Interesting and inspiring photos from Flickr....

[wagonbasher]

On 31/12/2021 at 22:01, Andy Kirkham said:

Railway Street Saundersfoot. From the collection of Mark Crombie

 

 

 

I am on holiday in Saundersfoot now, staying  in railway street (now called the strand).  This is a place .I know well from many family holidays.  Looking at these photographs you can see railway street is a normal late Victorian street with housing and shops oh, and a railway in the street… no fences.  When you look at the Wisbech and Upwell and the Glyn Valley Tramway the locomotives have ‘skirts’ covering their motion and have live guards (cow catchers etc).  As with steam tram locomotives these were requirements of the board of trade.  The MW locomotive in the shot that followed this posting and others of the Saundersfoot Railway show Saundersfoot locomotives with exposed wheels and motion? Any ideas?

 

by the way, note the woman on the mobility scooter in the first photo.

 

Andy

[montyburns56]

Croydon 'A' Power station 1970 by Gordon Edgar

 

 

[Fat Controller]

2 hours ago, wagonbasher said:

I am on holiday in Saundersfoot now, staying  in railway street (now called the strand).  This is a place .I know well from many family holidays.  Looking at these photographs you can see railway street is a normal late Victorian street with housing and shops oh, and a railway in the street… no fences.  When you look at the Wisbech and Upwell and the Glyn Valley Tramway the locomotives have ‘skirts’ covering their motion and have live guards (cow catchers etc).  As with steam tram locomotives these were requirements of the board of trade.  The MW locomotive in the shot that followed this posting and others of the Saundersfoot Railway show Saundersfoot locomotives with exposed wheels and motion? Any ideas?

 

by the way, note the woman on the mobility scooter in the first photo.

 

Andy

Andy,

The Nevill's Dock and Railway Company in Llanelly had extensive street running powers until operations finished in the mid-1960s, yet used  conventional small tank engines, without any skirts covering the motion. I wonder how the Board of Trade missed this?

[Nearholmer]

The BoT didn’t “miss” them, but it was largely not required to “see” them, because they weren’t ‘street tramways’ built and operated in accordance with the relevant Act of 1870 (IIRC). They weren’t ‘railways’ that had to comply with the Regulation of Railways Acts either, because they didn’t convey passengers. They were bits of industrial kit that happened to be in the street, either pre-dating the street, or there by permission of whatever the Highway authority was at the time, or allowed to be there by specific Acts of Parliament. They were ‘tramways’, that is how they were marked on OS Maps, but not ‘street tramways’, if that makes any sense.

 

The legislative landscape was a great deal different ‘back then’, notably more barren. Industrial activity was subject to very few laws, and those that did exist were narrowly specific, things like safety of boilers. It wasn’t until the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 that there were general, rather than narrowly specific, duties in respect of the safety and health impacts of industrial activity.

 

As a footnote, there were other ‘dodge around’ forms of railway/tramway which could convey passengers, some looking for all the world like railways, notably those built without the need for an Act of Parliament because all the necessary land was acquired without the need for compulsory purchase, The Sandy and Potton was one, and there were also oddities like the Wantage Tramway, which IIRC was a street tramway, but I think pre-dated the BoT making rules about steam locos as they were allowed to do under the legislation. The skirt-less locomotive Shannon/Jane, preserved at Didcot, was built for the S&PT, which was fenced like a railway, then sold to the Wantage, where it continued to work, now in the streets, with its underparts exposed, quite legally.

 

It can get confusing!

 

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Nearholmer

[newbryford]

10 hours ago, 2251 said:

 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, matters evolved over time.

 

Compare the 1936 and 1967 diagrams available here:

 

https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 1350

 

https://signalbox.org/~SBdiagram.php?id= 1351

 

 

Is it possible that the "double slip" had independently controlled blades as part of the trap(s)?

 

ISTR that slips of this type (with four levers) were called English slips.

 

[Dagworth]

25 minutes ago, newbryford said:

ISTR that slips of this type (with four levers) were called English slips.

 

The slips in the yard at Ipswich definitely had two levers at each end. Do I have to model them with four motors per crossing?

 

Andi

[newbryford]

3 minutes ago, Dagworth said:

The slips in the yard at Ipswich definitely had two levers at each end. Do I have to model them with four motors per crossing?

 

Andi

 

 

Now that you mention it................... 😀

 

 

[30851]

On 01/09/2022 at 04:39, 2251 said:

 

Good point!

 

But what did levers 25 and 26 do in 1936?

 

The 1936 and 1967 diagrams do show the same area so show the decline of Victoria station. First to go were the cross overs in the bay - don't know when that happened. Then sometime in 64/65 the connection from the down main to platform 11 and 12 was removed (along with platform 12). This would be after the removal of the local services on the GC in 1963. The last set of changes before complete closure were the removal of the down slow, loop and goods next to platform 1. This was done just before closure and was to allow the construction of road access (using the road that went down the dock opposite platform 1) to the track bed in preparation of demolition on closure (they were eager to start demolition).

 

As for what levers 25 and 26 did in 1936 - they controlled the points between the middle siding and down main (platform 4) as per the diagram. This connection wasn't there when Victoria was built and 25/26 did control the points in the docks. No clue when this change was made or why they decided the re-use 25/26 when there were other spare levers. I assume this connection was put in as the original layout would mean everything was blocked if something needed to go from platform 4 to the up. I notice they never out a FP lock on that connection so all those Skegness trains that reversed in platform 4 must have required the points being clipped (or whatever the correct words are for that). 

 

As for the double slip and trap there are some very clear pictures of this in Steam Memories:  1950's & 1960's Great Central Lines. The double slip is hand operated with 4 levers. The trap point - it is certainly different and not something you will ever get RTR! The traps are between the crossing and the toe of the seeming hand worked point next to the traps.

 

Rob

 

[montyburns56]

BICC Works 1968 by Keith Chambers

 

 

[Morello Cherry]

If you run out of wheels...

 

 

 

[montyburns56]

Stourport Power Station 1970s by Keith Chambers

 

 

[33C]

49 minutes ago, montyburns56 said:

Stourport Power Station 1970s by Keith Chambers

 

 

Great stuff, that's a layout in a box file right there!

[Ramblin Rich]

18 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

Stourport Power Station 1970s by Keith Chambers

 

 

There could be a very deep inspection pit in the shed! 😲

[highpeakman]

22 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

Stourport Power Station 1970s by Keith Chambers

 

 

 

It looks to be an odd place to have a loco shed. Doubtless there was a very good reason for having it there - at the end of some kind of staithe? Perhaps someone can provide enlightenment?

[montyburns56]

1 hour ago, highpeakman said:

It looks to be an odd place to have a loco shed. Doubtless there was a very good reason for having it there - at the end of some kind of staithe? Perhaps someone can provide enlightenment?

 

There's a history of the site here...

 

http://www.miac.org.uk/stourportps.html

 

"Another bridge, over the road, took two tracks into the power station itself. Beyond that point was the railway's most fascinating aspect, for the entire end part of the system was elevated, being constructed upon a sturdy concrete lattice gantry. The two tippler houses were on this structure, as was the locomotive shed. There was little spare room at the exchange sidings, and this may have been the reason why the expedient was taken of building the loco shed at the end of the gantry. It was built of brick, with a hipped roof and five windows down each side, and held two locomotives on its single road."

 

 

[65179]

1 hour ago, highpeakman said:

It looks to be an odd place to have a loco shed. Doubtless there was a very good reason for having it there - at the end of some kind of staithe? Perhaps someone can provide enlightenment?

 

See also: https://www.svrwiki.com/Stourport_Power_Station

 

The standard gauge line coming in at a higher level superseded the 2' 6" tramway bringing coal from the wharf delivered by barge.  The branch opened in 1940.

 

Simon

Edited September 5, 2022 by 65179

[montyburns56]

Burwell Tramway 1971 by Tom Burnham

 

 

[stewartingram]

I walked (actually a guided tour by an old timer from it, who lived in Burwell) around that time. We fould loads of the rail chairs were GER pre-1900, possibly from when the line was built?

[Nearholmer]

I cycled across there just under a month ago, but it was so ridiculously hot out on the fens that I cut short my explorations a bit - TBH I’m not sure whether or not I hit on the route of the tramway.

[Stephenwolsten]

On 29/08/2022 at 20:23, 03060 said:

 

I'm only part way through one of the Industrial Albums .... there's some truly evocative photos in there ! Thanks for the link Stephen, it may take me a while to study them all.

I see you are near Esholt so you may like this one: 

 

[hmrspaul]

On 26/08/2022 at 23:31, jimwal said:

 

If you enlarge the photo it looks to be in blue with a TOPS code, possibly SPV.

So presumeably not.

 

The van is a BR std design with roller bearings, many I believe became 'special parcels vans' due to their being too new to scrap.

 

Was there any fish traffic left by 1982?

Isn't it a RBV - a barrier wagon. https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brfish/e74f676f  which nicely links with that lovely Stanlow photo. 

 

Paul

[hmrspaul]

On 19/08/2022 at 22:42, Fat Controller said:

I believe it's an (L) NER 20t hopper; a bit out of its normal sphere of operations.

Brian

Don't you think it is too small for that, a 13ton version? 

 

Those wagon works at Fox Hill survived a lot longer than the other industry in Radstock, which was a sleepy small town by the time I visited it. The works yard were wide open! I don't remember ever seeing anyone there - and one photo shows my motorcaravan parked in their yard https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/marcroftsradstock

 

Paul

 

[03060]

1 hour ago, Stephenwolsten said:

I see you are near Esholt so you may like this one: 

 

 

Many thanks, Stephen, I'd found one of the engine shed at Esholt which reminded me that I'd managed to take photos (slides) of the remaining base brick layer just before it was swept away when the whole site was remodelled a few years ago. I've spent many a happy hour down there over the years but they've upped the security these days not that much is left other than the main pressing house buildings. The article in an early Bylines was very interesting to me though, just to realise the sheer scale of the system as it was.

 

Great photo, she still lives in the area just up the road at Bradford Industrial Museum.

Regards,

Ian.

[jimwal]

1 hour ago, hmrspaul said:

Isn't it a RBV - a barrier wagon. https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brfish/e74f676f  which nicely links with that lovely Stanlow photo. 

 

Paul

 

Yes, much more likely Paul.

I'd forgotten about the barrier wagon use and it fits the timeline.

[highpeakman]

15 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

 

There's a history of the site here...

 

http://www.miac.org.uk/stourportps.html

 

"Another bridge, over the road, took two tracks into the power station itself. Beyond that point was the railway's most fascinating aspect, for the entire end part of the system was elevated, being constructed upon a sturdy concrete lattice gantry. The two tippler houses were on this structure, as was the locomotive shed. There was little spare room at the exchange sidings, and this may have been the reason why the expedient was taken of building the loco shed at the end of the gantry. It was built of brick, with a hipped roof and five windows down each side, and held two locomotives on its single road."

 

 

Thank you for the link. Most interesting.