£1.38 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Have you seen this image - it claims to be unpublished. http://railwayanamichael.com/product_info.php?cPath=1_7_38&products_id=376 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Chris, I'd have thought that the freight service I outlined above would've been pretty much it. Not quite sure what you mean by pick-up goods movements, as it looks like Glenfield was only served by the one train a day. Regards, Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrislock Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 Chris, I'd have thought that the freight service I outlined above would've been pretty much it. Not quite sure what you mean by pick-up goods movements, as it looks like Glenfield was only served by the one train a day. Regards, Peter Peter - apologies I managed to miss your freight section and misread Dave's entry as yours! Doh. Interesting that it mentions only minerals and empties, and one general goods - doesn't shed light on that strange little siding, which is what I'm after. The goods referred to would likely have been unloaded on the platform by the little goods shed. I wonder where farm machinery ( crane needed),and livestock might have been unloaded? Have you seen this image - it claims to be unpublished. http://railwayanamic...products_id=376 £1.38, thanks. No I haven't seen that exact photograph before. This looks to be later than the Transport Treasury collection which is a common source. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
£1.38 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 It is worth doing a search on Google for new images every few months. It is surprising sometimes what appears unexpectedly. I found that one whilst looking for something else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DavidLong Posted February 24, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 24, 2012 Have you seen this image - it claims to be unpublished. http://railwayanamic...products_id=376 The engine is probably 78013 which took over the services in November 1963 after its cab had been modified. It had been the intention to modify three 78xxx locos but this was thought to be unlikely and that Claytons would be used instead. As we now know, this didn't happen. There is a photograph of the modified 78013 in Modern Railways for February 1964. Coincidentally, the same issue lists the withdrawal of 58143 which was one of the West Bridge branch locos. Edit: on an earlier post Invicta mentions 78028 which is listed as a Coalville engine from w/e 04/01/1964 so it looks like two out of the expected three 78xxx were modified. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Modeller Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 It had been the intention to modify three 78xxx locos but this was thought to be unlikely and that Claytons would be used instead. David So the Claytons were built to the Leicester and Swannington loading gauge? That's an interesting little fact for anyone putting together a railway quiz! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DavidLong Posted February 25, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2012 So the Claytons were built to the Leicester and Swannington loading gauge? That's an interesting little fact for anyone putting together a railway quiz! I guess that the cabs would have been modified for the line. . . but it wouldn't have made them go any better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrislock Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 It's been quite a while since I last posted on this topic, but I thought I'd share a couple of points gleaned from studying the Clinker book on the L& S - I think the answer to that strange little siding and the stone traffic situation may now be answered! The first solution comes from appendix G of the book ( for those that may have a copy). How I missed this I just do not know. It is a table showing the loads carried between July,1832 when the line opened, to Dec 1845; and it reveals that in the first 6 months of 1833, 654 tons of sand were carried away from Glenfield. By 1845, the amount had fallen to 24 tons, and then none is shown for the next half year. The presence of sand in such quantites enough to quarry, also explains the abundence of pine trees in the vacinity. So it is highly likely that the private siding was laid at the outset by a private owner to transport sand from what it looks like was a small quarry just to the east of the station. Also it is suggestive that the facility closed relatively early on, and so the original LS rails and chairs were just left when the MR took possession. Eureka! Regarding the stone, chapter XII of the same tome, explains that stone from the Groby quarries a couple of miles west of Glenfield, was brought into Glenfield for loading, but only for a period of a year or so, around 1864.; after which the new siding was laid by Groby junction. Now this is a puzzle, because how was it transported to 2-3 miles to Glenfield, and how would it have been loaded at that time? Or could it just be that the wagons were brought to Glenfield to await despatch? Please feel free to question my logic if you can offer a better fit for the evidence! Regards, Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted June 21, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 21, 2012 Chris the first question is what sort of stone was transported, crush or broken stone used for hardcore, rough stone used building work, dressed stone used for building work, or larger pieces of undressed or dressed stone used for more important stonework? There are also other possibilities such as limestone or iron ore for steel making which would also be quarried. Large pieces would probably be transported by a flatbed trailer at that date horse drawn transport would be required. In the Forest of Dean the stone was transported by the tramways. There are photos of large pieces being moved on the Bixhead tramway either to the stoneworks or the railway wharf in 1946 probably much the same as it would have been in 1846. (Its in the Ian Pope Severn and Wye books cannot remember the vol published by Wild Swan) Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrislock Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share Posted June 21, 2012 Don - the main stone which seems to have been quarried in the area were limestone and granite. There were a number of lime kilns locally, and I am guessing that this would have been moved by road ( or water). I don't think we are looking at the scale of the ops say in the Peak District. However, the book specifically refers to Groby as a granite quarry, but doesn't elucidate further. Interestingly, the original owner, Lord Stamford, built a private railway to interchange with the Leicester to Desford line, which relied on a wagon turntable "off a loop". It doesn't say what the motive power was, and I wouldn't surprised if it were Horse. This line was built without Parliamentary say-so but was taken under officially the L&S wing in 1833. Whether they used one of their ( few) steam engines to collect the wagons would need further investigation. It recalls the quarries getting into "low water" by 1864, and "traffic being taken to Glenfield for loading, and the rails removed". Later the Groby Granite Co took over the workings and laid in a "proper junction". I believe the new quarry line was 2' gauge powered by a Hunslet 0-4-0T, at least in 1896. How the stone was transferred to standard gauge is another unknown at present. However, from a 1905 operational viewpoint, not only would stone not have done ought but pass through Glenfield via a pick-up, but neither would the sand quarry be operational, having I am guessing long since overgrown. That would leave this odd curved siding most likely as a place to stick the odd wagon or brake van to get it out of the way. Nevertheless, now I have got involved in the historical side of this little station, it is difficult not to want to find out more! I think turning to the Midland Railway Society would be a good future move, as they are a veritable mine of information. Cheers and thanks for the interest! Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cary hill Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Good to see that you are making some progress with the historical details of the line despite the apparently elusive details which would reveal the purpose of that very odd stub siding. Having read the above, have you seen this site http://www.groby.org.uk/history/railway.html which appears to fill in a few more of the gaps re history of the Groby Quarries and how they were worked? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrislock Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 Good to see that you are making some progress with the historical details of the line despite the apparently elusive details which would reveal the purpose of that very odd stub siding. Having read the above, have you seen this site http://www.groby.org...ry/railway.html which appears to fill in a few more of the gaps re history of the Groby Quarries and how they were worked? Cary - thanks for that! So it had a standard gauge and a narrow gauge at one time.... I am amazed at how much industrial activity was taking place in Leicestershire in Victorian times, apart from the coal mining. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Youtube vid of the line There is also a few minutes black and white footage of the line on B&R video Vol 141 East Midlands Railways showing 58148 in Feb 1963. The commentary states the max width of stock allowed through Glenfield tunnel was 7' 7" & max height 10' 9" Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.