S&DJR connections with the GWR

[Andy Kirkham]

15 hours ago, Artless Bodger said:

Didn't the Midland also reach Swansea from Hereford via the Neath and Brecon?

 

The Neath & Brecon between Brecon and the Swansea Vale was an integral part of the Midland system in terms of train running; for much of the line's history the Midland  ran all the trains on that section; the N&B company confined its operations to the Neath-Coelbren section. After the grouping the LMS had no use for it as they could use  the Central Wales Line to reach Swansea.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Andy Kirkham

[John-Miles]

17 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

 

The GWR's main concern in respect of the Midland - once matters had finally been settled between Bristol and Gloucester - was in respect of South Wales where, for once, it and the LNWR were in agreement in trying to keep the Midland out

This isn't strictly correct. As stated above the Midland obtained access to South Wales via the N&B, it also took over the Hereford, Hay and Brecon and the Swansea Vale Railway as part of its route. In the early days of the SVR there were extensive discussions and even Acts of Parliament for the South Wales Railway (a GWR proxy) to take over the SVR but these failed. There was also a brief possibility that the GWR might take over  the HH&B but this also came to nothing. The N&B promoted and started to build a line northwards from Devynock and Sennybridge to Llangammarch Wells on the LNWR's Central Wales line. Extensive earthworks still exist. This was never finished because of the bankruptcy of the contractor. The N&B appealed to the LNWR for help but they were ignored. The SVR tried to sell its line to the LNWR (and also the Llanelly Railway - in fact anybody who would give them a reasonable amount of cash). This got as far as an inspection by LNWR directors but they decided against it although they did obtain running powers from Brynamman to Ystalyfera which were never used. So both the GWR and the LNWR had opportunities to block the Midland.

 

It might also be of interest that the Midland came very close to taking over the Brecon and Merthyr and were making eyes at the Monmouthshire Railway. The B&M deal failed because of the debenture holders not liking the deal and so it became impossible for the Midland to get to Newport and hence it had no direct contact with the Monmouthshire.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, John-Miles said:

This isn't strictly correct.

 

For full details, see the forthcoming Summer 2020 number of the Midland Railway Society Journal...

[Artless Bodger]

2 hours ago, John-Miles said:

The N&B promoted and started to build a line northwards from Devynock and Sennybridge to Llangammarch Wells on the LNWR's Central Wales line.

Thank you John-Miles. A bit more OT but your information rang a bell, I'd watched a youtube video about the remnants of this line during SI ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiBqUhHdxhE ). 

 

[Artless Bodger]

On 01/08/2020 at 15:26, The Johnster said:

The Culm Valley would have provided suitable work for the 1Ps , but sadly I reckon the idea of Stanier pacifics on the CRE would in reality have been 4Ps piloted by 2Ps because that’s how the Midland and the early LMS did things.  The history of the GW would have been very different of course; assuming the Midland took the South Devon under it’s wing as well Churchward, relieved of the burden of the South Devon banks (for which Derby might have built sisters for Big Bertha), might have built wide firebox atlatics and developed them into pacifics.  The Berks and Hants might never have been built. 

If the Midland had taken the B&E and South Devon early enough, then perhaps Churchward would have completed his apprenticeship in Derby rather than Swindon - then what? Would Derby have the lead in loco development, and Swindon followed a more traditional approach after Dean? 

[John-Miles]

46 minutes ago, Artless Bodger said:

Thank you John-Miles. A bit more OT but your information rang a bell, I'd watched a youtube video about the remnants of this line during SI ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiBqUhHdxhE ). 

 

Well I watched the video. Very interesting but 0/10 for pronounciation. Welsh is always a challenge for Anglophone people. Devynock is pronounced Day-vun-ogg. They also managed to mess up Llangammarch but 10/10 for enthusiasm. If you do intend to visit please be aware part of the route is on MOD land.

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, Artless Bodger said:

If the Midland had taken the B&E and South Devon early enough, then perhaps Churchward would have completed his apprenticeship in Derby rather than Swindon - then what? Would Derby have the lead in loco development, and Swindon followed a more traditional approach after Dean? 

 

Derby had the lead over Swindon until Churchward got a free hand - unlike Deeley.

 

What was the first Great Western class to have piston valves?

Edited August 2, 2020 by Compound2632

[The Johnster]

The Midland’s takeover of the Swansea Vale was extremely aggressive and included spreading false rumours about the financial stability of the company (which played a significant part in their becoming factual) and regarding safety standards as well.  A lot of underhand and scurrilous activity was undertaken, the Midland having paid spies in Swansea.  It has always seemed strange to me that this aggression and persistence was never matched by Midland expansion between Worcester and Hereford, but AFAIK while Midland locomotive movements took place on this section, there was never an attempt to establish through Midland passenger services between Birmingham and Swansea. 
 

Freight was routed this way of courseU I, forwarded in GW trains between Worcester and Hereford. 
 

 

[Compound2632]

34 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

never matched by Midland expansion between Worcester and Hereford, but AFAIK while Midland locomotive movements took place on this section, there was never an attempt to establish through Midland passenger services between Birmingham and Swansea. 
 

Freight was routed this way of courseU I, forwarded in GW trains between Worcester and Hereford. 
 

 

 

The Midland did run a through passenger service between Birmingham and Hereford from 1868 but in later years this dwindled to attaching carriages to GW trains from Worcester. It seems to be the case that through passenger services to Swansea were never on the Midland's agenda - the nature of the route would have made any such attempt hopelessly uncompetitive. The Midland was there for the goods and mineral traffic. @John-Miles can give chapter and verse.

 

I had assumed that goods and mineral trains were worked right through to Worcester and north thereof by Midland engines? Or maybe not at all periods?

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Re-the Forth Bridge Company. 

The MR had 32.5%, the NB 30%, the NE 18.75% and the GN 18.75%.

 

Possible railway amalgamations in the late 19th century are a fascinating subject in their own right. Some nearly made it to the statute books, eg the GN with the GE. Earlier the L&Y and the GE had thoughts on a fourth trunk line between London and the North.  

 

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I had assumed that goods and mineral trains were worked right through to Worcester and north thereof by Midland engines? Or maybe not at all periods?

 

The Midland would haul it's own goods and mineral train on it's own railway as much as possible, so a wagon or van loaded from, say, Nottingham to, say, Ystradgylais, would be hauled by Midland locos from Nottingham to Worcester, where it would be forwarded on a GW goods train to Hereford.  From Hereford it would be worked by the Midland to Brecon and onward to Coelbren over the Neath and Brecon over which the Midland had running powers, and from Coelbren Jc on the Midland's own metals again, the Swansea Vale.  AFAIK there were never formal running powers for the Midland over the GW from Worcester to Shelwick or from there to Hereford on the GW/LNW joint line, but locos passed over the section for access to Derby works by arrangement, for which the Midand was charged a fee.

 

This was a fairly normal way of working general merchandise goods traffic; vehicles were loaded to a destination which could be anywhere in the country and the RCH organised the payment of fees and division of income from goods customers between the lines that handled the traffic.  The vehicles were returned to their owning railway asap, empty if a return load could not immediately be found for them, until the pooling arrangements of WW1 and the grouping period.

[Compound2632]

8 hours ago, The Johnster said:

AFAIK there were never formal running powers for the Midland over the GW from Worcester to Shelwick or from there to Hereford on the GW/LNW joint line, but locos passed over the section for access to Derby works by arrangement, for which the Midand was charged a fee.

 

I'm afraid this can't be correct as the Midland certainly operated a passenger service between Birmingham and Hereford Barton, starting in 1869 (not 68 as I stated above) but only until 1873 - there's a photograph - and goods trains too, according to @John-Miles. The running powers derived from reciprocal arrangements with the West Midland Railway.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I know I'm going off topic, but there were rumours of the MR and L&Y amalgamating in the early 1860s. Also around the same time, there was a proposition for the LNW and GN to jointly absorb the MS&L (forerunner of the GC). So if things had turned out differentlly, the GC mainline to Marylebone would never have been built.

 

Ten years earlier there was talk of uniting the GN and the MR upon the principle of complete amalgamation. There were also negotiations for amalgamation of the LNW and MR. So if either had come to fruition, there'd be no need for a St Pancras either.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Compound2632]

Re. running powers, on reading Ahrons, I was surprised to discover that prior to the opening of the Dore & Totley line, the Midland worked its own goods trains between Sheffield and Manchester over the MS&LR main line.

[The Stationmaster]

On 01/08/2020 at 22:25, Compound2632 said:

 

Tru enough, but the Midland had the direct route - until challenged by the LNWR and GWR in league after the opening of the Severn Tunnel - a very real threat to the Midland's business, especially for goods between Bristol and the South West, and Lancashire and Yorkshire.

 

The traffic and operating impact of the Severn Tunnel is an interesting area and is rather different from the way many people perceived it.  Its had the advantage of shortening passenger train journey times  and later widening the options for new passenger train services, eventually between the south west and north west but that was not an immediate thing - even by 1911 there were none in the GWR timetable.  

 

Its use for freight traffic was very different as its main impact was the radical effect it had on the working of coal traffic.  For example by 1911 the vast majority of westbound freight trains through the Tunnel were destined for Rogerstone or Aberdare and were largely coal empties.  There were some goods trains to Severn Tunnel Jcn or Aderdare but none of them ran from anywhere beyond Bristol except one from Westbury which immediately indicates there were no substantial traffic flows over the longer distance sufficient to justify a through train.  Later marshalling books again indicate there was little or no freight traffic passing that way to the northwest from the south west.  But this is hardly surprising as the south west never really had much to offer in the way of originating goods traffic heading anywhere other than towards London - apart from various seasonal flows reliant on agriculture and fishery.   For bulk traffics there was strong seaborne competition hence there was, for example in 1911, only one train a day of coal empties from Exeter to South Wales and it would have been mainly loco coal empties as domestic coal moved more cheaply by sea, even to the south coast of Devon.

 

So in reality even 25 years after the Severn Tunnel opened it wasn't exactly competing with the Midland for whatever traffic there was between the West Country and Lancashire.   And it only began to truly compete for traffic between the West Country and Yorkshire after the GCR's London Extension had opened and Passenger rated traffic continued to pass via that route well into the late 1950s.

 

The principal GWR flows to the north west had always been from South Wales (basically coal) and London/the Midlands (there was a nightly Paddington - Manchester goods running in the 1890s).  But again this is hardly surprising.

 

It was of course the case that all the lag rger Pre-Group Railways were continually seeking to expand their areas of interest either by acquisitions or by through train working.  And the GWR - the largest of them all - was always a prime example of that.  Hence. like several more immediately thought of concerns, it had a rail connection into Manchester Docks and up until WWII it operated its own passenger trains into Manchester making that the most northerly place reached by wholly GWR operated trains.  It obviously got much further north as part of inter-company through working.  It had a jointly owned interest in Ireland (operated by the GS&W).  

[PenrithBeacon]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

... And the GWR - the largest of them all - was always a prime example of that.  Hence. like several more immediately thought of concerns, it had a rail connection into Manchester Docks and up until WWII it operated its own passenger trains into Manchester making that the most northerly place reached by wholly GWR operated trains.  ...

The rail connection to the Manchester docks was over the LNWR over whose tracks it also operated its Chester-Manchester services into Exchange. I am not aware of any GWR service into the Manchester docks (powered by its own engines that is), but the GWR did run into Liverpool Road goods and it had a goods office in the centre of Manchester, but I can't remember where. The GWR didn't own any tracks in the Manchester area.

See 

Edited August 3, 2020 by PenrithBeacon
more words

[Compound2632]

14 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 AFAIK there were never formal running powers for the Midland over the GW from Worcester to Shelwick or from there to Hereford on the GW/LNW joint line, but locos passed over the section for access to Derby works by arrangement, for which the Midand was charged a fee.

 

E.L. Ahrons, Locomotive and Train Working in the Latter Part of the Nineteenth Century Vol. 2 (Heffer, 1952, reprinted from The Railway Magazine), p. 98:

 

After describing the through coach workings by great Western train, he continues: "On the other hand the Midland ran goods trains with its own engines right through from Brecon to Birmingham over the Great Western line between Hereford and Stoke works." 

 

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The traffic and operating impact of the Severn Tunnel is an interesting area and is rather different from the way many people perceived it.  Its had the advantage of shortening passenger train journey times  and later widening the options for new passenger train services, eventually between the south west and north west but that was not an immediate thing - even by 1911 there were none in the GWR timetable.  

 

So in reality even 25 years after the Severn Tunnel opened it wasn't exactly competing with the Midland for whatever traffic there was between the West Country and Lancashire.   And it only began to truly compete for traffic between the West Country and Yorkshire after the GCR's London Extension had opened and Passenger rated traffic continued to pass via that route well into the late 1950s.

 

The principal GWR flows to the north west had always been from South Wales (basically coal) and London/the Midlands (there was a nightly Paddington - Manchester goods running in the 1890s).  But again this is hardly surprising.

 

Ahrons, op. cit. p. 115:

 

"But the year 1888 also saw a much more serious competition to the Midland in the opening of the new route of the Great Western and London & North Western Railways from Bristol through the Severn Tunnel. This not only affected the Midland Scotch service from the West of England, but also beat its Manchester and Liverpool connections. And even Leeds did not escape, ..."

 

... "the Great Western controlled all the bookings west of Bristol, and the unwary passenger who wanted to go anywhere was - as far as it could be done - propelled through the Severn Tunnel, sometimes to his disadvantage."

 

He goes on to describe the acceleration of the Midland's North & West passenger service. He has less to say about goods traffic but it seems to me pretty clear that the competitive advantage of the Severn Tunnel was primarily for North-South traffic, the Great Western having a virtual monopoly on East-West traffic anyway, despite the length of the old route via Gloucester.

[John-Miles]

19 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The Midland’s takeover of the Swansea Vale was extremely aggressive and included spreading false rumours about the financial stability of the company (which played a significant part in their becoming factual) and regarding safety standards as well.  A lot of underhand and scurrilous activity was undertaken, the Midland having paid spies in Swansea.  It has always seemed strange to me that this aggression and persistence was never matched by Midland expansion between Worcester and Hereford, but AFAIK while Midland locomotive movements took place on this section, there was never an attempt to establish through Midland passenger services between Birmingham and Swansea. 
 

Freight was routed this way of courseU I, forwarded in GW trains between Worcester and Hereford. 
 

 

I would be very interested to see your source of information for the above. I am the main author of the books on the Swansea Vale Railway and I have done a huge amount of research into the takeover. I found no evidence to support your assertions. Indeed, the evidence I found was entirely to the contrary. The Midland spent a lot of time and money helping the SVR out including loaning it substantial sums of money, locomotives and rolling stock. The initial loan and subsequent takeover seems to have been an entirely amicable affair.

[John-Miles]

14 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The Midland would haul it's own goods and mineral train on it's own railway as much as possible, so a wagon or van loaded from, say, Nottingham to, say, Ystradgylais, would be hauled by Midland locos from Nottingham to Worcester, where it would be forwarded on a GW goods train to Hereford.  From Hereford it would be worked by the Midland to Brecon and onward to Coelbren over the Neath and Brecon over which the Midland had running powers, and from Coelbren Jc on the Midland's own metals again, the Swansea Vale.  AFAIK there were never formal running powers for the Midland over the GW from Worcester to Shelwick or from there to Hereford on the GW/LNW joint line, but locos passed over the section for access to Derby works by arrangement, for which the Midand was charged a fee.

 

 

I'm sorry but this is also wrong. The Midland had running powers for all traffic from Stoke Works through to Hereford. The running powers from Stoke Works to Worcester were granted by the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway which was later absorbed by the GWR. The Midland was a major investor in the Worcester and Hereford and as a result obtained running powers. The Midland ran through goods to South Wales from Washwood Heath and Worcester ( Worcester Shrub Hill was a joint station and the Midland had a loco shed in Worcester)

[John-Miles]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Re. running powers, on reading Ahrons, I was surprised to discover that prior to the opening of the Dore & Totley line, the Midland worked its own goods trains between Sheffield and Manchester over the MS&LR main line.

This would be to gain access to the Midland's Ancoats goods station. The MSLR and the Midland did a deal giving the Midland access to what is now called Piccadilly station. The Midland used the MSLR part of the station for some years until Central was built. As part of the deal the MSLR line from New Mills to IIRC Ardwick became joint with the Midland.

[Compound2632]

23 minutes ago, John-Miles said:

This would be to gain access to the Midland's Ancoats goods station. The MSLR and the Midland did a deal giving the Midland access to what is now called Piccadilly station. The Midland used the MSLR part of the station for some years until Central was built. As part of the deal the MSLR line from New Mills to IIRC Ardwick became joint with the Midland.

 

Indeed, that gave the Midland access from the Peak Forest line, for traffic from the Midlands and London. But Ahrons, op. cit. p.128 states re. the opening of the Dore and Chinley line in 1893: "From this time the Midland fast goods trains between Bradford, Sheffield and Liverpool, which had hitherto run over the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire from Barnsley, quitted this route for the new Midland line."

Edited August 3, 2020 by Compound2632

[PenrithBeacon]

I imagine it would! The more mileage over its own system would mean less money paid to the GCR.

Not quite on topic, but then we have strayed far from the OP, when the GCR opened its London extension it withdrew its agreement with the GNR about GNR traffic over its system. The latter wasn't too fussed about expresses to Lancashire as they were hopelessly uncompetitive from KX but it did care about freight and minerals to Lancashire on the CLC. These were run from the GNR over the Midland via Butterley and the Peak Forest line and very successfully too

[John-Miles]

Later the GNR trains used the Hope Valley route to get to Manchester.

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Not quite on topic, but then we have strayed far from the OP, when the GCR opened its London extension it withdrew its agreement with the GNR about GNR traffic over its system. The latter wasn't too fussed about expresses to Lancashire as they were hopelessly uncompetitive from KX 

 

I find that surprising as the Manchester expresses via Retford had the reputation of supreme briskness, from all I've read - certainly 4 hr 15 min was very creditable in 1884. MS&L engines worked the trains between Grantham and Manchester. [Ref. Ahrons, op. cit. Vol. 1.]

[PenrithBeacon]

They were quick for the day, but it was a long way round and it became a serious issue when the GCR withdraw support. After this the route through Derbyshire on secondary lines to the Midland at Ripley took a lot of time out of the service. Then there was the arduous and slow climbing of the Peak route. The GCR/GNR services to Lancashire never really competed for end to end KX-Lancashire, but the intermediate stops added aspects that the LNWR and Midland couldn't provide. 

The shortest route was the LNWR one and it was the shortest by a long way. It was also the less hilly, a major advantage.

People tend to get misty eyed about Victorian competition, and it's true that the route to Manchester, with exceptionally hard running KX-Retford, could just about hold its own with the LNW, but projecting the service on to Liverpool and it was bound to fail as the LNW had much the best way south.

The GC/GN split made the GN concentrate on freight to Manchester and Liverpool over the Midland and CLC and I should think the railway's bottom line was all the better for it. I think the passenger services, or what remained of them, were withdrawn by the LNER, but I'm not sure about the dates offhand.

Edited August 3, 2020 by PenrithBeacon