Finding out about 1870-1880s railways

[mikeandnel]

If you want to go back to the early days of the Railways, then I recommend 'The First Railways' by Derek Hayes, published by The Times

It will start you from day one.

I am modelling the LBSCR during the Craven era and have found many of the previous posters to this thread  to have been very helpful to me with info, maps, phots et al, 

I refer you to http://www.lbscr.org/Models/Journal/LBSCR-Modellers-Digest-6.pdf

Michael

[Lacathedrale]

On the topic of books I very much enjoyed 'The Grand Experiment' which concludes chronologically at 1850 - a wonderful view into the rather esoteric past however not particularly useful for most modellers. I'll check out that book shortly, I have a number inbound thanks to this thread already!

[Nearholmer]

The Times book is very good, way beyond most coffee table material.

 

Another, random, side point, which I discovered through an accident report: the SER ran services from Cannon Street to Enfield, via Snow Hill and the Widened Lines in this period.

 

I knew that the LCDR and GNR inter-ran, but somehow I'd missed that the SER did too.

 

We need an 1870s Bradshaw on-line!

Edited January 31, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Lacathedrale]

My Ahron book has arrived, and I've just picked up an 1873 SER Goods van and 1860's brake van from Dan at SER Kits. I was blessed to see his locomotives in person too, and couldn't help but put down a deposit for both a Stirling A Class and an O-class. His Cudworth 2-2-2 definitely stole the show, but I think getting some more practical engines at first makes sense. He did make me laugh, referring to his post-1876 wagons as 'modern'. 

[Lacathedrale]

I do have some practical questions!

• How would those vignoles rail sidings have been ballasted? Same beige shingle as the running lines or ash/etc. ? Would they also have been ballasted above the sleepers?
• I can't seem to find a consistent answer to when railways uncovered every X sleeper, is there a general assumption that's safe to make?
• The reputation of the SER being a dirty and ramshackle affair outside of their premiere trains, are we talking late BR Steam or 'the white gloves had a smudge when running on the footplate' ?

[bbishop]

Bill,

 

You have to be canny with Dan's kits, he uses a very soft alloy with a low melting point. I would recommend araldite, in preference to lmp solder, especially for the small bits. Make very nice kits.

 

Bill

[mikeandnel]

My Ahron book has arrived, and I've just picked up an 1873 SER Goods van and 1860's brake van from Dan at SER Kits. I was blessed to see his locomotives in person too, and couldn't help but put down a deposit for both a Stirling A Class and an O-class. His Cudworth 2-2-2 definitely stole the show, but I think getting some more practical engines at first makes sense. He did make me laugh, referring to his post-1876 wagons as 'modern'. 

 

Can you give more details about the 'Cudworth'  and the wagon kits please

[Edwardian]

My Ahron book has arrived, and I've just picked up an 1873 SER Goods van and 1860's brake van from Dan at SER Kits. I was blessed to see his locomotives in person too, and couldn't help but put down a deposit for both a Stirling A Class and an O-class. His Cudworth 2-2-2 definitely stole the show, but I think getting some more practical engines at first makes sense. He did make me laugh, referring to his post-1876 wagons as 'modern'. 

 

He's about as fond of the Brighton's Traffic Department's timetabling as he is of the South Eastern's coaches!

 

Better to be a ....

[bbishop]

Can you give more details about the 'Cudworth'  and the wagon kits please

Mike?

 

Enter SER kits into your search engine. So remember that Dan is a "garden shed" manufacturer, working at his own pace and that not everything is available all the time.

 

Bill

[Edwardian]

https://serkits.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/ser-kits-order-form-mail-feb-2017.pdf

 

SER Kits Cudworth Mail, photo copyright D.Garrett 2013, from the SER Kits web-page:

Edited February 2, 2018 by Edwardian

[Kelly]

It is an interesting period, though beyond my usual interest generally.

 

However I did find an interesting book called London's first railway about the London and Greenwich railway. Some interesting things in it as well as things that seem utterly mad today.

 

Not far from there you had around the time the London and Greenwich running reverse road to Charlton junction with the ser meeting it there iirc. The lbscr had some interesting signalling too, including the block post. A bit later obviously you started getting the lbscr overhead system, which I always felt would make a good model in itself (not 1800s I know).

[bbishop]

It is an interesting period, though beyond my usual interest generally.

 

However I did find an interesting book called London's first railway about the London and Greenwich railway. Some interesting things in it as well as things that seem utterly mad today.

 

Not far from there you had around the time the London and Greenwich running reverse road to Charlton junction with the ser meeting it there iirc. The lbscr had some interesting signalling too, including the block post. A bit later obviously you started getting the lbscr overhead system, which I always felt would make a good model in itself (not 1800s I know).

Kelly,

 

And, finally, literally meeting as in a head to head collision. After which the L&G changed to left hand running.

 

Bill

[Lacathedrale]

Bill,

 

You have to be canny with Dan's kits, he uses a very soft alloy with a low melting point. I would recommend araldite, in preference to lmp solder, especially for the small bits. Make very nice kits.

 

Bill

 

Thank you for the help - Dan's instructions (possibly revised) for wagons do not mention anything about soldering, entirely around 5 minute epoxy or super glue. Thank you for the tip however, I'll make sure.

 

So far the wagon kit (VAN70 as per the SER Kits website above) has been very fun - the parts go together extremely well and logically, and there's more than enough information in the instructions. Getting a re-drawn copy of the works drawings at the same time at scale has also been extremely helpful.

[Killian keane]

Large Scotchman 'Mona' (built by Neilsons in 1873) at Greenwich Park about 1895, this view demonstrates how the sleelers were ballasted over well

Edited February 2, 2018 by Killian keane

[Lacathedrale]

There does seem to be a regular intervals of dips in the ballast...

[Regularity]

Yes, to allow/encourage drainage.

[ianmaccormac]

I remember when I was a Chatham Club member and helped to built Wateringbury back in the 1980's, we allowed a drainage cross channel every 7th sleeper. I can't find any good photos now to show it but I remember helping to do them!

Cheers

Ian

[Old Gringo]

I'm quite familiar with the broad brush strokes and practices of the pre grouping era, but the gulf between the experimental era (1830s-1850s) and the turn of the 20th century is all but a blank for me!

 

Resources seem extremely scant, and I'm not even sure where to look. Most books I've read summarise the early periods of these lines into paragraphs of facts and figures, rather than giving an "in the moment" view.

 

By way of illustration: what was the platform surface (or height?), What kind of turnouts were used (what chairs? Where did baulk road exist?), How were passenger trains handled in an era of common mixed trains? Etc.

 

Is there a book which covers this in general bounds? If not, my specific interest is the railways of Kent and Sussex, the LBSCR, LCDR and SER.

 

Hi Bill,

 

Like many of the others who have posted information here, I have found that there appears to be a gap in solid information after the early period of railway development up to around 1850.

 

In an earlier post, Kevin mentioned "Our Iron Roads" by F.S. Williams (first published in 1852, London, 390pp) which ran to seven editions by 1888.  I also have a copy of the 3rd (revised in 1883, 514pp) edition of 1883 and can recommend it as a source of information regarding the 'standard' British railway of the period (Ottley's Bibliography No. 4776).  Chapters 4 to 8 inclusive deal with the construction of formation, tunnels, viaducts, permanent way, etc. and chapters 12 and 13 on the timetabling and working of trains.

 

The working of trains also features in another volume of a slightly later vintage; "The Working and Management of an English Railway", by George Findlay, London, 1889, 270pp, which ran to five editions by 1894.  The last edition also has a biographical sketch of George Findlay, who was an employee of the London & North Western Railway (Ottley, 3727).  There is more detail included in operations, including signalling, train diagramming, working of trains and goods stations, etc.  Of course it's specifically L&NWR 'Premier Line' practice, but it's a good guide to the end of your period of study.

 

General specifications (formation widths, gauge, rails, sleepers, even fencing, plus costings) for many of the lines built up to 1841 can be found in 'Whishaw's Railways of Great Britain & Ireland', by Francis Whishaw, London, 1842 (500 Pages, 16 plates, 2 fold-out maps and gradient profiles.  This book was reprinted by David & Charles, with an introduction by Charles Clinker, in 1969 (ISBN 7153-4786-1) and from page 273 gives a London & Brighton Railway spec. of: "Gauge of Way, - The rails are set at about 4 feet 9 inches apart, which allows sufficient play for the wheels, and is now far more usual than 4 feet 8.5 inches.  The intermediate space is 6 feet 5 inches and each side space of ballasting is 2 feet 9 inches; making a whole width of ballasting about 21 feet 6 inches.  The width of land enclosed on a level is about 24 yards.  The rails are in 15 feet lengths, weighing 76lbs to the yard and are set in heavy chairs . . ." . .  There's more technical specs regarding chairs and both stone blocks and sleepers, although I would imagine that by 1875, the LBSCR would be on 30 foot rails supported on (ten) 9 foot long sleepers, as had become standard on many lines by then.

 

General specifications for the building of railways were consolidated by the Railway Clauses Act of 1845, which brought together all the sizes required to be observed by the railway companies applying to acquire an Act of parliament to authorise construction.  I'm sure that this information is out there somewhere on the Interweb, however, if you prefer to read hard copy, then look out for a copy of "Biggs General Railway Acts", by James Bigg & Son, London; the first edition was published in 1845.   A collection of the Public General Acts for the regulation of railways; the most comprehensive list is the 16th, 1912 edition (1142 pages, plus 16 more of adverts!  Ottley 5491).  Pages 151 to 205 cover the R.C.A. of 1845 and the specs. required.  Page 217, The Gauge of Railways Act, 1846, and so on.

 

Here's a link to a Board of Trade note of platforms, which I can't find listed as an Act: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BoT_Inspectors001.pdf . However, there's a height measurement quoted and it appears to have been complied with thereafter - although possibly light railways were exempt?

 

Although, I've not yet found any more contemporary writings from the period 1870 -1889 that have much more constructional information, there are several books written by employees of the period and they are listed in the bibliography of "Victorian Railwaymen - The emergence and growth of railway labour, 1830-1870", by P.W. Kingsford, published by Frank Cass, London, 1970, ISBN 0-7146-1331-2. 

 

Besides having three unusual fold-out maps at the back, showing the railway network in 1839, 1852 and 1872, this book has only five illustrations.  However, three of them are photographs of a range of London, Brighton & South Coast Railway employees (3 photos, each of 6 different grades) and all taken in 1881.  At the time of printing (1970) the negatives (possibly glass plates?) were reproduced by kind permission of the Museum of British Transport, Clapham, London.  (Did the negatives make it to York?).  The Frontispiece is a real gem, Mr. Thomas Hamerton, Inspector of the South Eastern Railway (died 1858) and the final picture, Somerset & Dorset Railway 2-4-0T locomotive No. 11 (nick-named 'Bluebottle') with ten employees, taken in 1861.

 

Although the Bibliography lists a number of titles, often quoted for the Victorian period of locomotive and train working; for example, 'Stokers and Pokers', by Francis Head, 1849 (reprinted by David & Charles, 1968), 'Railway Reminiscences', by G.P. Neele, 1904 and 'The Life of Roger Langdon' (a GWR employee) by R. Langdon, 1908, it omits, 'Engine Driving Life' by Michael Reynolds, 1882 (which was dedicated to William Stroudley, LB&SCR Locomotive Superintendent) and 'Ernest Struggles', (published anonymously by J.J. Beecroft, Reading in 1879) which was re-issued as 'Memoirs of a Stationmaster', H.A. Simmons, Adams & Dart, Bath, 1974.

 

The latter titles are mentioned in a further study of railway employees, 'The Railway Workers, 1840 - 1870', by Frank McKenna (a railway worker himself for 20 years), Faber, London 1980, ISBN 0-571-21563-2, with which I'll bring this list to a close!

 

Hope some of this helps with your research.

 

All the best,

John.

[Nick Holliday]

I remember when I was a Chatham Club member and helped to built Wateringbury back in the 1980's, we allowed a drainage cross channel every 7th sleeper. I can't find any good photos now to show it but I remember helping to do them!

Cheers

Ian

I'd always thought that the idea of exposing the ends of every fourth or so sleeper was partly so that the condition of the sleeper could be assessed. The problem with the overall ballast tended to be the sleepers rotting and this only being discovered by a catastrophic failure. This partial exposure would hopefully identify problems before they got too bad. It seems only an interim solution, which appeared on a number of lines, around the 1890's I think, prior to the adoption of the different ballasting approach, with the tops of the sleepers uncovered, although this was a slow process, with examples of the older ballast surviving until around 1910.

[Nick Holliday]

I think I'd be OK with 1880's shots, since all the latest 1870's developments would still be in evidence - especially if  they are more common. I guess one would simply have to be very careful about including "modern" elements. I do like the idea of a railway 'dark age' - it will preclude my rivet-counting obsession.

 

So if I were to summarise what we've discussed so far typically we'd see slot-in-post signals, low platforms, fine ballast over the rails (but with sagging to show said timbers), flatbottom rail on older lines and sidings spiked directly to the timbers. Carriages would be short bogie, six or four wheeled depending on main, secondary or branch line status. Wagons would be a mixture of sprung and dumb buffered. 

 

I'm not sure about the idea of Vignoles or flatbottom rail being prevalent. I know there was a lot of experimentation regarding rail sections in the 1830's and 40's, but by the end of that decade most lines, apart from the Great Western, seem to have adopted some form of double-headed rail, in chairs, and any Vignoles rail from earlier would be well time served, and not really usable. Flatbottom rail was still popular with contractors, but it doesn't seem to have made much impact on main line railways until there was a second wave of railway building, 1870 onwards, when the likes of the Midland and South Western and the Midland and Great Northern were being built, and even they within ten years had relaid their main lines with bullhead, keeping the FB in sidings. At that time much of this rail seems to have come from the Krupp works in Germany, which either could offer competetive rates, or there was a lack of indigenous supplies at the time.

Looking at photos is rather frustrating, as the high ballast and the wider spacing of sleepers quite often makes the chairs on BH rail invisible. I have found some definite examples of FB rail in sidings, but they have all been in works or shed locations, such as Crewe, Ashford and Longhedge, so it could have occurred in goods yards, if you want to go for it.

With regard to the dumb buffered wagons, unfortunately the majority of the books on wagons start in the eighties, covering wagons that survived to grouping. However, Mike Williams' book on Caledonian wagons delves into the earlier history, and in 1871 the directors decreed that all goods wagons, except minerals, would have sprung buffers, although given that their mineral wagon stock represented well over half their total, this still meant a lot of dumb buffers broth of the border, hence the Scottich railways' pleas to have the ban on them extended. Even before that date, probably most vans or specialist vehicles had sprung buffers, as their contents would be damaged by rough shunting, so this decision only really affected open goods wagons. A similar policy was adopted by the SER, although their mineral wagon fleet was nowhere near as large, and they included ballast and timber wagons in their dumb buffered new builds, as did their neighbour, the LBSC, although the first of Stroudley's Open A type had dumb buffers. Both of these southern lines ended up acquiring more dumb buffered minerals when they both bought several hundred second hand wagons from traders such as Stephenson Clarke, presumably to overcome a temporary shortage.

[Mike Storey]

I'd always thought that the idea of exposing the ends of every fourth or so sleeper was partly so that the condition of the sleeper could be assessed. The problem with the overall ballast tended to be the sleepers rotting and this only being discovered by a catastrophic failure. This partial exposure would hopefully identify problems before they got too bad. It seems only an interim solution, which appeared on a number of lines, around the 1890's I think, prior to the adoption of the different ballasting approach, with the tops of the sleepers uncovered, although this was a slow process, with examples of the older ballast surviving until around 1910.

 

Much later than that I think! I have photos of parts of the IOW system in the 1930's (especially Bembridge) where the sleepers were still almost entirely covered.

[ChrisN]

And, to highlight my point about the LT Museum archives, here we have Charing Cross, SER first, then District, both thumbnail images.

 

If you order scans from them, the quality is astonishingly good, often taken direct from an original large-format glass plate.

 

It’s quite hard to date Met & District images, because the locos and stock stayed very much the same for about thirty five or forty years, but I think the District one is early, maybe 1880s or early 1890s. The Remington Typewriter was in production from the mid 1870s, but when it came to Britain???? I’d be interested to hear views on the date of the photo.

 

Kevin,

Looking at the ladies' fashions which are not very clear, but they do not appear to be wearing bustles.  This would put them early 1880s or late 1870s.  They could be 1890s but the sleeves are plain and the shoulders are indistinct which would date for the early 1890s but I think the longer coats for the gentlemen would put it back to 1880 ish.

 

Having made a definitive statement means that someone will have a copy with the date written on the back and they shall post next.

[Lacathedrale]

Reading Ahron's volume five has given some interesting information: the SER used open thirds from the 1850's way up until the 1890's on branch traffic in North Kent, they would happily run tender first until tank engines started appearing (primarily for shuttling between Charing Cross and Cannon Street). Singles were used everywhere for expresses even up to the SECR merger. He certainly has a way with words.

[Killian keane]

Reading Ahron's volume five has given some interesting information: the SER used open thirds from the 1850's way up until the 1890's on branch traffic in North Kent, they would happily run tender first until tank engines started appearing (primarily for shuttling between Charing Cross and Cannon Street). Singles were used everywhere for expresses even up to the SECR merger. He certainly has a way with words.

Indeed, Cudworth was reluctant to design tank engines for quite a while, five drivers petitioned him to build tank engines, resulting in the gunboats Edited February 4, 2018 by Killian keane

[Dave Searle]

Hi,

 

...  The rails are in 15 feet lengths, weighing 76lbs to the yard and are set in heavy chairs . . ." . .  There's more technical specs regarding chairs and both stone blocks and sleepers, although I would imagine that by 1875, the LBSCR would be on 30 foot rails supported on (ten) 9 foot long sleepers, as had become standard on many lines by then.

 

The specifications for LBSCR lines to be constructed in the 1860's generally quote rail of about 75 lb,18 to 24 feet in length on creosoted red pine sleepers 8 to 9 feet long and 10" by 5" approximately 1 yard apart.

 

An LBSCR drawing for 1864 shows 75 lb rail in 21 ft lengths on eight 9 ft sleepers. Undated annotations on the drawing suggest a later move to steel rail weighing 78 lbs. A second copy of the drawing, annotated in 1885, has 78 lb steel rails, 30 ft long on twelve 9 ft sleepers.

 

Specifications for lines to be constructed in the later 1870s/1880s refer to both 21 ft and 30 ft rail lengths.

 

Hope this is of interest,

 

Cheers,
 

Dave