Could be, and I confess that it is a rather Victorian level of service, which to some extent is intentional; it is the WNR Holding Back the Tide! The MR was an outlier abolishing Third in 1875.  The GE did so, IIRC, in 1892.  The Great Western did not do so until 1912, and, as I've said before, if it's good enough for the GWR ....

 

You point is about proportions, however, and what we are seeing in those formations is the WNR continuing to adhere to the proportion of accommodation appropriate to the different classes at the period the coaches were introduced, rather than as would have changed in favour of Third by 1905. I see that, I'm just in denial!

 

I think, though, despite you being right, I'll stick to the rather conservative approach maintained by the Directors of the WNR. Second is provided at the costs of more Third Class accommodation, but still giving only the same number of compartments as First, save in the one case of the LT&SR Second, which could, as on the prototype, be downgraded to a Third, or have one or more compartments downgraded; perhaps a 2/2/2/3/3 Second-Third Composite?  In any case, Third Class compartments are still the more numerous and, of course, also more populous.  

 

 

 

James,

That is fine, and completely justifiable.  You have no choice about what the Directors of the WNR think, it is completely beyond your control.  :)  I think I have said before the Cambrian tried to abolish third but because all the big boys around, well GWR and LNWR still had second they had to re-introduce it as it caused problems for through 2nd class passengers.  

 

If you populate your coaches then I would not have many in the second class carriages.

  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 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...