Peterborough North

[robrailltd]

350s later known as 08s were delivered in green. 

the black ones were class 10s. i think the black ones were new to the LMS and region.

[stewartingram]

So just to recap, with relavence to the class 10/Conington ash sitings:

 

ATM I can't find my written proof of sitings, before I moved to Cambridge. This would be the period in question; as time goes on things change, and what was relevant in 1972 or even 1962, might not be relevant in earlier times. However, when steam was still running, I have limited sitings of shunters at Holme, with some reference to what they were doing on the day. One of these was on the Down Slow, which ends south of the crossing, with a freight train. I can't see any reason for a Ramsey train to be there. (Just to be pedantic, I haven't checked my numbers yet to see if they are class 10 or 08). If steam was still running, there would still be a need for ash disposal.

I repeat, I never ever saw any train actually on the Ramsey North branch, apart from that lone bogie bolster, so can't give any sightings for the branch. I agree that the yard - or some of it - at Holme would be a useful staging point for any train traversing the branch, and my notes suggest that a shunter "may" have been stabled at Holme whilst I passed. Or it could have been moving, & I just didn't record the fact. Either way, the branch traffic surely would have been sparse; as would possibly the ash disposal. But I did manage to see some shunters that late! In either case, they would have trundled to & from Peterborough, on the main line.

In the earlier times, I certainly saw the train parked up on the DS. We stopped for a period for me to do some spotting, and a break in fast expresses would give the 10 chance to go. I admit to thinking it was black, almost certainly now has been proven green, but a plain livery at that time. I don't know the precise length of the train, but don't recall it as being 3/4 wagons. Not as long as WD or 9F would be hauling, but long enough, and (fairly) consistent in its makeup, minerals/opens maybe as I recall? Not mixed wagons as though it was a branch service.

Discounting anywhere further along the line, it is also remarkable that I have many visits to Peterboro.N. logged but NO sightings of diesel shunters on any visit.

 

I have no proof either way, but my gut feeling remains that the footbridge had gone earlier than 1975, though the cabin does look of that period and would tie in with other work (barrier,tracklifting etc). I have an open mind here.

 

This really is bugging me now. I'm not trying to prove I'm right, I have the definite (multiple) memories of seeing it. I'm not trying to prove others wrong, we've had some plausible suggestions. It's the old RMWeb discussion thing again I'm sure, once again a plus for the site.

 

Thanks for everyone for their input, and apologies for hijacking the thread for a bit.

 

Stewart

[Richard E]

Didn't the Ramsey branch join the ECML just north of the crossing without a chord for traffic going north? If so could a freight coming off the branch have gone on down to Connington loop and run round there before setting off north on the down goods/relief and then joining the down main at Holme?

 

OK, the picture I've linked is of box vans but I understand the main traffic from Ramsey North was agricultural produce possibly including beet - could your sighting have been in the beet season (September/October ish) and have been traffic to the sugar factory at Fletton (drat, that's referring to my home patch again). Mind you did suggest empties ...

 

Edit - if the footbridge was north of the level crossing then it had gone by 1962 but was definitely still there in '57, photographic evidence on line thanks to the wedding photographer (again). I have a sneaky feeling it was just on the London side of the crossing. Unfortunately it wouldn't have been for electrification as that didn't happen st Holme until the 80's apparently.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Richard E

[stewartingram]

I don't have any relevant books to hand, perhaps one in the series of "Branch Lines round XYZ" might show what we want?

I am assuming (always bad) that from the branch, traffic could be run round in the goods yard, with departure north as required? Better than a run to Conington and back I would have thought. Does anyone know?

Having been a frequent (but not regular, if you get my meaning) to the scene, I honestly can't give you a date. But - the car was a pre-war Austin 7. 30mph max, no heater. And cars weren't used like they are nowadays, every trip was an excursion. So - perhaps - colder weather would have been a deterrent. Who knows?

 

Stewart

[great northern]

No apologies needed Stewart. This is both fascinating and relevant - it is about the ECML in the Peterborough area during my time period, and your observations made at the time are really important and very helpful. Recordings like yours, particularly when noted in detail, are pure gold dust. So, the first consequence of your postings will be that I shall have a Class 10 which is accurate, and that is because your input resulted in further information as to livery details being supplied by Clive Mortimore, so that Tim will be able to get mine correct.

 

Apart from that, it is a very interesting discussion of a railway related matter in its own right, and although we may never get to the bottom of it, it is good fun to read the various suggestions which might account for what you saw. By 1962, New England had lost all its small steam locos, C12, N5, J6, all gone. I can't at the moment find the RA for the Ramsey branch, but it was a rural branch built over flat ground, so it would not be heavily engineered. For some reason RA4 sticks in my mind, but I haven't yet found the proof of that. Anyway, the result would be that New England would have either Ivatt 4s or diesel shunters which were RA4 - nothing else, so it is significant I reckon that they were the two classes you saw stationary at Holme in 1962. D3448 and D3486 were at New England from new. D3440 went to Kings Cross new, but it is very likely that it was a New England loco by that time.

 

My recollection, from once or twice yearly trips to London, is that there were a lot of wagons in Connington sidings in the late 50s/early 60s, so I wonder if a shunter might have been needed to deal with the traffic there? Then it would be logical to give it a load to take back to Peterborough, rather than sending it light. The other thing that occurs to me is to ask on what day(s) of the week your observations took place? The Sunday timetable back then was very sparse, no main line departures from KX between 1510 and 1618 for example, so there would be ample time for a 7 mile journey on the double track between Holme and Peterborough.

 

If you do find your earlier notebooks Stewart, please do publish the details, they will be of great interest.

[stewartingram]

No apologies needed Stewart. This is both fascinating and relevant - it is about the ECML in the Peterborough area during my time period, and your observations made at the time are really important and very helpful. Recordings like yours, particularly when noted in detail, are pure gold dust. So, the first consequence of your postings will be that I shall have a Class 10 which is accurate, and that is because your input resulted in further information as to livery details being supplied by Clive Mortimore, so that Tim will be able to get mine correct.

 

Apart from that, it is a very interesting discussion of a railway related matter in its own right, and although we may never get to the bottom of it, it is good fun to read the various suggestions which might account for what you saw. By 1962, New England had lost all its small steam locos, C12, N5, J6, all gone. I can't at the moment find the RA for the Ramsey branch, but it was a rural branch built over flat ground, so it would not be heavily engineered. For some reason RA4 sticks in my mind, but I haven't yet found the proof of that. Anyway, the result would be that New England would have either Ivatt 4s or diesel shunters which were RA4 - nothing else, so it is significant I reckon that they were the two classes you saw stationary at Holme in 1962. D3448 and D3486 were at New England from new. D3440 went to Kings Cross new, but it is very likely that it was a New England loco by that time.

 

My recollection, from once or twice yearly trips to London, is that there were a lot of wagons in Connington sidings in the late 50s/early 60s, so I wonder if a shunter might have been needed to deal with the traffic there? Then it would be logical to give it a load to take back to Peterborough, rather than sending it light. The other thing that occurs to me is to ask on what day(s) of the week your observations took place? The Sunday timetable back then was very sparse, no main line departures from KX between 1510 and 1618 for example, so there would be ample time for a 7 mile journey on the double track between Holme and Peterborough.

 

If you do find your earlier notebooks Stewart, please do publish the details, they will be of great interest.

Firstly, how does one press multiple buttons to Agree, Like, Thanks etc?

 

I like the suggestion of a shunter "allocated" to Conington. A place I never new operationally, being out of the way so by road.Incidentally, I heard (probably during the '70s) of it being referred to as "Cambridgeshire's only coal mine"! During the clear up there they were actually picking coal out of the ash for re-use, or so I'm told.

As for my visits, well I was 10 in 1959, so solidly at school. That leaves weekends, and I would have thought Saturdays, for shopping trips to Peterboro. But, during school holidays, any day was possible, though as the driver, my dear old Grandad, was still working, again that says mostly Saturdays, though there must have been the odd weekday that he was off. After the move to Cambridge, he was still working, thought I would have thought by 1963 (later than what we are really discussing) he was retired, and part-time self employed. But the Austin 7 had gone - and I KNOW we were using that at the time.

I'm not familiar with the track plans, so do excuse me. Could a slow have been looped at say Yaxley or Fletton, to help the flow?

Incidentally, I love the idea that you will have a 10, though it does intrude on the steam scene, but apparently is so much part of it. I know externally an 08 is a 10, but I getting to the point where I want one too! A tad different as they say.

Any more bites I find, whenever, I will post.

 

Stewart

[great northern]

Hi Gilbert

 

D3487 is a Darlington built engine, she is green. She would have had a polished wooden surround to her door. The radiator would be black and the coupling rods shinny metal. Darlington seemed to have its own standard livery for shunters. Another Darlington, Stratford and Doncaster variation on the livery was placing the BR emblem on the engine room doors. Lesser works put them on the battery boxes.

Many thanks Clive. The good news is that my D3487, when delivered, will, thanks to this, be spot on. The bad news is that I shall have to wait a bit longer for delivery to take place, but it will be worth it. It is the polished wooden surround to the door that has got Tim thinking. He will sort it though.

[great northern]

Firstly, how does one press multiple buttons to Agree, Like, Thanks etc?

 

I like the suggestion of a shunter "allocated" to Conington. A place I never new operationally, being out of the way so by road.Incidentally, I heard (probably during the '70s) of it being referred to as "Cambridgeshire's only coal mine"! During the clear up there they were actually picking coal out of the ash for re-use, or so I'm told.

As for my visits, well I was 10 in 1959, so solidly at school. That leaves weekends, and I would have thought Saturdays, for shopping trips to Peterboro. But, during school holidays, any day was possible, though as the driver, my dear old Grandad, was still working, again that says mostly Saturdays, though there must have been the odd weekday that he was off. After the move to Cambridge, he was still working, thought I would have thought by 1963 (later than what we are really discussing) he was retired, and part-time self employed. But the Austin 7 had gone - and I KNOW we were using that at the time.

I'm not familiar with the track plans, so do excuse me. Could a slow have been looped at say Yaxley or Fletton, to help the flow?

Incidentally, I love the idea that you will have a 10, though it does intrude on the steam scene, but apparently is so much part of it. I know externally an 08 is a 10, but I getting to the point where I want one too! A tad different as they say.

Any more bites I find, whenever, I will post.

 

Stewart

More research, including perusal of the Middleton Press book, Hitchin to Peterborough, including the Ramsey North branch. It is disappointingly short of text relating to the branch, though it does say that New England used its smaller 0.6.0s to run it, which confirms the low route availability. The branch diverged to the East, and so the Ramsey pssenger service used the outer face of the Up platform, and all traffic off the branch would have to come in that way. The OS map in the book is from 1901, so things may have changed somewhat by the 50's, but there was a complex set of crossovers at the North end which would have been accessible for reversal across onto the Down main, and  there were also a surprisingly large number of sidings on the Down side, South of the level crossing, from which one of those long crossings of the whole formation so beloved by the GNR and the LNER gave access to everywhere! Connington sidings in the 50s were apparently used for disposal of spent railway ballast, and there were " vast rubbish tips" too.

 

I've also consulted my 1958 WTT, which shows that after the passage of the 2.10pm Newcastle, through Huntingdon at 3.08, the next passenger service was a Hitchin- Peterborough slow, due at Holme at 4.04, so even  a diesel shunter limited to 15mph would be able to get through the double track section, either before or after the stopping service, the next main line train not being due at Peterborough till 4.30. That is on weekdays though, on Saturdays the margin between expresses at Huntingdon varied between 7 and 14 minutes all day long, so there would have to have been  a loop or a siding into which it could set back. I reckon it would have waited a hell of a long time though. Having said that, the goods WTT shows that the 2.20pm Ferme Park- New England Class H was allowed 4 hours 5 minutes for the 74 mile journey, so perhaps that puts things in context, particularly when one reads that these trains sometimes didn't manage to complete the journey within an 8 hour working shift. Further research reveals on the 1926 OS map that there were both loops and set back roads on the Down side at Yaxley, so the crew could have sat there contemplating the scenery, and possibly some overtime, for however long it took. We are getting there.

[Richard E]

I think there were loops at Old Fletton as well.

[Donington Road]

A little bit of research has shown that the goods yard at Holme (where I partake in a quiz at the Admiral Wells pub every Tuesday evening within sight of the gate box) closed, so it is claimed, to all traffic on 31st October 1970. The freight services to Ramsey ceased in December 1973 (according to several sources including Ely model railway club) although it is claimed elsewhere that it was 1971 according to a photo caption (http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/r/ramsey_north/) which shows a diesel shunter in charge of a train of box vans allegedly at Ramsey North. That same photograph appears on another website that claims closure was in 1972! It would make sense to me that Holme goods yard would have survived, even if only as a refuge, until the Ramsey North traffic ceased. Incidentally the pub, and the former station, now lie 6' below sea level according to local claims. There are some old photographs of the station and it's staff in years gone by that now grace the pub walls.

 

There are suggestions that the current gate box at Holme (now disused), which is built on top of a relay room (apparently) was built in about 1975.

 

Whilst I can find no proof there is a suggestion that the station building might have lasted that long although I can say for certain they were still there in 1962 thanks to a wedding photographer in Peterborough who has some railway pictures on line as well.

 

In addition to the images of Holme on http://www.peterboroughimages.co.uk/blog/?cat=15

there are some more here http://sawtry.ccan.co.uk/content/category/categories/transport/rail

[Donington Road]

I think there were loops at Old Fletton as well.

 At lot of railway at Old Fletton was brick yard orientated

http://maps.nls.uk/geo/find/#zoom=13&lat=52.54703&lon=-0.25228&layers=39

[Richard E]

I know, after all Hampton is built on some of the brick pits. A lot of fly ash traffic at one time to try and infill the pits. Has made life interesting for folk living down there in the new houses. And, of course, Fletton loop is still there, passes the old sugar factory site (as do I twice daily) and the end of the road in which I live. Indeed Fletton loop provided an alternative access to the LMS via the LNER compared to the drop down over the river from Peterborough North to Peterborough East.

 

Edit to correct reference to link the the LMS line to Northampton via the LNER - bit of brain fade

Edited November 7, 2014 by Richard E

[31A]

I wonder whether you're thinking of the LNWR rather than the M&GN when you talk about the Fletton Loop?

[great northern]

I really want to get on with more of the detail work on the station area, and there has been one major breakthrough, in that a very clever member in Australia, username 69843, is going to use his knowledge of 3D printing to produce some essential items for me. You'll have to wait to see what they are. That leaves me contemplating another set of things which are alas very prominent on all images of the station and surrounding area. Below is a 1950s view of the station forecourt, copyright of, and reproduced with kind permission of Andrew C Ingram.

Several things of interest on here, including a nice bus. Can anyone tell me more about that? What sticks out, or rather up though, is that run of telegraph poles. The one on the left was I believe reputed to be the largest in the country. The next one is small by comparison, but still a major job to reproduce in model form. There was a whole run of these along and through the District Engineer's area, so there would be a lot of work involved in making them, not helped by my total ignorance of the subject.

 

I can't see how it could be practicable to model these correctly in all details, apart from the fact that I can't see what the details are, so, is it better to do something, which will be "wrong" in many respects, or to leave them out altogether? I keep prevaricating about this, so your views, whether as to what to do, or how to do it, would be much appreciated.

[stewartingram]

Bristol L bus with an ECW body. Looks like an Eastern Counties one, as I would expect here. I can't make out the numberplate, but it looks like one of those with a straight one-liner, for some reason I'm saying (from memory) in the series like GPW678. I have a multitude of pics to refer to later; there is also the excellent ECOC website http://easterncountiesomnibusco.com/ though the Fotopic collection is no more.

There will probably be a few replies stating OOC made one of these - they didn't. They did the very similar early version, with squared off windows. OK for a "layout" bus though from normal viewing distances. And there are/have been kits around, see here: http://modelbuszone.co.uk/efe/operators/loadframes.html.

 

When I worked for NTL (on the emergency services side, not cable), that picture often surfaced during out training courses on communications equipment just to highlight the pole!

Somewhere in a box I have a model of that GPO van, diecast, Matchbox sized, must look it out. Those cars to the left of the bus, headed by the Standard Vanguard (we always called them backward A4's) must all be taxis surely?

 

Stewart

[teaky]

As you are probably aware this has been discussed on Tony Wright's thread too.

 

My feeling is that telegraph poles are an important feature but few people look closely at them.  For example, a housing estate from the mid 20th century would have telephone poles dotted about because they were added after the state was built, but a 21st century estate wouldn't because they tend to be laid underground these days.  However, does anyone really notice how many insulators there are on each pole?

 

A model of a steam age railway needs telegraph poles.  A model of a modern railway needs lots of grey lineside boxes, steps handrails etc.

 

I think Tony calculated around £600 for his poles and concluded he could live with simplified versions.  I agree with the reasoning behind this compromise.  It seems the same logic we apply to, say, track where we accept generic flat bottom Peco on larger layouts simply to be able to complete a layout before we die, whereas the builder of a compact P4 layout might be able to justify a couple of perfectly detailed telegraph poles and perhaps even include the wires.  Similarly, some people (not everyone) may be happy with a 50 wagon coal train of RTR wagons (with or without minor modifications) whereas a P4 BLT might only have a dozen perfectly modelled wagons built from brass kits.

 

If you are modelling the station in the photograph then it needs at least a couple whopping great telegraph poles with lots of insulators because I'd have thought they would have stuck in someone's mind if they visited the station.  These could be cobbled together from Ratio kits or similar I'd have thought.

 

There we are.  No doubt lots of people will disagree but you asked for opinions GN.

[Alister_G]

As you probably know, Gilbert, I chose to make my own telegraph poles as nothing ready-to-plonk matched the prototype poles I was wanting to portray.

 

However, those I am modelling are a couple of orders of magnitude less complex than those you show in the photograph, and I wouldn't know where to start to reproduce them accurately.

 

That being said, and as teaky says, they are an essential part of "the scene" of 19th and 20th century railways, so some representation should be attempted.

 

My feeling is that if you don't try and represent them, you will always feel there is something missing.

 

(BTW they are nearly as bad to photoshop around as a lattice signal post )

[bigwordsmith]

Ref the Bus, Gilbert, I think it is a Bristol LWL6B. The majority of these had Gardner engines but in these cases the L6B classification denoted a Bristol 6-cylinder engine

 

 

Don't ask me how sad I am to be able to find out these things!

Edited November 7, 2014 by bigwordsmith

[stewartingram]

Eastern Counties were a mean lot. They put the smallest engine in that they could get away with. In many cases the 'L's had 4 cylinders! Well A lot of East Anglia is flat...

I've just had a look at the fleetlist:

L4G - 46

L5G - 170

LL5G - 17 (longer chassis)

LWL5G - 4 (longer chassis, 8' wide)

LWL6B - 4 (as above, 6cyl Bristol).

The one in the picture is a 7'6" body, 99% certain on a standard short chassis. You can't see any centre rear window pillar, as it is a narrow body. It has the early design of external sidelight on the rhs (though the later chrome flush mount type may have been a company mod). The o/s mirror is difficult to make out but I think it is a round black one, rather than rectangular? Route indicators are as supplied on the 7'6 bodies, though they were later modified, along with addition of flashers. 8' bodies had the "full monty" 3-pane type. And I'm sure that numberplate starts with a "G"...

Most of my photos are copyright and can't be posted on here. Shame that ECOC/Fotopic site is gone, we could probably identify the bus! There were many little detail differences in the batches.

 

Every batch of buses that ECW built differed in detail it is a modeller's nightmare, though basically all were standard(!). The 8' bodies differed with double rear windows, the longer chassis obviously had more seats/different windows.

 

I'm told the one pointer to seeing what the different engines were, is the number and position of holes in the l/h/s of the engine bonnet.

 

Funny how we all describe buses as a Bristol, or Leyland, or whatever, by its chassis; The body was the thing that differed, as the chassis and engine were largely hidden. Be much easier if we described this thing as an ECW!

 

Sorry, another fascinating picture, getting me going just like the class 10.

 

Stewart

[great northern]

Thanks for replies so far chaps. I have now filed the bus under "too difficult".   The telegraph poles..... well I agree really - they must be there, but how to achieve it is another matter. I need a tall slotted concrete post for the biggest one, for a start.

 

As a refuge from these weighty matters, I went to run some trains, and discovered that the KX Goods- New England pick up was due. Having left KX at 2.20am here it is, just after 5.33pm, approaching the end of the journey. How many crews will have manned it during that time, I wonder? It ran as a Class H goods, as far as Hitchin, whence it became Class K. I didn't notice that change until now. I will put it right for the future. As I find trains like this far too long to capture on one image, I have done a succession of shots, so that those who like looking at wagons and vans can see the whole thing. The three brake vans behind the loco are being worked back from London, as the result of an irascible telephone call from the New England Yardmaster, who was running out of them. The late and much lamented Andy Rush advised me as to the composition of this train.

I am learning, belatedly, only to photoshop the easy ones.

While shots like this just get you know what cropped out.

But in view of the very helpful advice about photoshopping telegraph poles, I decided to remind myself of the "pleasures" of shopping lattice posts. Are you sure those poles are really necessary?

But for those who aren't that turned on by wagons, here is an East - Leicester stopper, behind one of the few remaining working Compounds.

And she is seen again, about to draw to a stand at Platform 6. No doubt the crew will ensure that all the coaches are under cover, as that sky looks very threatening. Come to think of it, so does the one outside here, so my afternoon "moderate exercise" may be put on hold.

 

[stewartingram]

Gilbert, that other "difficult" bus has re-appeared! I really am going to have a rummage through my boxes soon....

 

 

Stewart

[stewartingram]

Been doing a bit of digging. If you go to the Langley website http://www.langley-models.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_OO_Vehicle_kits_G1___G84_23.html and look at the vehicle kit G40, you will find a familiar GPO van listed. Any help?

I also had a quick rummage through my bits box. Reckon I might have enough bits to reassemble into OOC's version of the L. Equal standard to your "bridge bus"? Looks like there might also be some bits to make a K (d/d, aka the Bristol version of your bridge bus). Remember that conversion scan I sent, to make it into a proper LKH? Now, no promises mind, but I'm on extended sick leave at the moment, might just have a play....

 

 

Stewart

Edited November 7, 2014 by stewartingram

[coachmann]

The Bristol L is available from EFE or Corgi, I forget which. Might not be a wide one but in 4mm who cares. Other vehicles in that shot are an Austin taxi, Austin Princess, Standard Vanguard (ugh, I had one), a pre-war Hillman and a late 1940's Morris Commercial GPO van.

Edited November 7, 2014 by coachmann

[Alister_G]

I've just had a closer look at that photo, and it's most curious. Whereas you can clearly see a wire going from the foreground telegraph pole off to the left to a more standard sized pole, and also a wire going from the same pole off to the right, there don't appear to be any between the foreground pole and the one further back, despite the plethora of insulators on each pole.

 

I wonder if that's a trick of the light, or whether in fact they had been decommissioned at the time the photo was taken?

 

One would think, given the mass of insulators, that you would be hard pressed to see daylight between all the wires, if all the insulators on both poles were in use.

[coachmann]

There are no wires because the nearest pole is not in fact a telegraph pole. Its a mobile bat sanctuary attached to the roof of the Morris van....

Edited November 7, 2014 by coachmann