Pylons .

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Do plans exist for L12L and L9? This is allegedly an L9 tower, although it’s on an L8 line, with just two LD30s(?) straddling the M4 just north of the junction with the L32:

 

 

https://openinframap.org/#15/51.5172/-2.52019

 

(It’s the more northern of the two supposedly 132 kV lines; the other was SWE PL16 and has since been dismantled. The deviation angles don’t look right either, as though the L8 line already replaced another 132 kV line.)

 

Looking at the L9 photos on Flash’s site, it does seem to broadly match with L9 deviation towers.

 

Leaves me wondering though: who made L9? Was there a separate L9 for each of the nine L6 types, or just a single L9 design belonging to one of the L9 designs?

 

I found another L9 section in the south west, but all straight line towers! In that instance it was indeed on an L6 line as you would expect.

Edited October 30, 2022 by Daniel Beardsmore

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Also, what on earth is this? Something somewhere in between L8 D30 and D60.

 

 

[pharrc20]

17 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Do plans exist for L12L and L9? This is allegedly an L9 tower, although it’s on an L8 line, with just two LD30s(?) straddling the M4 just north of the junction with the L32:

 

 

https://openinframap.org/#15/51.5172/-2.52019

 

(It’s the more northern of the two supposedly 132 kV lines; the other was SWE PL16 and has since been dismantled. The deviation angles don’t look right either, as though the L8 line already replaced another 132 kV line.)

 

Looking at the L9 photos on Flash’s site, it does seem to broadly match with L9 deviation towers.

 

Leaves me wondering though: who made L9? Was there a separate L9 for each of the nine L6 types, or just a single L9 design belonging to one of the L9 designs?

 

I found another L9 section in the south west, but all straight line towers! In that instance it was indeed on an L6 line as you would expect.

Afaik, the L9s over the M4 motorway were used here to provide clearance for planes taking off and landing at the former BAE Filton Down airfield and factory nearby, so I would guess these date from when this L2/L8 line was erected. The other L9s that you can see further up the M4 towards London were used to provide a less visually intrusive appearance on the L6 line towards Melksham substation.

 

I haven't come across any diagrams for the L9 or L12 low height towers but will double-check when back in the UK.

 

Cheers Paul

[pharrc20]

17 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Also, what on earth is this? Something somewhere in between L8 D30 and D60.

 

 

Hmm an odd one yes, I would guess this and the D tower plus the L2 DT date from when the ZF line was diverted into make Minety substation back in the late 60s or early 70s. Likewise the L2 DT and L8 D60 on the north side of the substation on the same ZF line added at same time to divert the line in. Maybe the original plan was for this odd tower to act like a D40EW to split the two circuits apart on the approach to the substation? But they decided against it as saved on needing two extra towers.

Cheers Paul 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

I don’t think I have ever seen a drawing showing EC/EWCO for any type, although they are now confirmed in L2, L6 and L8.

 

For L8(c), the chart notes, “D40 EWCO AS D60 WITH 4/UC …” suggesting that the mystery tower could be L8 or L8(c) D40EWCO.

 

For BICC L6(c) you have two types—both listed against D60—that presumably differ only in foundation, and I was already of the impression that L6 D40 EWCO is based on D60:

 

D40° E/C TOWER (10° DEVN) OFFSET 1.270
D40° E/C TOWER (10° DEVN) OFFSET 1.270

 

L2, the drawings were in the source material that made up the Tower Bible but both are amongst the missing pages. I read somewhere that a more complete Tower Bible PDF once existed, but goodness knows where it got to (missing items in red):

 

 

(The purple lines indicate unresolved mysteries although “Scottish” DD2 is now cleared up, as noted on topic page 59.)

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Current plans status of all lattice types with known designations >= 132 kV⁴:

 

PL1 and PL1b: requires investigation as there is still no information on how these differ
PL1a single circuit: plans needed
PL1a double circuit: covered by the Tower Bible but D56 and DT90 are missing
PL2: never seen; plans are missing from the Tower Bible
PL3: never seen; plans are missing from the Tower Bible
PL4: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete
PL7: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete
PL9: known only from a brief listing in relation to optical fibre conductors; never seen
PL10: known only from a brief listing in relation to optical fibre conductors; never seen
PL16 single circuit: plans needed
PL16 double circuit: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete (missing numerous DD types)
L16: covered by the Tower Bible (notwithstanding non-bible DT towers)
L55: believed to be the same as L16 but only the D2 plan is recovered¹
L132: seems to be synonymous with L16/L55³
L66: plans needed, none recovered
L2: good condition plans needed, including SFX and D10 crossarms as these are omitted from the standard plans
L3: plans needed, none recovered
L4: may as well have the whole lot as National Grid’s ones are incomplete and inaccurate (D90 missing, D60 and D30 incorrect)
L6: needed: L6 BB (current plans are too squashed/degrated), L6 JLE, L6 BICC, L6(c) all types
L7: plans needed
L8: uncertain; the L8(c) plans are warped from reproduction errors
L9: plans needed, none recovered
L12: all good

L12L: plans needed (L12 LD30/L12L D30)
L13: plans needed
L34: better plans needed²

 

All plans can be made publicly available for everyone’s benefit if permitted, or kept offline and used publicly only for creation of recognition diagrams.

 

¹ the “3-X” type is still a mystery; it could be J L Eve’s version of PL16, i.e. CEB-L132 0.175 conductor³ — needs further examination of 3-X lines to inspect the deviation towers

 

² the S or S2 plans are truncated and thus missing the inscription (the missing part of the tower base was guessable), and the S30° plans are missing a page and the bottom of the existing page. It’s possible that the plans are marked “GEN.OHL.275/L34” which would be where its name comes from. One of the L2 plans is indeed marked “GEN.OHL.275/L36”, and L55 gets its name from the marking “GEN.OHL.132/L55”. L66 may be the same.³

 

³ Standard CEB-L132 had (at least) two conductor types: 0.4 and 0.175, with the latter being Blaw-Knox’s PL16. Eve designed the 0.4 type and in typical Eve fashion never named it, which seems to be why it’s variously called L16, L55 or L132!

 

⁴ attempting 33/66 kV lattice is plain lunacy!

[L2's are great!]

On 02/11/2022 at 00:42, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Current plans status of all lattice types with known designations >= 132 kV⁴:

 

PL1 and PL1b: requires investigation as there is still no information on how these differ
PL1a single circuit: plans needed
PL1a double circuit: covered by the Tower Bible but D56 and DT90 are missing
PL2: never seen; plans are missing from the Tower Bible
PL3: never seen; plans are missing from the Tower Bible
PL4: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete
PL7: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete
PL9: known only from a brief listing in relation to optical fibre conductors; never seen
PL10: known only from a brief listing in relation to optical fibre conductors; never seen
PL16 single circuit: plans needed
PL16 double circuit: further plans needed as Tower Bible coverage is incomplete (missing numerous DD types)
L16: covered by the Tower Bible (notwithstanding non-bible DT towers)
L55: believed to be the same as L16 but only the D2 plan is recovered¹
L132: seems to be synonymous with L16/L55³
L66: plans needed, none recovered
L2: good condition plans needed, including SFX and D10 crossarms as these are omitted from the standard plans
L3: plans needed, none recovered
L4: may as well have the whole lot as National Grid’s ones are incomplete and inaccurate (D90 missing, D60 and D30 incorrect)
L6: needed: L6 BB (current plans are too squashed/degrated), L6 JLE, L6 BICC, L6(c) all types
L7: plans needed
L8: uncertain; the L8(c) plans are warped from reproduction errors
L9: plans needed, none recovered
L12: all good

L12L: plans needed (L12 LD30/L12L D30)
L13: plans needed
L34: better plans needed²

 

All plans can be made publicly available for everyone’s benefit if permitted, or kept offline and used publicly only for creation of recognition diagrams.

 

¹ the “3-X” type is still a mystery; it could be J L Eve’s version of PL16, i.e. CEB-L132 0.175 conductor³ — needs further examination of 3-X lines to inspect the deviation towers

 

² the S or S2 plans are truncated and thus missing the inscription (the missing part of the tower base was guessable), and the S30° plans are missing a page and the bottom of the existing page. It’s possible that the plans are marked “GEN.OHL.275/L34” which would be where its name comes from. One of the L2 plans is indeed marked “GEN.OHL.275/L36”, and L55 gets its name from the marking “GEN.OHL.132/L55”. L66 may be the same.³

 

³ Standard CEB-L132 had (at least) two conductor types: 0.4 and 0.175, with the latter being Blaw-Knox’s PL16. Eve designed the 0.4 type and in typical Eve fashion never named it, which seems to be why it’s variously called L16, L55 or L132!

 

⁴ attempting 33/66 kV lattice is plain lunacy!

Here are the all plans i have

 

Edited December 25, 2022 by L2's are great!

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Is there a means to upload them such that they retain their original filenames, and their high resolution? This forum crushes images down to a tiny sizes and the images are all randomly named (seemingly prior to upload). What happened to the RHS of each, with the series name, date, dimensions etc?

 

So far I have chosen not to trace L6 BB or L2 as the drawings are just too small and in too poor quality, although I am not convinced that the missing detail in the L2 drawings ever existed. L2 D10 and D30 have different crossarm bracing and nothing I have seen so far is of any use in drawing either. One PDF I found shows the difference clearly but nonetheless it’s drawn badly, and the plans omit D30 and the crossarm bracing is too cramped to recreate.

 

Looking at the incredible models I see here, there must be some good plans of the PL generation out there (that I am not allowed to have), but I have all but given up on pylons at this stage, as what I am working on is just not deemed to be desirable by anyone.

I started down this path to scratch my own itch, and I have scratched it to the point of bleeding. Beyond that, I only retain my desire to continue things if there is a clear desire for it to succeed.

[L2's are great!]

15 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Is there a means to upload them such that they retain their original filenames, and their high resolution? This forum crushes images down to a tiny sizes and the images are all randomly named (seemingly prior to upload). What happened to the RHS of each, with the series name, date, dimensions etc?

 

So far I have chosen not to trace L6 BB or L2 as the drawings are just too small and in too poor quality, although I am not convinced that the missing detail in the L2 drawings ever existed. L2 D10 and D30 have different crossarm bracing and nothing I have seen so far is of any use in drawing either. One PDF I found shows the difference clearly but nonetheless it’s drawn badly, and the plans omit D30 and the crossarm bracing is too cramped to recreate.

 

Looking at the incredible models I see here, there must be some good plans of the PL generation out there (that I am not allowed to have), but I have all but given up on pylons at this stage, as what I am working on is just not deemed to be desirable by anyone.

I started down this path to scratch my own itch, and I have scratched it to the point of bleeding. Beyond that, I only retain my desire to continue things if there is a clear desire for it to succeed.

There is a tower bible that i have saved as a pdf and it has a good selection, but admittedly there are plans that i too am missing yet i know they exist. I think the only way to obtain some is to know someone who works for national grid because the plans are sure to be saved on the system. 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

The tower bible is archived on my site and will remain publicly accessible so long as my site lasts. Someone on the Pylon Appreciation Society forum (I think that is where I read it) claimed years ago that there was a more complete copy than the one I have, but mine is the one with massive amounts missing including all of L2 and the pages I want most, the DX types (as that would verify whether DX denotes transposition towers, and allow us to identify which design is which). The tower bible is not detailed enough to make models from; the drawings are not even accurate. However, for recognition purposes they have to suffice as there is nothing better.

[L2's are great!]

An interesting shot I found on the web.

Shows the East Claydon-Cowley Line only a few months old in December 1967 on the approach to East Claydon Sub

 

 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Maybe it’s just me, but L6 doesn’t strike me as being a 60-year old design. Think about the cars from that era compared to cars of today — the pylon designs don’t seem to age somehow. L7 is just as old and is apparently still a current design, although I am not sure how much new L7 is being built now. Even L4 goes back to the mid-70s and that’s still a current type.

 

I guess we may feel differently about it if Britain were to massively leave the lattice approach behind.

[pharrc20]

20 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Maybe it’s just me, but L6 doesn’t strike me as being a 60-year old design. Think about the cars from that era compared to cars of today — the pylon designs don’t seem to age somehow. L7 is just as old and is apparently still a current design, although I am not sure how much new L7 is being built now. Even L4 goes back to the mid-70s and that’s still a current type.

 

I guess we may feel differently about it if Britain were to massively leave the lattice approach behind.

New L7c towers are being used on parts of the Hinkley to Seabanks project to divert, terminate and replace parts of the existing PL1 and PL16 tower lines rather than using L4 towers. Main areas are around Seabanks, Portishead and the new Churchill substation.

Cheers Paul 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Odd … I would have figured L4m would have sufficed, unless they intend to uprate the whole line to twin or heavier conductors at a later point.

[pharrc20]

On 29/12/2022 at 21:24, Daniel Beardsmore said:

Odd … I would have figured L4m would have sufficed, unless they intend to uprate the whole line to twin or heavier conductors at a later point.

From what I saw travelling home on the M5 on Wednesday afternoon, the new towers around the Avonmouth area appeared to be L7c terminal towers where the existing 132kV lines have been chopped and changed around to make way for the new L12 part of the new 400kV line. Further south the 132kV line from Weston-super-Mare was built with L3 towers and originally teed into a PL16 line. That PL16 is going I think and a new line using L7c towers will run to the new 400/132kV substation at Sandford from the existing L3 line. Previous tower replacements on this L3 have also been L7c towers as well in the past given the line has twin conductors fitted still.

Cheers Paul

[Daniel Beardsmore]

I noted before that part of a PL1a line near me has a section replaced with L7 (other replacements are all L4), including a DJ and DT back to back. The DJ tees off a PL16 line, ending with the elusive DDT that is just a bit too far to walk to. (That substation is the one with the unrecognisable DT that begins—or ends—a line of towers that one could argue is J L Eve’s version of PL16.) Why L7, I have no idea!

 

I took a fresh look at that DT recently — no more work has been done on the sealing end compound since I last visited that I can see, unfortunately. I did come across a tiny solar farm and a solitary wind turbine in a nearby field, so maybe that is what they are intending to connect to the grid.

[L2's are great!]

This very short L2 route consists of only 10 towers and links Frodsham Sub to Rocksavage Power Stn. Part of the line is half 132kv half 400kv, but wanted to share because that D90 is not on a full 90 degree turn. Makes me wonder if it was rerouted but I can't seem to find out. This section is just 132kv and is at the very end of the route. Interestingly there is another D90 further down especially when L2 D90s are not that common.

Edited January 1, 2023 by L2's are great!

[pharrc20]

3 hours ago, L2's are great! said:

This very short L2 route consists of only 10 towers and links Frodsham Sub to Rocksavage Power Stn. Part of the line is half 132kv half 400kv, but wanted to share because that D90 is not on a full 90 degree turn. Makes me wonder if it was rerouted but I can't seem to find out. This section is just 132kv and is at the very end of the route. Interestingly there is another D90 further down especially when L2 D90s are not that common.

Not many L2 lines with more than one D90 tower - another localish one is the Kearsley to Whitegate 275kV line VJ I think it is (off top of me head) that has two D90s, first is second tower out after leaving Kearsley and the second is further along line next to M60 orbital motorway near Middleton, Manchester.

This YYS Runcorn line runs to what is now the INEOS plant. Not sure if the line has ever been altered aside from the 400kV connection into the Rocksavage power plant and extra L8 ST tower that was inserted. Only part of this line appears on the NGC data iirc. Don't forget that a D90 tower is used to deviate lines from 61 upto the full 90 degrees angle, where the turn has to be more than than a D60 can go.

Cheers Paul

[L2's are great!]

1 hour ago, pharrc20 said:

Not many L2 lines with more than one D90 tower - another localish one is the Kearsley to Whitegate 275kV line VJ I think it is (off top of me head) that has two D90s, first is second tower out after leaving Kearsley and the second is further along line next to M60 orbital motorway near Middleton, Manchester.

This YYS Runcorn line runs to what is now the INEOS plant. Not sure if the line has ever been altered aside from the 400kV connection into the Rocksavage power plant and extra L8 ST tower that was inserted. Only part of this line appears on the NGC data iirc. Don't forget that a D90 tower is used to deviate lines from 61 upto the full 90 degrees angle, where the turn has to be more than than a D60 can go.

Cheers Paul

Ah yes that was the other example. Kearsley has that very rare D90 with equal arms too, or does that even count as a D90?

Oh yes i noticed that there was an ST tower situated right next to a modified L2 D10 tower. Ah thats probably why, but when i looked at it from above, the angle seemed lower than 60. Either that or that is the lowest angled L2 D90,  but then again you've got a similar scenario at Nursling with that BICC D90.

 

Best wishes, Felix

Edited January 2, 2023 by L2's are great!

[L2's are great!]

Are there any other L6 JL Eve D90s other than this one? I know of 3 D40ECs, 2 at Chesterfield, one at Nursling but hadn't found any other D90s 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

How much work goes into designing a pylon? If that is the only L6 JLE D90, was it worth the time taken to design it, compared to getting (say) BICC to put in a D90, or to just take a different route? Seems odd how little some of the different types were ever used.

[L2's are great!]

22 minutes ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

How much work goes into designing a pylon? If that is the only L6 JLE D90, was it worth the time taken to design it, compared to getting (say) BICC to put in a D90, or to just take a different route? Seems odd how little some of the different types were ever used.

It is bizarre how difficult it is to find certain D90s but then again if D60s can be used then that's usually the more common alternative approach I'd say.

The most common L6 D90 is the BICC design, followed by balfour beattys version and the blaw knox variant for which, I only know of 3 in existence. Even with L3 for example, there is no L3 D90, most D90 towers in L3 routes are L2 D90s 

Edited January 2, 2023 by L2's are great!

[L2's are great!]

On 26/06/2022 at 20:54, L2's are great! said:

Also having never seen a blaw knox L6 D90 tower before, am i right in saying this is one of them??

Heres the Blaw Knox D90 Equiv on route heading west out of monk fryston

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by L2's are great!

[Daniel Beardsmore]

You like making it a headache to figure out what your photos represent but I did identify the location of that L6 JLE D90, and I was able to compare it to the drawing on my L6 page. It’s near enough the same. The drawings are never accurate to begin with.

I might at some point have a go with your L4 and L7 plans. The L4 drawing has the missing D90 type and the missing bracing members from National Grid’s D60 drawing (for now I just estimated those pieces from photos). The L7 drawings are either inaccurate or the design changed—a number of final crossarm bracing members are missing—but are usable and I can use my own photos to put back the missing bracings. (The final crossarm bracing members for L2 and L3 are generally impossible to make out in those hopelessly small drawings, and for L2 this is an important detail as D10 and D30 have distinctly different crossarm bracing — possibly the same with L3 but I never got to L3 in person this year. I suspect they were just drawn too small to begin with.)

[L2's are great!]

16 minutes ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

You like making it a headache to figure out what your photos represent but I did identify the location of that L6 JLE D90, and I was able to compare it to the drawing on my L6 page. It’s near enough the same. The drawings are never accurate to begin with.

I might at some point have a go with your L4 and L7 plans. The L4 drawing has the missing D90 type and the missing bracing members from National Grid’s D60 drawing (for now I just estimated those pieces from photos). The L7 drawings are either inaccurate or the design changed—a number of final crossarm bracing members are missing—but are usable and I can use my own photos to put back the missing bracings. (The final crossarm bracing members for L2 and L3 are generally impossible to make out in those hopelessly small drawings, and for L2 this is an important detail as D10 and D30 have distinctly different crossarm bracing — possibly the same with L3 but I never got to L3 in person this year. I suspect they were just drawn too small to begin with.)

Well its just the way ive posted things since joining this forum in 2019, I guess we are all different in the way we word things.

But there are these plans for the L2 D10 and D30 that i have which should help, i forgot i had these.