Pylons .

[Daniel Beardsmore]

What on earth towers are those? Those are not normal L2 D10 or D30 crossarms. Check your own plans earlier (you’ll have to guess which are L2 and L3 as you didn’t indicate in any possible way what was what). If L2 was ever constructed to that design, the design changed considerably afterwards. L2 around here has very different crossarms, and the bracing is different between D10 and D30, as I can see from your plans it is for L3 also. The plans are just too small to be able to draw the crossarms and show the difference.

[L2's are great!]

 

13 minutes ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

What on earth towers are those? Those are not normal L2 D10 or D30 crossarms. Check your own plans earlier (you’ll have to guess which are L2 and L3 as you didn’t indicate in any possible way what was what). If L2 was ever constructed to that design, the design changed considerably afterwards. L2 around here has very different crossarms, and the bracing is different between D10 and D30, as I can see from your plans it is for L3 also. The plans are just too small to be able to draw the crossarms and show the difference.

Those are original CEGB blueprints for the L2 series and here are the normal L3s

It wont let me rotate it for some reason

 

 

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

[L2's are great!]

These are the L3 C plans 

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Images uploaded to the forum have a size limit (width and height). However, I am sceptical that what you have there ever had much more detail: compare the stroke thickness to the crossarm bracing length at the tips of the crossarms and you’ll see that there is little scope for any more detail to exist, and if it did, it would have to be in a better copy of the document (if we were to assume the stroke thickness was increased by 1bpp threshold conversion).

Look on page 32 of this topic and you’ll see a much nicer set of L2 plans, but again they are too small, and the forum software likely crushed the image to too small a size. Even then, it looks like the final bracing members were never drawn in, just like with the L7 drawing. I have yet to see any indications of the existence of usable L2 plans.

You can see from your own L3 plans above how the D10 and D30 crossarm bracing differs, and it’s one way to identify which tower type you are looking at. L2 is the same idea, but the plans actually omit D30 crossarms entirely, so I can’t draw D30 regardless.

What happened to all the right hand portions of your plans, with the tower dimensions, drawing details and dates?

[L2's are great!]

Ill try screengrab the full L3 plans with the data, it might not be clear but all my plans i have were pre photocopied etc.

These are some more L2 prints

[L2's are great!]

[Daniel Beardsmore]

That L2 DTU is a completely different design.

Also, this is how your L3 DS above comes out if you zoom in:

[L2's are great!]

I can give you the figures, just let me know which ones you want and from which towers

[L2's are great!]

Also was looking into Castle Donington Power Station and the backstory of the pylons that ran past there. The L6 BKs came from Ratcliffe Power Station and then there was a switch to L2 which can be seen today. The L2D40 EC was added in way later to connect up the 2 routes as you can make out the L2 DT45 and L2 D60 in the old shot from 1988 however they are not connected unlike today. These L2's run to the cross over near Enderby. Im not sure if the East Claydon section originally connected to the Ratcliffe branch but it looks likely before the L6s came and diverted things with the Ratcliffe line running to Coventry instead. Such a fascinating tale to be had with the routes around the old power station which there is nothing left of. Did the other L2 route which runs to Drakelow/Willington ever divert to Castle Donington?

Edited January 3, 2023 by L2's are great!

[Daniel Beardsmore]

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

I can give you the figures, just let me know which ones you want and from which towers

 

What I was doing (and may work on again at some point) is drawing diagrams for recognition purposes (generally just the STD height), but I have also been documenting various other details of each type: base width, width across the widest crossarm, height (STD), weight (STD) and all the known height extensions and minuses (which differ by tower type at least according to the tables), as well as series-specific details such as applicable voltages, conductor bundle sizes, known conductor types (e.g. Lynx), known sub-designations and a best guess at the year of introduction. I did also consider drawing the crossarm plans from the tower bible to help with identification, but that interferes with my semantic HTML mark-up and general presentation approach and I am not sure how yet to approach that. This is all available publicly online.

That is, even though there was very little collated information for me to go on when I started in autumn last year, people looking for pylon details in the future will have lots of information available to them.

However, I have run out of motivation at the moment, as this is not something that people find interesting.

[SHMD]

Hi Daniel, I would not only find it "interesting" but I would also find it convenient and useful.

 

There is a lot of data online and I think that would put some people off, because of questions like: 'where to look', 'is correct', 'is it available', 'is it complete'...

Knock some of those, off the list, and more people would become a bit more involved.

 

(You, also, would gain so much from the exercise.)

 

 

Kev.

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Series that I have a name for are here, but not all of them have diagrams: https://telcontar.net/Power/pylons/series

 

There is ultimately no way to answer “is it complete” as this data is not (for any remotely practical purposes) available to the hobbyist. For now however the answer is a resounding “no” and it’s likely to remain so forever, because there are type (series/suite) names that we have no details for (design, location, etc) and types that we can find in person or on Street View (other services are available™) that do not match anything we know of.

 

To answer “is it correct”, I would have to say: for enthusiast purposes, yes. As noted earlier, the official plans contain numerous errors and all manner of inconsistent simplifications, and I will have hypercorrected some details that look wrong in the drawings but aren’t. (It also depends on the source material and whether I need to do my own simplifications, and if I do, mine are a little more prototypical than the official simplifications.) On each L series page I add download links to any plans I have used, and for the PL series, the tower bible is available to download, so in either case, visitors are welcome to check for themselves if they feel like I have made a mistake.

[Daniel Beardsmore]

(Note: the most I can do with a “thumbs up” is slice off the thumb and salvage the bones, but I would only collect around two thumbs, as no-one would offer me their second thumb to the knife. Not sure what I would do with the bones either — maybe take up breeding the world’s smallest dog and use the bones as a treat.)

[pharrc20]

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

Also was looking into Castle Donington Power Station and the backstory of the pylons that ran past there. The L6 BKs came from Ratcliffe Power Station and then there was a switch to L2 which can be seen today. The L2D40 EC was added in way later to connect up the 2 routes as you can make out the L2 DT45 and L2 D60 in the old shot from 1988 however they are not connected unlike today. These L2's run to the cross over near Enderby. Im not sure if the East Claydon section originally connected to the Ratcliffe branch but it looks likely before the L6s came and diverted things with the Ratcliffe line running to Coventry instead. Such a fascinating tale to be had with the routes around the old power station which there is nothing left of. Did the other L2 route which runs to Drakelow/Willington ever divert to Castle Donington?

I have done some work on Castle Donington as well but not got info to hand at present but will look to see which L2 came first but line codes related and link into those heading to Willington and Drakelow too.

Cheers Paul

[SHMD]

Thanks for the link (again) Daniel.

 

I've been there before, (and found it useful, plus downloads - thanks), but his time I found the "comparisons" page and the "guide" page - Doh! Just what I wanted!!

How did I miss those before?

 

 

Kev.

[pharrc20]

On 02/01/2023 at 00:36, L2's are great! said:

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

Hi Felix, yes indeed I got up close to that weird D90 tower on a wet Saturday back in 2011 lol... the things you do!! Ditto my other post I will have a look at my info. It is a shame oldmaps is no more as that was a goldmine for tracing routes old, new and changes to but alas gone now. NLS maps are ok but no where near the same level of coverage.

Cheers Paul 

[pharrc20]

With all these tower diagrams being posted it might be pertinent to suggest that these are just general arrangement diagrams and so they are never going to be as detailed as the original say Blaw Knox in-house drawings for say an L2 D standard tower showing every piece of bracing, nut and bolt.

 

Sure, these BK drawings may well exist somewhere but pretty sure with metric conversions of designs newer drawings will have superceded them.

 

The B.R. wagon general arrangement diagram for one of the I.C.I. bogie limestone hopper wagons (my pet favourite wagons) bears little resemblance to the original Charles Roberts official drawing of the same wagon aside from the obvious outline shape and dimensions.

 

So for everyday usage the CEGB and the companies supplying it with tower designs almost certainly would have had full drawings and general arrangement versions, which is what I believe these scans are. And now these are available I can safely say I received a similar set from National Grid some years ago but not as complete as what Felix has uploaded.

 

Cheers Paul

[Daniel Beardsmore]

26 minutes ago, SHMD said:

I've been there before, (and found it useful, plus downloads - thanks), but his time I found the "comparisons" page and the "guide" page - Doh! Just what I wanted!!

How did I miss those before?

 

Probably because I split up several pages as they had become too large.

[Daniel Beardsmore]

15 minutes ago, pharrc20 said:

So for everyday usage the CEGB and the companies supplying it with tower designs almost certainly would have had full drawings and general arrangement versions, which is what I believe these scans are. And now these are available I can safely say I received a similar set from National Grid some years ago but not as complete as what Felix has uploaded.

 

The outline diagram plans are obviously not for construction purposes, but they are broadly accurate. What exactly the pylon models are based on, I don’t know: either top secret plans we are not allowed to see or even know about, or just a lot of painstaking photography work.

 

Creation of recognition diagrams works better the higher resolution the plans are in, and I have given up trying to explain this. Not for a couple of severed thumbs, at any rate.

[L2's are great!]

23 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

 

What I was doing (and may work on again at some point) is drawing diagrams for recognition purposes (generally just the STD height), but I have also been documenting various other details of each type: base width, width across the widest crossarm, height (STD), weight (STD) and all the known height extensions and minuses (which differ by tower type at least according to the tables), as well as series-specific details such as applicable voltages, conductor bundle sizes, known conductor types (e.g. Lynx), known sub-designations and a best guess at the year of introduction. I did also consider drawing the crossarm plans from the tower bible to help with identification, but that interferes with my semantic HTML mark-up and general presentation approach and I am not sure how yet to approach that. This is all available publicly online.

That is, even though there was very little collated information for me to go on when I started in autumn last year, people looking for pylon details in the future will have lots of information available to them.

However, I have run out of motivation at the moment, as this is not something that people find interesting.

What i can do, is compile a list from all the plans i have and post it here, so all the figures add up in an orderly way

[L2's are great!]

17 hours ago, pharrc20 said:

I have done some work on Castle Donington as well but not got info to hand at present but will look to see which L2 came first but line codes related and link into those heading to Willington and Drakelow too.

Cheers Paul

Ooh that'd be great!

[L2's are great!]

17 hours ago, pharrc20 said:

Hi Felix, yes indeed I got up close to that weird D90 tower on a wet Saturday back in 2011 lol... the things you do!! Ditto my other post I will have a look at my info. It is a shame oldmaps is no more as that was a goldmine for tracing routes old, new and changes to but alas gone now. NLS maps are ok but no where near the same level of coverage.

Cheers Paul 

Something else I came across, talking of D90's is the setup on the approach to Willington substation. Ik that there is 2 D90's that then attach to L8 DTs however there is this abandoned DT45. Is there anything to suggest this was ever connected to the original circuits?

[Daniel Beardsmore]

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

What i can do, is compile a list from all the plans i have and post it here, so all the figures add up in an orderly way

 

If there are proper, complete, high-resolution drawings anywhere, I will archive them online and probably process them at some point in the future. There is no need to do anything else on my behalf in this regard.

(I am ignoring those CEGB 220/380 kV plans unless there is any evidence that they were ever built, as I have no data to go on.)

I knew this was a dead end subject going into it, but it was good to be able to scratch an itch before inevitably calling it a day out of boredom and frustration.

[L2's are great!]

17 hours ago, Daniel Beardsmore said:

 

If there are proper, complete, high-resolution drawings anywhere, I will archive them online and probably process them at some point in the future. There is no need to do anything else on my behalf in this regard.

(I am ignoring those CEGB 220/380 kV plans unless there is any evidence that they were ever built, as I have no data to go on.)

I knew this was a dead end subject going into it, but it was good to be able to scratch an itch before inevitably calling it a day out of boredom and frustration.

The only high resolution ones i have were those individual L2 CEGB Plans. D10, D30, etc. 

[pharrc20]

On 04/01/2023 at 16:46, L2's are great! said:

Ooh that'd be great!

Ok here is what I know about Castle Donington (CD) collated from various sources online. Construction began in 1951, and the station opened in 1958 (from Wikipedia).

 

The northern L2 line is ZD that runs from Staythorpe PS to Willington PS with feeds into Ratcliffe-on-Soar and CD – according to NGC tower data if the years given are correct then Staythorpe to Ratcliffe was commissioned in 1959, whilst Ratcliffe to Willington was commissioned in 1955. A tee was either built in to the line when built or added after, but I would go with the former option. Between towers 158 and159, a triangular tee was used and linked on the south side (leading to power station) by a D40 EWCO tower - maybe tower 158A, then a D tower 158B and terminating on a DT tower 158C. This tee into CD was presumably removed c.1993/94 and the link between towers 158 and 159 on the south side circuit linked together. If you go on Google Earth and look for Back Ln https://goo.gl/maps/g9JDkD82vKzQ9pth7 you can see the two D30 towers with the towers angled inwards indicating where the tee used to exist. Why they just did not use or add in a DJX tee junction tower is not known as this is the usual method of adding a tee.

 

The southern L2 line is a bit more of a mystery in that its origin is tied up with some other L2 lines nearby. At present the ZLA line is shown to start at CD and meets the ZL line at tee near to King's Newton. It then heads south as ZL line originally direct to Iver substation via East Claydon sub and later added subs at Patford Bridge (WCML supply) and Amersham Main. The circuits were altered and diverted near Potters Marston, where ZL used to cross over the M69 motorway but severed by joining to each side of the L6 4WP Coventry to Enderby line. 

 

Some alterations have taken place at some point in the past around the L2 lines from Drakelow, Willington and CD and the old OS maps available online show a muddled picture of the changes that without any photographic proof make it hard to say exactly what happened.

 

Cheers Paul