Castle Aching

[Marly51]

The guys that amaze me are the ones that I call ‘wire men’, on account of them being made entirely of steel hawsers. These are old boys in their seventies and eighties who can still knock through a hundred miles, and happily plug away up those hills that used to be marked with two arrows on OS maps.

It’s totally humiliating to be overtaken, while puffing and groaning up a hill, by a bloke almost old enough to be your dad, who turns and gives a cheery ‘lovely morning for it!’ as he flashes by and disappears over the crest.

Ahh, but there are some who have totally knackered their joints, as well! Quite a few of my former hillwalkingclimbing friends have paid the price of bivvying on damp ground in their youth and have now been through double hip surgery ops more than once ☹️ I’m definitely slower going uphill these days, but still enjoy getting out there!

[Annie]

No indeed - the YHA was founded in 1930. Edwardian lady cyclists? - quite properly not cycling on the station platform. 

Oh I do like those bicycles.  I still have my Ladies Hercules heavyweight touring bicycle with fully lugged frame with that classic curved shape.  Over 60 years old and in original condition; - a superb bicycle to ride.  Hercules used to guarantee their bicycles for 60 years of use so I can certainly say they got that bit right.  Unfortunately I can no longer ride any of my lovely old bicycles with this illness I have, but I'm not going to part with my Hercules even though I've had plenty of folk asking about buying it.  

[Nearholmer]

The big claim of cycling is that it is ‘low impact’, so relatively kind to the joints. My bro took it up in his mid-50s, having spent a lifetime bashing his joints over hurdles for that very reason.

[Northroader]

I admire the insouciance of this lady cyclist, blithely forming a charming foreground to the tug of war going on behind.

[RedGemAlchemist]

The big claim of cycling is that it is ‘low impact’, so relatively kind to the joints. My bro took it up in his mid-50s, having spent a lifetime bashing his joints over hurdles for that very reason.

Hmm. Interesting. I have a bad back and knees (I know, I know, I'm only 24 so what did I do? For your information it's a hereditary condition) so might be worth investing in a bicycle myself...

Edited March 31, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[TheQ]

Many years of high impact sport, volleyball, baseball, sailing have knackered my knees and back.

A while ago I tried returning to my bike, just too painful every turn of the pedals, especially on the knees. As to how I used cycle with that narrow seat.....

[RedGemAlchemist]

Many years of high impact sport, volleyball, baseball, sailing have knackered my knees and back.

A while ago I tried returning to my bike, just too painful every turn of the pedals, especially on the knees. As to how I used cycle with that narrow seat.....

Fair enough. That'll do it.

Edited March 31, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[jcm@gwr]

I gave up cycling when I discovered the internal combustion engine!

But I also inherited a bad back, that, coupled with always doing a

physical job (engineer, builder, mechanic, shop fitter, loft converter,

and now a plumber) means I've suffered for years.

Things changed for me when I installed a 'Whirlpool' (Jaquzzi) bath

about 15 years ago, I use it once a week, without fail, and I haven't

had any problems since, and no bad joints!

[Killian keane]

I admire the insouciance of this lady cyclist, blithely forming a charming foreground to the tug of war going on behind.58D38DD3-E1D8-4EB8-A384-0FDDA86DA9AE.jpeg

Titfield Thunderbolt rematch?!

Might I query as to the circumstances of that photo and as to the identity of the rather smart looking saddle tank? (something about me says Craven)

[Nearholmer]

I think it might be a HM&ST loco being hauled through the streets, but I can’t recall why ...... to get round a flood, maybe?

 

Edit: no, it was being delivered to the incomplete line. Built by Dodds of Rotherham.

Edited March 31, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Killian keane]

I think it might be a HM&ST loco being hauled through the streets, but I can’t recall why ...... to get round a flood, maybe?

It does look very like Chichester from that line, except for the trailing wheels being too big, but then again she was built as an 0-6-0st so this could show her removal to Avonsides for conversion to a 0-4-2st

[Nearholmer]

I’ve found a couple of sources, both of which say that the photo shows her being delivered to the line.

 

Opening day photo below, an 0-4-2ST, but possibly by omission of coupling rods.

Edited March 31, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Tom Burnham]

Paused outside the "Anchor" pub in Sidlesham while being hauled along the road by the Burrell traction engine "Queen of the South".  Rails were progressively carried from behind the loco to the front as it edged along.  The loco was required by the contractor to work on the southern part of the line, but the lifting bridge over the Chichester Canal at Hunston had not yet been started.  The standard history of the Selsey Tramway doesn't identify the lady bicyclist, unfortunately.  The pub is still recognisable - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sidlesham_Anchor_Inn_geograph-3299714-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg

[RedGemAlchemist]

I’ve found a couple of sources, both of which say that the photo shows her being delivered to the line.

 

Opening day photo below, an 0-4-2ST, but possibly by omission of coupling rods.

I like that engine. Giving me ideas, that is...

[corneliuslundie]

I am going to be really boring and drag this thread back on topic.

I have been reading “A history of the Southern Railway” by C F Dendy Marshall. In it I came across the following which May be useful to Edwardian and followers of this thread.

“The following are the approximate dates of introduction of various classes of rail which happen to be available:

L & S W R

82 lb   30 ft Double headed, 1882

87 lb   30 ft Bull           “     , 1887

90 lb   30 ft Bull           “     , (SWR pattern), 1902

90 lb   45 ft Bull,          “     , (     “        “     ), 1903

90 lb   45 ft Bull           “     , (British Standard), 1908

S E R

82 lb   30 ft Double headed, 1882

91¼ lb 45 ft Bull          “    , 1903

95 lb   45 ft Bull           “    , (British Standard), 1908.”

 

Jonathan

[Shadow]

A bit in the future for CA, (1928), but a Hundred of Manhood & Select Tramway film.

 

https://player.bfi.org.uk/free/film/watch-the-selsey-tramway-1928-online

[Compound2632]

I am going to be really boring and drag this thread back on topic.

I have been reading “A history of the Southern Railway” by C F Dendy Marshall. In it I came across the following which May be useful to Edwardian and followers of this thread.

“The following are the approximate dates of introduction of various classes of rail which happen to be available:

L & S W R

82 lb   30 ft Double headed, 1882

87 lb   30 ft Bull           “     , 1887

90 lb   30 ft Bull           “     , (SWR pattern), 1902

90 lb   45 ft Bull,          “     , (     “        “     ), 1903

90 lb   45 ft Bull           “     , (British Standard), 1908

S E R

82 lb   30 ft Double headed, 1882

91¼ lb 45 ft Bull          “    , 1903

95 lb   45 ft Bull           “    , (British Standard), 1908.”

 

Jonathan

 

According to Fig. 1 of Dow, Midland Style (HMRS, 1975), the Midland was using 100lb rail in 54lb chairs from 1896 - but that will be for main line renewals. From the 1860s, 83lb rail (or thereabouts) was in use with 40lb chairs with inside keys. Outside keys were adopted in 1884, with 85lb rail in 50lb chairs. Dow also cites The Railway Year Book for 1922:

Midland: 45ft rails at 100lb/yard and 54lb chairs - the 1896 spec, so presumably 1896 is also the date for the adoption of 45ft rail;

LT&S section: 90lb rail and 52lb chairs;

M&GN: 85lb rail and 48lb chairs;

S&DJR: 90lb and 83lb rail and 48lb and 40lb chairs;

CLC: 95lb rails and 51lb chairs.

 

John Addyman's chapter on civil engineering in North Eastern Record Vol. 1 (HMRS, 1988) includes a table of rail standards used. In brief, 24ft 80lb double-headed rail to 1880, increasing to 30ft 82lb to 1889, then 30ft or 45ft 90lb bullhead to 1906, when British Standard 95lb bullhead rail in 45ft lengths became standard.

 

The LNWR's dustless tracks were laid with 60ft rails, 90lb/yard in 45lb chairs, from 1894. 90lb rail for main lines and 80lb for secondary routes had been the standard since 1887, in 30ft lengths. When Crewe started rolling steel rails in 1875, the weights were 84lb for main lines and 75lb for branches [Talbot et al., LNWR Liveries (HMRS, 1985)].

 

I have no doubt that the Midland's continued use of 45ft rail compared to the LNWR's 60ft was to make their expresses sound faster!

 

I'll repeat, these will be the standards for running line renewals. There will have been plenty of older, lighter track still in use. I think this all points to a lightly-laid line of the 1880s, such as the WNR, being laid with rails no longer than 30ft, certainly no more than 85lb/yard.

Edited April 1, 2018 by Compound2632

[Regularity]

I'll repeat, these will be the standards for running line renewals. There will have been plenty of older, lighter track still in use. I think this all points to a lightly-laid line of the 1880s, such as the WNR, being laid with rails no longer than 30ft, certainly no more than 85lb/yard.

Inside-keyed track, whilst easier to maintain (platelayer only had to walk in the four foot to see both sets of keys) gave a harder ride, so was replaced possibly more quickly than would be usual. I say this as it turned up on the second-hand market and was bought by such impecunious railways as the Northampton & Banbury Junction. (The East & West Junction was even shorter of money, and bought flat-bottom rail off the contractor - himself a director!)

The GWR (Northern Division) also had inside keyed track for a while: some was re-used on various branchlines, and remained in use until just after WWII at New Radnor, based on photos. It was then replaced with up-to-the-minute soncrete block and steel tiebar sleepers!

[corneliuslundie]

A useful place to find information on the track initially used is in the Inspecting officers' reports on opening, though they obviously only cover the period after such things as inspections became compulsory.

Jonathan

[Compound2632]

Inside-keyed track, whilst easier to maintain (platelayer only had to walk in the four foot to see both sets of keys) gave a harder ride, so was replaced possibly more quickly than would be usual. 

 

... the reason being the lateral forces due to an oscillating rail vehicle (as discussed in a recent Brunel-bashing thread). Outside keys give some springiness whereas for inside-keyed track, the rail is hard up against the unyielding cast iron of the chair. Which leads me to wonder, were chair breakages more common with inside-keyed track?

[Edwardian]

No indeed - the YHA was founded in 1930. Edwardian lady cyclists? - quite properly not cycling on the station platform. 

 

Wonderful picture.

 

Cyclists are a key part of the Edwardian scene, and the hobby was growing at the time of Castle Aching.

 

IIRC, Kelly's Norfolk Directory for 1912 lists a cycle shop in Castle Acre, but it is not present in the 1904 listing. 

 

Castle Aching, is an amalgamation of two places, and having a railway connection helps it to be greater than the sum of its parts.  I daresay the railway fosters modest Edwardian tourism, and this, combined with a burgeoning local population, might have supported a cycle shop by 1905, and we should certainly expect to see practitioners of the genteel art of cycling gracing the layout in due course.

 

 

I admire the insouciance of this lady cyclist, blithely forming a charming foreground to the tug of war going on behind.58D38DD3-E1D8-4EB8-A384-0FDDA86DA9AE.jpeg

 

Ooh look, there is a gentleman with a camera, so I must stop and pose!

 

I see that more information on the background activity follows.  Absolutely wonderful stuff.

Edited April 1, 2018 by Edwardian

[sem34090]

Does anyone have any drawings of Edwardian cycles? I have a plan formulating...

[Northroader]

Not quite the right date, but still, we’re on holiday today, and Hilda helps me with tracklaying on my Englefield Line:

[Guy Rixon]

... the reason being the lateral forces due to an oscillating rail vehicle (as discussed in a recent Brunel-bashing thread). Outside keys give some springiness whereas for inside-keyed track, the rail is hard up against the unyielding cast iron of the chair. Which leads me to wonder, were chair breakages more common with inside-keyed track?

 

Yes, inside-keyed chairs did break more often and this is quoted as the reason for the Midland giving up on the practice. (Sorry, no reference to hand, but I think Mr. Essery mentioned it in an article for MRJ.)

[Compound2632]

Not quite the right date, but still, we’re on holiday today, and Hilda helps me with tracklaying on my Englefield Line:9C739076-7C93-41AC-B6E8-5D7FC5B8A0CF.jpeg

 

I'm actually quite surprised. My money was on Mr Northroader giving us a French bicycle advert*.

 

Not really sure of the advisability of this, whatever the epoch.

 

*The different viewpoint may assist sem's researches?

Edited April 1, 2018 by Compound2632