Jump to content
 

Incompetent CMEs


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

That worked, with a couple of exceptions, on the Midland, but didn't translate too well elsewhere, especially on the WCML. A train is a train no matter if it has six coaches or sixteen, and occupies one block section at a time. There weren't enough block sections to accommodate the frequent short trains so they had to be concentrated into longer, less frequent ones.

So were the Midland mainlines far more intensively block signalled? I remember the 100 mph Deltics being introduced on the East coast requiring 3 blocks clear ahead of them.

I first wondered about the "modernity" of the turn of the century Midland during my years as a student in Liverpool when home was in NW Derbyshire in the mid 1950s.

 

The obvious, quick (but boring) way home home at the week-end was Cheshire Lines "clock face" timetabled non-corridor*  (Lpool Central to Mcr. Central) in 40-45 mins. 

The interesting wayward ones were old L&M from Lime St (once the DMUs were introduced with forward view) and the L&Y corridor trains from Lpool Exchange via Wallgate and Trinity Street - both these route departures were sparse and random. 

          *the exception was the 13.15 "North Country Continental" Gresley buffet car train to Harwich - a great favourite.

 

Sorry  a bit OT - but it does demonstrate the interdisciplinary task of running a railway (as did the Civils & rude Mechanicals rivalry and deceit expressed in earlier posts.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, runs as required said:

Sorry  a bit OT - but it does demonstrate the interdisciplinary task of running a railway (as did the Civils & rude Mechanicals rivalry and deceit expressed in earlier posts.)

Not to mention the strange dark arts practiced by the Signal Engineers, who from my days on London Underground had the final say in determining what constituted a train. 

 

Jim

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

34 minutes ago, Ohmisterporter said:

Would not the head of signalling be told, "This is the train service we want to run, signal for it accordingly".

So, in the case of the LNW, Frank Webb would be summoned down to Euston and told by Moon in front of all the Directors hungry for the Divi , to provide: train, rails and sleepers and signals - all at least cost ! 
Phew!  No Pressure there then ...

... in fact plenty of time to ponder - over afternoon tea on the 2 o’clock corridor back home - about tactics in tonight’s Crewe Town Council meeting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

It's probably a myth, but there is a story about Churchward that involves Frank Webb. It is said that Churchward was called to a board meeting at Paddington and asked "Why is it that Mr Webb's engines produced at Crewe cost just over half those you are producing at Swindon?" Churchward's reply was "Because one of mine call pull three of his backwards!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, Ohmisterporter said:

Would not the head of signalling be told, "This is the train service we want to run, signal for it accordingly".

 

 

No.  The timetable, and any train running to it was subject to the limitations of the signalling, and speed limits, not the other way around.  The Chief S&T Engineer would have, rightly, responded robustly and stated that 'these are the signals and points, and these are the block sections, and your train service will run according to that, and if you don't like it take it up with the Board of Trade, but you'll find they're on my side and you might have your railway shut down.  And then we'll all be up the road...'.

 

Or perhaps something along the lines of 'No problem, sir; to be able to do this I'll need 40 new boxes, full track circuiting throughout, 25 refuge sidings converted to loops, 180 miles of main line quadrupled (all requiring purchase of prime development land and full compensation for those made homeless), new track layouts and bi-directional running at 4 main stations, 30 miles of sextupling for London commuter trains to be kept out of the way, and, while we're about it, a new fleet of hi-tech hi-maintenance locos that can accelerate the loads to line speed in half the time it takes now, and the ability of all freight trains to run at line speeds.  Ball park £10 billion at 1930 prices.  Still want me to signal for it accordingly?  Thought not'.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But it did happen. There were many examples of routes being quadrupled, although usually in comparatively short stretches, then these might eventually become connected and made continuous. The LNWR route out of London went to six tracks in the early 1900s. I might be wrong, but I don't think any lines were originally built as quadruple. But it was a major capital investment, and not undertaken lightly. As hinted, the directors would have taken a lot of convincing that this was a good - and profitable - thing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, runs as required said:

So, in the case of the LNW, Frank Webb would be summoned down to Euston and told by Moon in front of all the Directors hungry for the Divi , to provide: train, rails and sleepers and signals - all at least cost ! 
Phew!  No Pressure there then ...

... in fact plenty of time to ponder - over afternoon tea on the 2 o’clock corridor back home - about tactics in tonight’s Crewe Town Council meeting.

 

Not possible, at least in detail. Richard Moon retired as Chairman on 22 February 1891. Corridor carriages were introduced on the 2pm Scotch Express in 1893 - I'm afraid I don't have a reference for the exact date but I do wonder if the sudden enhancement of passenger amenities was related to Moon's departure! There is a posed photograph of the 2pm stock in 1897 headed by a 2-2-2-2 of the Greater Britain class. The engine chosen was No. 528 Richard Moon...

 

2 hours ago, Tankerman said:

It's probably a myth, but there is a story about Churchward that involves Frank Webb. It is said that Churchward was called to a board meeting at Paddington and asked "Why is it that Mr Webb's engines produced at Crewe cost just over half those you are producing at Swindon?" Churchward's reply was "Because one of mine call pull three of his backwards!"

 

Churchward became Locomotive Superintendent of the Great Western in the year that Webb retired, 1903, and my understanding is that this anecdote applies to Churchward's 4-6-0s - so I suspect the question was framed in terms of Whale's latest locomotives, not Webb's. Whale was of course having 4-6-0s of the Experiment class mass-produced on a scale inconceivable for Swindon 4-6-0s. Nevertheless, the usual number of locomotives featuring in the story is three, not four, and Churchward's language is reported as being more emphatic.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

Or perhaps something along the lines of 'No problem, sir; to be able to do this I'll need 40 new boxes, full track circuiting throughout, 25 refuge sidings converted to loops, 180 miles of main line quadrupled (all requiring purchase of prime development land and full compensation for those made homeless), new track layouts and bi-directional running at 4 main stations, 30 miles of sextupling for London commuter trains to be kept out of the way, and, while we're about it, a new fleet of hi-tech hi-maintenance locos that can accelerate the loads to line speed in half the time it takes now, and the ability of all freight trains to run at line speeds.  Ball park £10 billion at 1930 prices.  Still want me to signal for it accordingly?  Thought not'.

To which the response is: "umm, you're right, we might have a capacity problem. I have this idea for something called HS2 instead? If we start it now in the 1930s people mightve finished arguing about it by 2020 and then they can get on and build it..."

  • Like 2
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Not possible, at least in detail. Richard Moon retired as Chairman on 22 February 1891. Corridor carriages were introduced on the 2pm Scotch Express in 1893 - I'm afraid I don't have a reference for the exact date but I do wonder if the sudden enhancement of passenger amenities was related to Moon's departure! There is a posed photograph of the 2pm stock in 1897 headed by a 2-2-2-2 of the Greater Britain class. The engine chosen was No. 528 Richard Moon...

 

 

Churchward became Locomotive Superintendent of the Great Western in the year that Webb retired, 1903, and my understanding is that this anecdote applies to Churchward's 4-6-0s - so I suspect the question was framed in terms of Whale's latest locomotives, not Webb's. Whale was of course having 4-6-0s of the Experiment class mass-produced on a scale inconceivable for Swindon 4-6-0s. Nevertheless, the usual number of locomotives featuring in the story is three, not four, and Churchward's language is reported as being more emphatic.

 

Thanks for the reply and correction, I was told this a long time ago now by a member of the Falmouth Model Railway Club not long after I joined at 16. As I'm 74 now, faulty memory could also be a factor. :D

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

But it did happen. There were many examples of routes being quadrupled, although usually in comparatively short stretches, then these might eventually become connected and made continuous. The LNWR route out of London went to six tracks in the early 1900s. I might be wrong, but I don't think any lines were originally built as quadruple. But it was a major capital investment, and not undertaken lightly. As hinted, the directors would have taken a lot of convincing that this was a good - and profitable - thing.

Trying to think of quadruples as built and can't come up with any except a very short stretch of the Barry Rly from Cadoxton yard to the low level dock entrance, and that was a relatively late build as railways go.  By the grouping period, after a flurry of 'catching up' work, land prices and lower profits made big investments less viable; we are still suffering the consequences.  The Welwyn Viaduct is a good example, major bottleneck but too expensive to duplicate.  Hadley Wood Tunnel another, sorted eventually.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, brack said:

To which the response is: "umm, you're right, we might have a capacity problem. I have this idea for something called HS2 instead? If we start it now in the 1930s people mightve finished arguing about it by 2020 and then they can get on and build it..."

Now you're getting the hang of how things work!

 

2 hours ago, JimC said:

Its widely reported with varying numbers!

And a variety of implied expletives; Churchward was famed for being a plain speaker, one of the reasons for his shop floor popularity; you didn't have to make the effort of watching your language when he was in the vicinity...

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

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, JimC said:

Its widely reported with varying numbers!

 

I just looked up the Wikipedia entry for Churchward where the story is attributed to W.A. Tuplin, in Great Western Saints and Sinners, so that immediately sets alarm bells ringing for its authenticity.

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone posting hereabouts on RMweb ever know Professor Tuplin D Sc, MI Mech E  in life?

 

I first came across him in the Times Bookshop in Dar es Salaam in 1971 as author of a Pan paperback "British Steam since 1900", which still sits yellowing on my bookshelves. 

It introduced me (in a land of spotless EAR Garratts) to typologies and aspects of steam engineering I hadn't thought about before. What particularly struck me was that he appeared to have not a shred of doubt about the veracity of what he wrote - a sort of 'Shock Jock' trenchant David Starkey - at the time a refreshing contrast to streams of repetitive books by OS Nock.

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

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

But it did happen. There were many examples of routes being quadrupled, although usually in comparatively short stretches, then these might eventually become connected and made continuous. The LNWR route out of London went to six tracks in the early 1900s. I might be wrong, but I don't think any lines were originally built as quadruple. But it was a major capital investment, and not undertaken lightly. As hinted, the directors would have taken a lot of convincing that this was a good - and profitable - thing.

Increasing the capacity of line would be considered, if the existing line(s) were subject to extensive delays in running trains, now and into the future.

Places like Euston Station was extended several times, to keep up with increased demand . I have no idea of what sums they did in calculating the projected cost of improving the line, against the cost of doing nothing. It certainly wasn't a decision by the LNWR Board to make it a 'nicer' station (far from it, it became a rabbit warren!),

No, the decisions were made entirely to enable more services to use it and therefore more passengers.

 

Of course the modern approach is to do 'feasibility studies', which can sometimes drag on for years. An example is increasing capacity at London airports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I just looked up the Wikipedia entry for Churchward where the story is attributed to W.A. Tuplin, in Great Western Saints and Sinners, so that immediately sets alarm bells ringing for its authenticity.

Tuplin is always a dubious source, but the story also appears in the much more reliable Ken Cook's book (and Cook knew Churchward). Professional locomotive engineers seem to have had a low opinion of Tuplin, so it seems unlikely Cook would use him as a source.

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

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, JimC said:

Professional locomotive engineers seem to have had a low opinion of Tuplin

And some amateur modellers as well.  I would have completely discounted the tale of Lady of Lyons' fast run at Little Somerford and give no credence to Tuplin's assumptions or account of it, but for having heard the tale from other sources that I think were reliable, and none to his highly unlikely footplate stories allegedly as told by drivers or firemen either.  As fiction, which I reckon to be the best way to read his stuff, it is tolerably well researched and entertaining; as comment on anything that ever really happened it's bullsh*t.  The story of the driver of a GC express who left the footplate to spy on a courting couple in the first compartment is especially incredulous.  We are led to believe that a passed cleaner doing the firing brought the loco from Leicester to Rugby on his own, because the driver had instructed him not to stop.  In reality he'd have pulled the train up at the next open box.  The point was to illustrate how well the loco steamed; an inexperienced man was capable of keeping time with it over 40 odd miles on his own.  B*ll*cks.

 

I'll allow there might be an element of truth, that a driver fell off a loco to his death shortly after leaving Leicester for some reason, but Tuplin's reason for his leaving the footplate is pretty unlikely; he'd know that there was no view from the tender framing and anyway the courting couple would surely have pulled the blinds down.  It's all fantasy, isn't it.   Well, so's Cwmdimbath, and that's much more believable!

Edited by The Johnster
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

And some amateur modellers as well.  I would have completely discounted the tale of Lady of Lyons' fast run at Little Somerford and give no credence to Tuplin's assumptions or account of it, but for having heard the tale from other sources that I think were reliable,

Yes Tuplin's embellishments server only to make the tale less credible. I've heard it said his lurid speculation about the locomotive slamming into full gear plain couldn't happen on a piston valve locomotive and was a phenomenon restricted to slide valves, although I don't know enough about the engineering detail to know the truth.

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...