Changes req'd for from LBSCR into SR Malachite era

[Lacathedrale]

Hello!

 

I've always found a strange attraction to the malachite green livery of the Southern - much like a beige Mk.1 Fiesta it seems to loop all the way around so far past ugly that it's back to being cool again - so I thought that it might be prudent to investigate as an alternative setting for my notional future layout, originally earmarked for pre-group). I am quite confident in choosing appropriate stock for that 19th century terminus - Terriers and D's for most of the suburban and outer suburban services, with C's and E's for freight. Coaches would be four and six wheelers of various vintages.

 

In the pre-war period however, I'm a little more lost -

 

• What 2-4 bogie-coach formations would one expect to see on a branch suburban terminus at this time? My research so far has been unable to turn up much of value for the late Maunsell/early Bulleid period at all.
  • Would you see push-pull sets from the pre-group companies and/or as converted on suburban services, or were they more branch-line than mainline?
  • Would we still see four and six wheelers, or would these have been well and truly shipped out to the most backward of branch lines by now?
• I assume that converted LBSCR AC multiple units would mostly be in evidence those areas that had just been converted to 3rd rail from overhead i.e. 2SL (ex. SL), 2Wim (ex. CW) and 3CP (ex. CP) sets?
• Would it be broadly accurate to presume that 1948 shed allocations (excepting withdrawls) would represent late Southern Railway allocations?

 

Thank you for reading and all the very best,

[Guy Rixon]

I don't know details of central-section policy, but I see no reason not to have push-pull trains on a suburban branch, provided that they can accommodate the traffic. However, if the branch has morning and evening peaks, the push-pull sets might need to be strengthened with trailers or replaced.

 

Some of the the AC EMUs were very wide trains, so were not available on all lines.

[Lacathedrale]

Thanks @Guy Rixon - my plan is for the short branch and additional station at Croydon to have stayed open - so a prime candidate for commuter traffic and would definitely have been electrified at least partially. It falls into the same category as the West Croydon, Wimbledon, Crystal Palace area of lots of viaducts and few tunnels, so I'm fairly comfortable with the converted units being around there - but I'm just not clear on what other EMUs would have roamed the rails at that early stage in those areas previously dominated by the AC overheads.

 

I've seen pictures of push-pull sets with additional coaches on the 'wrong' side of the loco so I'm also fairly happy to do that - probably a nice bit of operational interest for trains which would otherwise just shuttle in and out.

 

The wiki page notes that the Maunsell sets were originally three coaches - BTK-CK-BTK for the west of england, but these were modified with various design changes, but it doesn't detail if the sets changed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR_Maunsell_carriage - This page notes the Bulleid coach sets in the same way - mostly BTK-CK-BTK (http://www.user.dccnet.com/d.leech/bulleidguide.pdf) but build dates post-war, which I didn't realise - so would be quite mutually exclusive with Maunsell olive :)

 

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2019 by Lacathedrale

[Nick Holliday]

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

 

 

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

In the pre-war period however, I'm a little more lost -

 

Kidner's Oakwood Press book Southern Suburban Steam LP 147 might hold the answers to your questions, as might the new Mike King book being discussed elsewhere.

To put things in perspective:

Kidner does note:"By the end of 1932 most of the inner suburban electrification was complete; the only steam worked lines left were from South Croydon to Oxted and beyond, Orpington and Bickley via Swanley to Sevenoaks, Surbiton to Guildford and to Staines via Chertsey and the Reading line, also the short run between Clapham Junction and Kensington."

This does mean that any answers to the rest of your questions are likely to be mainly conjectural rather than actually based on real examples.

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

 

• What 2-4 bogie-coach formations would one expect to see on a branch suburban terminus at this time? My research so far has been unable to turn up much of value for the late Maunsell/early Bulleid period at all.
  • Would you see push-pull sets from the pre-group companies and/or as converted on suburban services, or were they more branch-line than mainline?

The Southern didn't build any new suburban steam stock, apart from those created by putting old bodies on new underframes, like the LSWR based conversions modelled recently by Hornby. Stock would probably have consisted of that originating in whichever Division you're basing things on. Pull-push trains were mainly associated with bucolic branch lines, but there might have been some remnants of services such as along the Epsom Downs branch, as I recall a photo of a PP train there after electrification, when perhaps the off-peak traffic on the branch only required one or two coaches, difficult to provide with the electric sets then available. For a period in the thirties several of the branches were not fully electrified, and short steam hauled trains were provided for passengers to complete their journey to the terminus.

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

• • Would we still see four and six wheelers, or would these have been well and truly shipped out to the most backward of branch lines by now?

Four wheelers were well on the way out, although an interim set on the Gravesend branch included four and six wheelers, but only until about 1930. The extent of electrification by 1932 spelled the end for most of them.

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

• I assume that converted LBSCR AC multiple units would mostly be in evidence those areas that had just been converted to 3rd rail from overhead i.e. 2SL (ex. SL), 2Wim (ex. CW) and 3CP (ex. CP) sets.

8 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

• Would it be broadly accurate to presume that 1948 shed allocations (excepting withdrawls) would represent late Southern Railway allocations?

 

Thank you for reading and all the very best,

Converted LSWR stock provided the bulk of the initial allocation for the Brighton electrification, and exLBSC steam carriages largely were involved in the creation of the non-powered twin trailer sets, allocated to the Western and Eastern sections around 1926.  These twin sets were intended to make an eight coach train when sandwiched between two three coach emus, and when required for the Central section, in 1928/9, they were formed using one LSWR and one SECR coach. Additional sets for the Central section were formed later using reconstructed coaches from the CW sets. Further trailer sets using ex-ad stock were built for the Western section on Windsor services, and for the Eastern section for Gravesend services. 

The wider South London line stock were formed into two coach powered sets. The motor cars, with their lowered roof ends ran on the South London line as DC units, and the first class coaches from the original sets, which ran under steam for much of their lives, were converted to emus and ran on the West Croydon to Wimbledon line.  

David Brown's Southern Electric Volume One gives chapter and verse on the complex birth of the third rail system.

As regards loco allocations, the Semgonline website will give you a bit more information. 

http://www.semgonline.com/shed_allocations/shed-alloc.html

 

[IWCR]

4 and 6 wheelers gone from passenger traffic by the early 30's.

Some still in departmental service or as camping carriages after this date.

On the Isle of Wight 4  wheelers were still in general use till 1938,  one set used for a mail train lasted  till  1949.  Oddly enough after withdrawl this set of 3 LCDR carriages returned to the mainland for scrapping and was photographed stored in a siding at Croydon, a letter to  Railway Magazine at the time was asking where these Malachite Green liveried 4 wheel carriages had come from when such things had been gone for over 15 years.

 

Pete.

[keefer]

Pages about South London line EMUs (with further link to 2-SL & 2-WIM units)

http://www.semgonline.com/gallery/1sl.html

Mentions the 2-SL cars were still limited to the South London and Wimbledon lines due to being wider stock (9'6" ?)

[Lacathedrale]

Gotcha, so it's going to be multiple units anywhere in suburbia past 1932, and if there were any steam hauled services they would be a) using pre-group bogie stock and b) routes to non-electrified branches. With multiple units I'm fairly comfortable with the idea that 2-Wim, 2SL would have run around the area (at least, within a mile or so of my fictional-for-that-century terminus) and I gather the ex-LSWR EMU's for the purpose would be the notional 3SUBs? It is a little moot however, because the point of bringing the layout forward 40 years was to enjoy malachite and green locos, rather than a layout full of multiple units

[Wickham Green]

The vast majority of malachite green locos operated on main lines, of course, and would rarely have strayed into any smaller terminus - though Rule 1 would permit, say 1817, 1854 or a malachite M7 to turn up with a matching birdcage  or Maunsell trio on occasions.

[Lacathedrale]

So if I am reading correctly (and I have both the Southern Suburban Steam book and Southern Electric books ordered and for delivery imminently, thank you @Nick Holliday - so no doubt subject to correction) - siting the layout on the south western division (i.e. an overflow for Waterloo, a Charing Cross-style push across the river by LSWR, etc.) would allow me to more easily justify mainline steam locos.

 

I do appreciate that:

• This notional station would be incredibly unlikely by 1930 (although quite in keeping with the spiteful competition between the pre-grouping companies south of the river)
• Those loco-hauled services would be 8-12 coach trains rather than the three or four coach trains I'd be modelling
• Suburban services would be EMUs apart from maybe extending the Kenny Belle from Clapham up to this extra terminus.

??

[Nick Holliday]

As an alternative scenario, and keeping the ex-LBSCR theme from the OP, what if Bricklayers Arms had prospered as a passenger terminal, rather than closing in 1852? If it had caught on, it's possible to imagine that the London business district, and suitable infrastructure, could have extended towards the station, and, perhaps, if some political grandee wanted to reduce or remove steam from the centre of London, and in particular London Bridge Station, the remaining outer suburban steam services, after the general electrification, would have been concentrated at Bricklayers Arms, with perhaps some electric services included. This would be handy as the main steam depot was next door. It also ups the potential for goods traffic.

So you could have trains serving the Oxted line, East Grinstead, Tunbridge Wells with Central Section flavour, and Reigate and Reading services, and probably others I can't think of, for a touch of Eastern magic. Although the peak services might be eight coaches, off-peak I'm sure three or four coaches would have sufficed. It might be possible to contrive a two coach pull-push train service, superimposed on a more regular electrical timetable to meet certain, unspecified, local needs.

[Wickham Green]

Stephen Hannington has modelled PART of a - hypothetical - main line station with short trains : Surrey Arms might give you some inspiration : https://esngblog.com/2017/10/31/not-quite-a-minories/

[Lacathedrale]

@Nick Holliday that's not a bad idea - who wouldn't have liked to have alighted at at terminus in such gorgeous surrounds?

 

There are some pretty nice pictures here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklayers_Arms_railway_station and describes quite adroitly the internecine conflict - built in a ridicolous location almost exclusively to force the hand of the London & Greenwich to permit the SER and LCR to use London Bridge. The intriguiing snippet 'The railway introduced a proposal to extend the line to Waterloo Road in 1846, which was rejected by a committee of Parliament.' gives  a little more credence to my idea about a parallel  push to a Westminster terminus and has the same ring as 'Kings Cross (York Road)' .

 

Maybe this terminus was built, as an LB&SCR station alongside Waterloo. Trains from the west country into the city could be routed onto Brighton rails near Epsom, avoiding the congestion around Clapham Junction, Longhedge and the Spa Road junctions, and at the same time act as an additional terminus of the South London loop line, for those charming ex-AC EMUs on suburban traffic.

[Lacathedrale]

I've finished the Southern Suburban Steam book - pretty fascinating. It is much like has been discussed in this thread - D-classes were booted off suburban traffic by the AC electrification and Terriers were shunted off to various lightly-laid branches at the same time - so if one wanted to practically include them in a layout it would need to be pre-war. Now I know, it's going to make it very hard for me to justify a 1930's layout without some extreme reaching - (as above, alternate london terminus that has the magic wand of 'political grandee' to force steam into it!

 

Thank you all very much for your kind and considerate help in researching !

.

 

 

[Wickham Green]

You can always invent something along the lines of the Kenny Belle !

[Guy Rixon]

You could consider a suburban terminus of an electrified route that is also the terminus of a lesser and non-electrified route that goes out into the countryside. Somewhat in the way that the Marlow branch emerges from Bourne End alongside the line from Maidenhead (except that neither line to Bourne End is electric).

[Lacathedrale]

On 21/11/2019 at 19:36, Guy Rixon said:

You could consider a suburban terminus of an electrified route that is also the terminus of a lesser and non-electrified route that goes out into the countryside. Somewhat in the way that the Marlow branch emerges from Bourne End alongside the line from Maidenhead (except that neither line to Bourne End is electric).

 

I think this is really the only way forward - I don't want to sacrifice the location too much - one of the charms of the layout plan and location chosen was its proximity. That said, I'm somewhat heartened by pictures of Vivian Thompson's Eastbourne in this link, which show some pretty non concurrent stock, colour schemes, etc. and still comes out as authentic:

 

Maybe I just need to consider myself anchored at a certain time (say, midway through the first decade of the 20th century) and then lean forward or back depending on when the mood strikes!

[rogerzilla]

Slightly off topic, but the rumour is that the SR Board didn't like Bulleid's original shade of malachite, so he promised to tone it down, but didn't actually change a thing.  I'm amazed that they put up with him until nationalisation.

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, rogerzilla said:

Slightly off topic, but the rumour is that the SR Board didn't like Bulleid's original shade of malachite, so he promised to tone it down, but didn't actually change a thing.  I'm amazed that they put up with him until nationalisation.

 

Because the guy was a genius?

 

He also contributed to the new image. A modern forward thinking company with modern trains rather than the Victorian era ones they wanted to replace.

 

Drummond 4-4-0s or this..

 

 

 

 

Jason

[rogerzilla]

Genius?  He certainly got away with a lot.  The Q1 was very good, as long as you didn't have to look at it

[TJ52]

I think the first decade of the 20th century is pure gold. A great range of liveries and excuses for cross London services. Small locos and short coaches. I wish now I had settled on that 30 years ago, though I do like my southern locos in olive green.

 

Terry

[Wickham Green]

17 hours ago, rogerzilla said:

Genius?  He certainly got away with a lot.  The Q1 was very good, as long as you didn't have to look at it

 NO ........ so long as you don't look on it with the blinkered vision of what a locomotive 'SHOULD' look like ! : if the first loco you ever saw was a SECR 'D' in grubby black, it's excessive splashers and the totally pointless flares on its tender would't compare well with the simplicity & functionality of the Q1.

 

( Thank God we have them BOTH in the National Collection ...... until the next round of de-acquisitioning anyway. )