Plan loosely based on High Peak Junction

[cary hill]

I was walking with my wife in the High Peak/Middleton Top/Cromford Canal area in Derbyshire last weekend and it occurred to me that it might make a good subject for a layout design with some tweaking.

 

There a number of interesting features - one of which is the unusual almost "terraced" arrangements of the High Peak Goods Yard and Incline alongside the Cromford Canal, the "Matlock Branch" running right next to the canal for a short distance, but clearly well below the level of the canal as the railway is crossed by a level bridge to gain access to High Peak from a nearby carpark and then lower still the River Derwent.

 

Other features which can be modelled include an aqueduct carrying the canal over the river, a railway bridge crossing the river and a very convenient almost immediate tunnel, a steam engine powered pumping house and a sewage works.

 

So when I got home I had a quick look at the old OS maps for the area to see what could be compressed and my somewhat rough interpretation of how it might been before closure/rationalisation is attached .

 

I have resurrected the old dismantled High Peak shunting yard with simplified pointwork and restored the Derby-Manchester Line to it's former double track glory.

 

My fundamental problems start once I acknowledge that this is the Peak District, Derbyshire and I have no suitable stock so I need to convince myself that it can be moved to the West Country!

 

So I did a quick check list to see if it was plausible:

 

 

• Inclines - plenty in Cornwall not so sure about Devon.
• Independent Railway Workshops - Wadebridge and others - not worried if closed years ago.
• "Small shunting yards" - shouldn't be a problem - plenty of China Clay yards or other extractive industries.
• Transhipment facilties rail to canal - probably more likely to be rivers in the West Country than canals. My wild card might be to "build" one of the proposed canals such as the "Padstow-Lostwithiel" canal, although Cornish businessman seemed to prefer canals with "inclines and tub-boats" rather than "proper" canals with locks and similar, presumably on cost grounds.
• Aqueducts - i can think of Treffry's viaduct but this is a "Roman" style structure i.e very high and I think it was a "wagonway" with a water supply underneath. I can see mentions of some others but I have seen no photographic evidence. I need an essentially not very high(30-40 feet?) large single arch aquaduct with small decorative arches either side - could be a problem to justify unless I "build" a canal to suit.
• Convenient rocky hillside/gorge river bend requiring the railway to cross the river and dive almost immediately into a tunnel - I hope I can find a prototype(no chance) - any ideas?
• Steam engine pump house - plenty of these in Cornwall but not for the purpose of raising river water for the canal but not a big problem as I believe a lot of mines needed water pumping out of them.

 

So I think I can tick most of the boxes although I am a bit tentative about a couple of them.

 

Anyway on to the first "draft" of the plan(sorry it's a bit luridly rough and ready) - it is drawn for 20 foot length, although I would like to compress the length by 10% and probably the width, which as drawn is up to 4' wide, although I can see a possible reduction by removing some of the semi-redundant central frontage to form a much flattened 'S' shape if you see what I mean.

 

I wonder if it might be a good idea to curve the left hand end, as in reality the line from the goods yard does not cross the river(which is why I have not drawn it properly) but runs along the bank for about half a mile or so before joining the mainline. I thought I might exaggerate the river bend more so that the stand of trees and the rocky outcrop conceal it in a better way. I suppose another alternative is to assume that mainline access is to the right passing by the engine shed.

 

I discovered from the old OS maps that there was once a second small canal spur aqueduct over the railway between the river girder bridge(a bit like the old Airfix one) and the tunnel mouth. I wonder if two aqueducts might be too much but it would be more interesting than modelling the severed stagnant canal bed and the pedestrian footbridge now there. I guess all the canal water will be stagnant green.

 

The mainline will have more convincing smoother curves than drawn at the moment. I think I can get to all areas of the yard, although I probably need to consider whether the exact configuration is sensible and hope that I have not caught "Hornby Magazine Track Plan Disease" , as I have eliminated what looks like an additional set of ladder crossovers which appear to have been about half way between the ones drawn.

 

The land on the far "side" of the river is rising front to back . If the river is datum I am guessing the railway would about be 3 inches above this and the canal a further 2 inches above the railway and the shunting yard marginally above canal level with the ground beyond continuing to rise to the back. Left hand front will be rising steeply from the river bank as this will serve as a view block. I am toying with the idea of angling the road at the right hand side across everything to view block that end although the A6 in Derbyshire does nothing of the sort crossing only the incline as shown currently.

 

Also toying with the idea of losing the sewage works and having (a) passing loop(s) instead as there may not be enough going on in this area or will this be clutter?

 

Should I leave the plan alone and accept that Derbyshire is Derbyshire not Devon or Cornwall?

 

I would appreciate any comments on and criticism of the plan and I would be particularly pleased if anyone can identify a possible area of the Devon or Cornwall where such a plan could be plausibly located (a very long shot I fear).

 

Thanks,

 

David

[edcayton]

This doesn't answer your questions, but there was a superb O gauge model of this area on the circuit some years ago. It was in at least one of the mags.

Ther is no reason why you can't rewrite history to have your working canal in Cornwall, but PLEASE not another narrow canal with 70' narrowboats!

 

Ed

[Kris]

I don't want to sound to negative, but as a plan for a Cornish line it doesn't ring true to me. I think this is for a few reasons.

• The general lack of canals in Cornwall, especially those that survived the arrivals of the railways. Your plan seems to show that the canal is still thriving / working given that there is a warfe and transhipment shed. This suggests that the canal is a general goods carrier, again not something that I associate with cornish canals. I think of them as being bulk mineral carriers.
• The river is rather large for a cornish river. Most rivers in Cornwall are reasonably narrow
• The main line diving into a tunnel having just crossed a river.

Now lets go on to what I do like.

• Despite the negative things I have said about the canal above I do like the idea of the canal linking with the railway. I think that this could work very well with a narrow gauge railway, and could conceivably be based in Cornwall. If this was done the line shown could consist of the yard facilities loosing the line over the river. Feeding the yard with the incline would be different.
• The idea of having two unlinked railways - suggests GWR/SR operations.

[cary hill]

I don't want to sound to negative, but as a plan for a Cornish line it doesn't ring true to me. I think this is for a few reasons.

• The general lack of canals in Cornwall, especially those that survived the arrivals of the railways. Your plan seems to show that the canal is still thriving / working given that there is a warfe and transhipment shed. This suggests that the canal is a general goods carrier, again not something that I associate with cornish canals. I think of them as being bulk mineral carriers.
• The river is rather large for a cornish river. Most rivers in Cornwall are reasonably narrow
• The main line diving into a tunnel having just crossed a river.

Now lets go on to what I do like.

• Despite the negative things I have said about the canal above I do like the idea of the canal linking with the railway. I think that this could work very well with a narrow gauge railway, and could conceivably be based in Cornwall. If this was done the line shown could consist of the yard facilities loosing the line over the river. Feeding the yard with the incline would be different.
• The idea of having two unlinked railways - suggests GWR/SR operations.

 

Thanks for your comments and criticisms - no problem with them whatsoever as I prefer bad ideas to be binned as soon as possible as it saves wasting time on them.

 

I have done a bit more research on Cornish canals or more accurately the lack of them - the longest lived appears to be the Liskeard and Looe which seems to have closed in around 1910 and supposedly linked Sandplace and Moorswater - so your comments are bang "on the money" re canals, particularly as I will be modelling post-Nationalisation.

 

I think my draft plan exactly reflected the buildings in Derbyshire and, having slept on it, it makes much more sense to have an arrangement similar to Wenford Bridge/Goods and I think the De Lank Incline also lurked nearby. This would give me china clay traffic and some general goods traffic which, on balance, is far more likely than the coal,iron ore, lead, copper(possible in Cornwall), texiles and iron castings transported in Derbyshire. The canal would obviously have closed years ago, so would have to be portrayed as "closed" with a rotting barge or two perhaps. All I have to do know is justify the canal being there at all and the aqueduct!

 

Re Cornish rivers - surely it would depend which part of the river's course was being portrayed? Some of the tidal estuaries are wide but your point is still useful as narrowing the river might help me with baseboard width problems and establish that the river not navigable - so I need a canal or did do 200 years ago.

 

Re the tunnel - I have not been able to source much evidence of suitable gorge sides to bore a tunnel through in Devon or Cornwall - only Lydford and Lynton/Lynmouth spring to mind and they are not useable in this context as they are plunging gorges. I guess this almost "toy train set" prototype feature does not transfer well from the Derbyshire Peaks due to the differing geology in the West Country. The area a few miles north at Matlock Bath, Derbyshire was called "Little Switzerland" by Victorian romantics(should have gone to SpecSavers?) but then again anywhere with a spectacular watercourse and a couple of hills seemed to have been called "Little Switzerland" by the Victorians, as I think the Lynton/Lynmouth area was similarly named by them. I suppose the railway going over a river and virtually straight into a tunnel is a bit "Swiss".

 

The narrow gauge angle was not one I had thought of - a sort of goods only Lynton and Barnstaple maybe - food for thought although might be difficult to accomodate the idea if the canal is "closed".

 

The idea of the unlinked railways is something I keep returning to as I wish to run ex-GWR/SR stock on the same layout. I struggle to locate plausible prototype locations where they could co-exist on an equal footing as the Exeter/Plymouth areas have to be ruled out on size grounds. There are other possibilities e.g. Bodmin-Wadebridge but GW locos would be pretty much restricted to small Prairies and Panniers or places such as Brentnor where their tracks are adjacent but which would be very dull to operate. So I continue to search.

 

David

[Kris]

 

Re Cornish rivers - surely it would depend which part of the river's course was being portrayed? Some of the tidal estuaries are wide but your point is still useful as narrowing the river might help me with baseboard width problems and establish that the river not navigable - so I need a canal or did do 200 years ago.

 

David

 

Most cornish rivers very quickly turn from wide estuary to narrow river. The relative area of the each rivers catchment is small compared most other locations in the UK leading to small rivers. The other fact is that most cornish rivers are short due to the peninsular nature of the county. (obviously with all of this there are exceptions).

 

As a thought for location the line between Gunnislake and Callington used to have several joining lines with inclines.

 

 

 

[Etched Pixels]

There are other SR/GWR meeting points - Launceston for example and places they sort of wandered nearby without wishing to admit each others existence.

 

For me the canal doesn't work. Cornwall is lumpy, it isn't canal country - Cornish canals are about as practical as a North sea motorway. Thats perhaps one reason you see early waggonways/railways so much in Cornwall ? You do get wharves but usually on the coast or nearer the mouth of rivers (eg Hayle, Wadebridge, etc). The somerset end of Devon you do get canals (and SR/WR mixes etc) but its harder to find the canal/bridge/tunnel exit.

 

Narrow gauge I can see. Most narrow gauge in Cornwall was horse tramway but there were bits of real NG - especially industrial (eg Delabole). Inclines are certainly another possibility - or some truely *insane* wagon lifts.

 

The river/tunnel is also a bit problematic for a lot of examples but plausible I think for the mainline. A lot of the branches simply followed the contours. They weren't built for passengers and clay doesn't take the bus or complain if its slow moving.

 

I think if I was to try and Cornwallise it I'd take the operators well and declare it and the area extending left from it to be an estuary. At that point the yard etc becomes a harbour with the mainline passing high above on one of those grand viaducts (I'm thinking 18" separation here but maybe that won't fit your spaces) with the whole model effectively the river valley and the mainline running along the level of the plateau above the valleys, then I'd take the canal out entirely which also fixes your exit problem. That would also let you run a spur from the harbour under the mainline to something like your works at the bottom of the plan, which might look visually interesting and you've also got fish traffic out and just about anything you want an excuse for in with a wharf - even perhaps a tiddly SR station for the nearby village. After all the NC wasn't averse to putting stations a couple of miles from anyone who might want to use them 8)

 

(equally you can spin the plan 180 or mirror it and swap the ops hole for the empty zone up front if you want wharf 'front of house')

 

Is one an SR branch the other the GWR mainline - who knows, it doesn't seem entirely implausible viewed that way.

[kiwinewt]

Thanks for your comments and criticisms - no problem with them whatsoever as I prefer bad ideas to be binned as soon as possible as it saves wasting time on them.

David

 

Eh - modellers licence. You are already condensing and making it what you want, so why not? You do say its "loosely based on High Peak Junction" after all...