Jump to content

'CHARD

Waverley Route new image links and discussion

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, 37175 said:

 

Your Flickr site?

Absolutely not. Found it via Google Images. I'll pull the post anyway seeing as the photo shouldn't be on the Internet in the first place.

 

Regards, Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 37175 said:

By the way, the Up Main Distant that you can see part way down the train is 365 yards north of Whitrope Siding signal box. 

Copyright shenanigans apart, that strikes me as an awfully short distance between Distant and Home.  I realise Up trains wouldn't be travelling fast at that point, but presumably there was a banner repeater just before the North portal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Richard Hall said:

Copyright shenanigans apart, that strikes me as an awfully short distance between Distant and Home.  I realise Up trains wouldn't be travelling fast at that point, but presumably there was a banner repeater just before the North portal?

 

I'm not sure, but I don't think there was. I've attached a very basic diagram I made about twenty years ago showing distances of all signals from Whitrope Siding 'box - hopefully it's readable.1268834527_whitropedistancesfromsignalbox.jpg.8234f338f6082f831e8497624dd37a0c.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just idle curiosity now, but I wonder what the sighting on Whitrope Up Distant was like from inside the tunnel. 365 yards doesn't sound like a lot of space to bring an 800 ton train to a halt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Permissible speed Hawick to Riccarton culvert was only 45mph and climbing at 1:92 would factor in stopping distance. 

Anything of length or weight would of had the speed scrub by the constant curvature from the north anyway.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'd understood it to be that the type 4 had failed and come to a stand just in rear of the up distant and the type 3, slightly underpowered for consist, was sent to rescue. Cant mind what Bruce told me when he sent me it years ago.

Either way, the duff is DIT and not tandem working the consist.

Edited by Iain Mac
Spelling/phrasing
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how readable this will be, screen capture from CAD. 52.75mp-53mp route map, ongoing project.

Aerial photos copyright Bing although suitably altered, to give credit to origin.

 

Plenty of room......

Hawick Station Capture 5.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I use that resource a lot.

 

It is 1:1 in CAD though and I can do all sorts with it, scale, add gradient profile, curvature, multiple date coverage for site development and ultimately build it in 3D creating landscapes.

I do find nls a great review point for starting, but its still just a map on an aerial view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/06/2020 at 23:20, The Border Reiver said:

LNER Gresley K3 2-6-0 61984 at Hawick shed, on a sunny day in 1961

 

1961 - K3 at Hawick

 

 

Lovely photo.  A Tweedmouth K3: I wonder what it was doing at Hawick? Pretty sure the loco next to it is 65331 with its curvaceous tender cab: most J36 tender cabs looked like garden sheds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peak D23 at Carlisle station on the down Waverley in August 1965. Unusually, it standing at platform 4 and not the usual platform 3 which is occupied by a class 40.

 

GH040_30_20161130_0029_1200.jpg.9f45b91efa230c95200a7e6f9e115506.jpg

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, The Border Reiver said:

Peak D23 at Carlisle station on the down Waverley in August 1965. Unusually, it standing at platform 4 and not the usual platform 3 which is occupied by a class 40.

 

GH040_30_20161130_0029_1200.jpg.9f45b91efa230c95200a7e6f9e115506.jpg

 

The usual random parcels van inserted behind the loco.  If my eyes do not deceive me, a "Stove R" six-wheeler.  Wonderfully archaic. I'm guessing these parcels vans were attached at Carlisle: I wouldn't have thought something like a Stove R would have been rated for the maximum line speeds attainable between St Pancras and Carlisle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Richard Hall said:

 

The usual random parcels van inserted behind the loco.  If my eyes do not deceive me, a "Stove R" six-wheeler.  Wonderfully archaic. I'm guessing these parcels vans were attached at Carlisle: I wouldn't have thought something like a Stove R would have been rated for the maximum line speeds attainable between St Pancras and Carlisle.

 

To me the 6-wheeler looks more like a Thompson LNER BZ rather than the LMS-type Stove R.  I have an extract from the June - Sept 1962 ScR Carriage Marshalling Circular which (for the Down "Waverley") says "Attach rear Galashiels - BZ (SX) Galashiels to Edinburgh" although it's entirely possible that changed operating requirements by 1965 meant attachment at Carlisle.  The Up working has the note "N.F.W. from Carlisle" which I think means "no vehicles with wheelbase less than 15 feet" (but perhaps some-one more knowledgeable can confirm).  That would tie in with your thoughts on line speeds south of Carlisle.

 

Alasdair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

the LMR 1965-66 PTM has the Down Waverley (09.15 St.Pan. departure?) as:

1S64-65.PNG.1176c7bf7b223cf6370917a39f54a383.PNG

 

From 4/10/65 (I believe the Waverley did not run in Winter) there is this:

1S64-66.PNG.384aae08b6abf0948f9018090adf8bc9.PNG

So the CK/BSK/PMV are detached from the 10.15 St.Pan-Glasgow Central

 

'PMV' is only defined as 'Luggage and Parcels van' but will not be BR Standard stock (i.e. mk1 with buckeye couplers and Pullman gangways, denoted by 'Z')

Also, it's probably not a Brake Van type as there are specific vehicle codes for these i.e. B/BG (bogied), BY (4-whl), BZ (6-whl). Stove vans might be actually defined as such.

I think (and I'm often wrong) that N.F.W. means 'No Four-wheeled' vehicles - presumably 6-wheelers were ok.

c.f. there were Abdn-Glasgow trains which had an XFISH (6-whl) on the end, but not a FISH (4-whl)

 

For completeness, the corresponding Up Waverley (10,15 Edin departure) was:

1M88-65.PNG.2019b451c6d78f7efd40350f53dc1275.PNG

 

Many thanks, as always, to Robert Carroll's Coaching Stock Group at groups.io

https://brcoachingstock.groups.io

Edited by keefer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh!

Melmerby's link to the the Beeb report above about the Carlisle re-opening with the South Scotland MP urging for a station stop at Langholm would make for an expensive diversion, compared to a GWR style Langholm Road stop (7-8 miles distant) adjacent to the A9 in the vicinity of the old Langholm branch Riddings Juction.

 

I hadn't realised what an interesting history the Langholm branch had until I Googled the booklet by Bruce McCartney here  on the branch.

  • The Caledionian secured the defeat of the original 1845 NBR bill to extend from Hawick to Carlisle via Langholm.
  • The CR later proposed a line via Teviot dale and Langholm to Hawick - which may well have resulted in a CR/NBR confrontation like Peebles.
  • In 1859 the NBR eventually succeeded with the Liddersdale (Waverley route) - opening in 1862, the Langholm branch in 1864.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/06/2020 at 15:15, AJCT said:

 

To me the 6-wheeler looks more like a Thompson LNER BZ rather than the LMS-type Stove R. 

 

I never knew such an animal even existed.  My life will now be incomplete without one (in N gauge).  I should imagine this was the last regular working for a six-wheeler on a class 1 passenger train: the WR was a wonderful railway but perhaps a little too rustic to survive in the modern world.

 

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.