1950s road sign info

[mswjr]

Hi All, Can anyone tell me did rail over road bridges in the 1950s have warning height signs on them, as todays do, I have been online but can only find a picture of a 1950s road sign approaching a bridge, any info welcome.

Thanks

 Garry

[The Johnster]

There were certainly 'low bridge' signs on the bridges with painted lines indicating the area where the stated height was available on arches; I can recall a couple of very low ones under the Penygraig Branch at Tonyrefail.  I would suggest getting hold of a 'Highway Code' of that era, which gives pictorials in colour.  It might be possible to photo-reduce these!

[Michael Hodgson]

You had signs like this to warn you as you approached.  Not sure that there was necessarily anything on the bridge itself, though I imagine anything that got bashed frequently might well have been subject to some sort of local initiative.

I don't remember it as a problem. 

 

Road over rail or road over canal bridges often had a diamond shaped cast iron sign "This bridge is insufficient ....." with weight/axle loading limits like this.  They were are collectable railwayana worth a lot of money now and usually nicely painted up, but were unpainted in the 1950s (probably originally painted but neglected and rusty).

 

 

 

[mswjr]

Thankyou.

[Nearholmer]

I’m with Johnster: some very low bridges had a thing like a very horizontally elongated ‘H’ painted on the arch in white bands about 6” wide, and in the centre of the horizontal a sign/plate giving the clear height between the two extremes (to a spurious degree of precision).

[bécasse]

Give me a few days and I will have a look to see if I have the dimensions of the sign which was reasonably standard. I measured a vast number of road signs of all sorts in the mid-1960s just as they were starting to be replaced by signs of the style still used today. The "approach" road sign pictured above existed in at least half-a-dozen versions, for example, most of which I have dimensions for. However this particular sign would have been particularly difficult to access for measuring for obvious reasons but I certainly would have tried to find one.

[keefer]

I suppose a roundabout way would be to examine vintage photos of the era, particularly bus collections in municipal areas.

A lot of towns and cities had railway lines elevated from street level, so a lot of opportunity for bridges/viaducts.

If you have a particular area in mind, even just looking for old photos of an area where you know there were bridges may show something useful, often in the background (i.e. not the main subject)

[keefer]

Here's one - doesn't actually state the year of the pic but sometime between 1952 & 1969:

A Joint Board bus under the bridge by Museum of Transport Greater Manchester, on Flickr

As mentioned in the comments, not particularly 'low' but the awkward line of the road through it warranted extra care.

EDIT: the reason i found the pic above - I watched a HubNut video on YouTube - apparently all SHMD double-deckers had this notice!

 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by keefer

[Nearholmer]

Here is an extreme example at Beverley in Yorkshire:

 

 

This one is where I grew up in Sussex , and this fuzzy picture is probably about the date you want. The signs on the arch were oblong, rounded corners, white ground, black lettering.

 

 

I remember when a bus hit it when I was at school. Double deckers didn’t operate the routes along here, but for some reason one got sent to the tiny local bus garage, just off to the left here, and instead of taking the circuitous approved route, it went this way. Not a local driver, I guess.

[keefer]

Just now, Nearholmer said:

Here is an extreme example at Beverley in Yorkshire:

I was trying to remember where that was! Apparently the bus roof was designed to 'fit' the arch but it still required care getting through.

[Lemmy282]

That's not a railway bridge in Beverley, it is the medieval town gate, North Bar.

[BernardTPM]

25 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Is this picture back to front? Both vehicle appear to be on the wrong side of the road for their direction of travel.

[Wheatley]

More or less totally off topic, but until they finished, the coach drivers who took the OU Geology Summer School field trips around Shap had a competition running between them to see who could get a 57 seater through that bridge/tunnel under the WCML at Shap Wells the fastest without losing the wing mirrors or part of the roof. 45mph the year I went . 

Edited August 15, 2023 by Wheatley

[SRman]

My rendition in this diorama was a bit crude, but the road warning sign was from Tiny Signs, if that's of any help for modelling purposes. This was a very old photo I scanned in, so not the best resolution.

 

[The Johnster]

7 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

You had signs like this to warn you as you approached.  Not sure that there was necessarily anything on the bridge itself, though I imagine anything that got bashed frequently might well have been subject to some sort of local initiative.

I don't remember it as a problem. 

 

Road over rail or road over canal bridges often had a diamond shaped cast iron sign "This bridge is insufficient ....." with weight/axle loading limits like this.  They were are collectable railwayana worth a lot of money now and usually nicely painted up, but were unpainted in the 1950s (probably originally painted but neglected and rusty).

 

 

 

 

They referred to 'locomotives' of over xxxx tons, which confused the bejaysus out of me when I was a sprog; the bridges went over the railway, what did it matter how heavy the locomotives were?  Heavy motor cars made sense, but Greatuncle Ted insisted on calling auto trains railmotors (and I found later that this was still the term in the WTTs in the early 60s), so even that was a bit vague.  Locomotives meant road locomotives, traction engines and such, of course, but I had not heard that terminology as an anklebiter.  I also thought for many years that they were peculiar to the Taff Vale Railway, as all the ones I knew were on bridges over that railway!  The one over the Roath Branch on Penylan Hill in Cardiff was painted black with the lettering picked out in white in the late 50s, but was neglected after that. 

 

The odd shape and the wonderful wording make them an ideal wall decoration IMHO.

[BachelorBoy]

This might be helpful

 

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Pre-Worboys

 

https://www.roads.org.uk/articles/war-worboys

 

[BachelorBoy]

And this

 

https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Report_of_the_Departmental_Committee_on_Traffic_Si?id=oZIvAQAAIAAJ&hl=az&gl=US&pli=1

 

[Nearholmer]

8 hours ago, BernardTPM said:

Is this picture back to front? Both

No. 
 

But it intrigued me too. I think the cyclist/motorcyclist must be on the wrong side of the road and the car giving him a wide berth.

[Right Away]

 

 

“Draughts anyone?”

A little later date than the OP’s query, (double yellow lines intr1960 and the Mk3 Zodiac intr 1962), the parapet markings on this bridge at Fareham, Hampshire are quite striking …. ouch!

[Mike_Walker]

Interesting; that the bridge is posted as 14' 0" yet that bus is a highbridge type around 14' 6".  Perhaps the middle bit is marked as 14' 6" hard to tell.

 

The reverse of what existed in Staines where a bridge was posted as 14' 9" but clearance was actually less as London Country found out the hard way when they took a brand new Atlantean under it.  Investigations showed that a Routemaster just squeezed under without the clearance everyone thought it had!

[Sitham Yard]

26 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Interesting; that the bridge is posted as 14' 0" yet that bus is a highbridge type around 14' 6".  Perhaps the middle bit is marked as 14' 6" hard to tell.

Even with my dodgy eyesight I can see the sign on the left is not 14'0". I think it is 14'6" or possibly 14'8".

Andrew

[Fat Controller]

'Model Railways' did a series of articles on road signs and street furniture, back in the late 1970s/ early 1980s.

[Wheatley]

7 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

No. 
 

But it intrigued me too. I think the cyclist/motorcyclist must be on the wrong side of the road and the car giving him a wide berth.

The car is parked against the right hand kerb I think, facing in the wrong direction. Either that or the woman in the pale dress is about to get run over. What looks like a centre line is the guideline for high vehicles to keep them perpendicular to the arch as they go through it.   

Edited August 16, 2023 by Wheatley

[Right Away]

For current interest, courtesy of Google Maps; the bridge south of Tunbridge Wells (West) where the Spa Valley Railway crosses the A26 road.

IIRC, Southdown (NBC) had to ensure that Park Royal bodied AN68 Leyland Atlanteans were not diagrammed for Service 729 and that a Bristol VR was used because of the reduced headroom.

 

[Mike_Walker]

4 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

Interesting; that the bridge is posted as 14' 0" yet that bus is a highbridge type around 14' 6".  Perhaps the middle bit is marked as 14' 6" hard to tell.

 

The reverse of what existed in Staines where a bridge was posted as 14' 9" but clearance was actually less as London Country found out the hard way when they took a brand new Atlantean under it.  Investigations showed that a Routemaster just squeezed under without the clearance everyone thought it had!

Oops should have looked more closely!  😊