Totnes Queries 1930s

[JHWestern]

Hello,

 

I am new and delighted to find this group (though I have yet to work out how one joins it).

 

I hope you don't mind, but I have a number of queries about Totnes that have niggled me for some time and this might just be the best place in which to share them.

 

I am interested in the appearance and operation of this station in the mid-1930s.

 

Ashburton Junction

I have long wondered whether the Ashburton Junction Box, rendered redundant and taken out of service in April 1933, was promptly demolished or whether it might have still been in situ in 1935.

 

Thanks to sdrsignalling.co.uk, I now know that the Box in question dated from 1884 and was “most likely a GWR Type 5 brick boxâ€. The Box evidently did not get in the way of the relaying of the junction in July 1934, as its concrete plinth remains extant. How long did the Box remain extant?

 

Totnes Creamery

 

I understand that the old pumping station was sold off to become a dairy in 1934. I do not know of a view of the station dating from the mid-30s that shows this building after the change in ownership.

 

When were changes made to the building by its new owners and what were these changes? At some point the lovely Italianate campanile-style chimney gave way to the modern brick structure, but I wonder how quick off the mark the new owners were in making this change.

 

Operation

 

I wonder what movements were made on the Quay Branch in the mid-30s. I believe it was operated by a locomotive up to a certain distance, but I wonder what movements it made, the shunting involved and the traffic (aside from bacon).

 

It would also be helpful to understand a little about goods operations. Were there pick-up goods on the mainline and, if so, what were the shunting movements undertaken?

 

I wonder also what movements the daily goods service to the branch entailed.

 

Finally, I would benefit from a better understanding of the movements involved in banking. I believe 3150s were commonly used. One is pictured on the goods shed siding in the ‘30s. I understand that Dainton sidings were also used for bankers. That is about the extent of my grasp.

 

Thank you in anticipation

[Coombe Barton]

Quay branch - see this thread and some of the pix referred to http://www.rmweb.co....ses-gentrified/ - including the horse shunting. i this thread there's a link to the photo archive in Totnes. See post 49 for a link to the horse drawn shunting on The Plains.

 

Traffic for the Quay line, according to Tony Kingdom's book on the branch

 

Incoming:

• Trees - Reeves Timber yards
  
• Grain/Seed - Holmans Warehouses
  
• Apples - Symons Cyder
  
• Pigs
  

Outgoing

• Sand dredged from the Dart (Kingdom has this as incoming - I have doubts)
  
• Timber (Reeves)
  
• Cyder (Symons)
  
• Bacon
  

Max 30 wagons per day.

 

Tony Kingdom's book - places like http://www.abebooks....M/6782666570/bd - they're mainly much more than this.

 

I was lucky - got mine from a seller at the St Buryan show in 2009 for a fiver

 

[Edit} Believe the loco wasn't allowed past the gate just past Harris Bacon.

 

[Edit again] - Corrected the spelling to Symons after seeing it i the above mentioned pic.

[JHWestern]

Vey many thanks indeed

[devondynosoar118]

Try here, a beautiful model that may have answers as well as inspiration!

http://small-but-perfectly-formed.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/totnes-change-for-ashburton-branch.html

 

As for goods traffic, Ashburton traffic was never massive, but I will ask around when I am next on the SDR as I am sure there is some info in the museum. Kris may also have some book info for you. I suspect it was a few open wagons and the odd van at most. I am sure some time tabling still exists too. Have you looked at old maps.com for track plan?

[Kris]

Sorry, I don't have any info to add beyond what has been said already.

[JHWestern]

Thanks. I appreciate the thought and the link. I have seen the 2mm model in the press. It won awards, I believe. It is beautifully done, really very beautifully done, but is not, I think really a model of Totnes. From whichever angle I look at it, it doesn't look like Totnes. I'm all for compomise, compression and faction, but this version has been too extensively re-arranged to resemble its namesake from any viewpoint. It's just not what it says on the tin, rather it's a lovely model of a fictitious South Devon Station, like the Totnes in reverse on Kingstorre, which I happily concede is an inspirational model. In a funny sort of way, if it had been called something else, I'd probably have loved it.

 

I have probably comitted heresey (so while I am at it, I never did see the point of Stoke Summit as a layout - there, said it now).

[JHWestern]

Aha! I seem to have found the answer to the second of my queies. Thanks to those good people who are trying to save the Brunel Atmospheic Pumping Station, there are a couple of images that hold the key: http://atmostotnes.o...ry-of-the-site/

 

Both appear to be post the conversion to creamery in 1934. Both show the campanile intact. The aerial shot - useful in a number of ways, shows both the campanile and the new chimney. It is said to be of the late 1930s; it is probably pre-war because the footbridge roof is intact (unless it's a Luftwaffe snap!). Great to see the allotments.

 

The first picture is probably also second half of the 30s as all the vehicles wear the shirtbutton. What a fantastic shot of GW road vehicles for Totnes fans and one is still dual fitted with oil lamps! The first shot, with the vehicles, is clearly of the west side. The aerial view shows the roofs of the two lean-tos pictured in the fist shot.

[Kris]

The Totnes image bank have some interesting photos http://www.totnesimagebank.info/images don't know if they will help you further but there is a photo of Totnes station when it was still broad gauge.

[JHWestern]

Very many thanks, Kris. Funnily enough I was looking at these yesterday during the same trawl that came up with the pictures of the creamery. I really love the Edwardian shot of the 517 with the 4-wheeler - not my period but what a wonderful picture and great if you want to model Edwardian Ashburton.

[devondynosoar118]

I want the SDR to rebuild 1420 as a 517 to use with the celestory coaches. Some excellent images of the train sheds on the 1912 shot as well, good links!

[JHWestern]

I want someone to make an RTR 517!

[devondynosoar118]

Cab mod, chimney and dome plus bits from N Brass loco?

Can't see an RTR 517 this year but would be a good commission from Dapol.

[JHWestern]

Cab mod, chimney and dome plus bits from N Brass loco?

Can't see an RTR 517 this year but would be a good commission from Dapol.

 

Thanks, I will look into the N Brass option.

 

Wasn't Dean Sidings all set up to do a 4mm 517 a few years back?

 

When I last spoke with the proprietor, he was all set to produce a number of variants in resin. He explained that they would best fit the DapoI chassis, rather than the Hornby and I wonder if there could have been availability issues regarding the Dapol unit? I am speculating, does anyone know?

 

I can never keep up with this business as I seldom make shows that he attends and he steadfastly refuses to have a website. I suspect I would have paid him a lot of money over the years had I been able to see and order his products on-line!

 

That is part of the charm of the cottage industy that serves British outline railway modelling - the random eccentricity of the supplier. It's almost as if they want to go out of businesss having only sold 3 of something. It is the same with 20mm wargames (also 1/76) - for years now I have been trying to buy certain vehicles from Matador Models. They have a website and say they do mail order. I have been failing for years to persaude them to exchange money for goods. It seems that you have to go to a big wagames show, Salute, in person, which is not really practical for me.

[devondynosoar118]

As a Wargamer the above is all too familiar! Dean sidings sell regularly at exhibitions but a web site would be nice. Alan Gibson lists the kit in 4 mm but has not had enough interest to make a new batch of kits. David Geen also lists the old Mitchell Design 517 in 4mm.

Just re-checked N brass and they have less stuff than I remember, certainly worth looking at on a show stand as there are no pictures!

[JHWestern]

Thanks, devondynosoar.

 

Funny, I grew up on the banks of the Soar. Retuning to the banks of the Dart, the 517 is yet another example of how completely neglected the Grouping scene now is. Because (it sometimes seems to me) that almost the entire focus of modellers and the RTR manufacturers is the 50-60s period, the focus is on prototypes common under British Railways. Every so often these are grudgingly and not consistently made available in pre-war liveries (I can't remember the last time Bachmann put one of its Small Prairies in pre-war livery). The net effect is that you end up with very little pre-war available and if you go back before, say, 1936, what little there is dwindles rapidly.

 

This must be true, because otherwise there would be a RTR model of a 517, or, even, a 4800; it is really depressing to think that in all these years it has not been possible to have a pre-war RTR auto-train; the Airfix/Dapol/Hornby model being of a 14XX with top feed. Many consider the "Ashburton" GWR branchline terminus layout overdone to the point of cliche, yet it has never been possible to model such a branch in a '30s setting using OOB RTR.

 

Devon, for most of the 30s was dependent on the old 517 for these rural branchline auto-services. Unless I am mistaken, by the mid-30s there were still no Collett 4800s anywhere in the South West penninsula, west of Exeter shed, save 2 that went to Cornwall. Ashbuton saw its first, so far as I know, in March '36.

 

I imagine the 517s predominated in may other corners of the system until at least the mid '30s.

 

I know the dominance of the '50-60s scene is dictated by the nostalgia of the dominant modelling generation, but I also wonder to what extent entrants to the hobby of any generation are influenced/constrained by the choice on the shelves. Would we have more Grouping and more pre-Grouping layouts if these periods were adequately supported by the RTR sector?

[devondynosoar118]

I agree completely, there are pictures of 517's in the early 1900s as well as 31xx locally, neither of which has been produced in RTR. I am a grouping and pre grouping fan, as someone who missed BR steam by 20 years. The big railways in preservation are taking more interest in this period, look at the success of the Railmotor and the reconstruction of a star at Didcot.

[JHWestern]

I agree completely, there are pictures of 517's in the early 1900s as well as 31xx locally, neither of which has been produced in RTR. I am a grouping and pre grouping fan, as someone who missed BR steam by 20 years. The big railways in preservation are taking more interest in this period, look at the success of the Railmotor and the reconstruction of a star at Didcot.

 

It is always cheering to hear I am not alone - having entered this life just as steam finally ended on the national network, my "nostalgia" is second hand as the highlights of my childhood were the annual visits to both S Devon preserved lines. My tastes have since broadened to pretty much anything c.1895-1939.

 

You make a very good point regarding the preserved lines - some of them have been very BR-era samey for a while now and change is welcome.

 

As someone, who, when he gets out of his amchair, is likely to prove what Railway Modeller used to call "the average modeller" it is surprisingly difficult to contemplate even a mid '30s GW layout. For 1935 in Devon I find, for instance, that there is not a single RTR GW coach of an adequate standard that I can use. Thanks to the Hornby GW horse box, there is at least one RTR Brown vehicle that can be deployed OOB.

 

So narrowly has the mainstream hobby now focussed that I recently read an article in which a modeller, with no suggestion of humour, set out in some detail how he had stock that could allow him to repesent "three periods" within the c1950 to 1970 timeframe. Golly, three periods.

 

Gradually, as the generations move on, it will be possible to open a magazine without the umpteenth '50s''60s layout and plans or prototype features that assume you only want to model this period. What will happen then? Will we see an endless stream of blue and yellow diseasals replace the green diseasals and the dirty black steam engines? My childhood was during "The Age of the Train". I remember standing on overbridges watching Deltics storm beneath me, largely just to see what the heck was making such a deafeningly awful racket. I have not one single shred of nostalgia concerning the Corporate Image era.

 

Alternatively, given that the romance of steam has traditionally drawn many to the hobby and that we live in a land replete with popular preserved lines, will our perpetual dwelling in just the last 2 of 15 decades of steam give way to more variety? The answer is "no" unless the RTR manufacturers become frankly more imaginative. What we buy is shaped by what is available and those joining the hobby are dependent on RTR. Many of us will remain so.

 

The sporadic release of a locomotive in a grouping or even pre-grouping guise is simply not enough. If you want to run, say, a seconday mainline, say, c.1900-1935, of the sort manageable in 4mm, you will need a number of different locomotive types. I would suggest at least one 4 coupled tender engine, perhaps both a 2-4-0 and a 4-4-0. You would need a passenger tank, 4 or 6 coupled. You will doubtless want a 6-coupled tank engine and goods tender engine. Then you will need suitable coaches and goods stock. You would doubtless be tempted to add a top-link Atlantic, 4-6-0 or Pacific for the larger companies. You will need more than the BR-liveried post-war survivors currently available. It would doubtless take time to build up coverage and many would say that this was not practical.

 

However, the manufacturers do not even attempt what they could more readily do. Coming from a GW bias, I acknowledge that we have had some improvement after a very, very fallow period for the pre-war modeller. The re-tooled 2800 from Hornby was well overdue, but at least we have it. The 42/7200 is a significant bonus. The GW ROD is equally welcome. These are significant releases, particularly as goods engines are often relatively neglected. But, they simply serve to throw into starker relief the paucity of product in the branch and passenger departments.

 

So, while I am grateful for these new releases, they do not begin to restore the balance in favour of the pre-war modeller:

• Where are Bachmann's 2 small prairies, Collett Goods, unmodified Hall and others in pre-war GW livery?
  
• Why can we not have a Hall with a Churchward tender?
  
• Why is the one pre-war version of Hornby's new Castle dropping out of the catalogue?
  
• Why can we not have both early and late production Castle bodies (we have BR period variants)?
  
• When are we to have the equally overdue re-tooled King from Hornby?
  
• Hornby have finally relegated their Bow-ended Collets to the Railroad range, but when the other 3 of the Big 4 all have re-tooled coaches, LNER now have non-corridors as well and we have more Pullmans than surely anyone knows what to do with - where the Hell are the GW coaches?
  

When neglect takes the form of not applying liveries to models otherwise available that we would happily buy, the situation is particularly frustrating.

 

There are also major gaps:

• We have no pre-war 0-4-2 autotank, and never have had. Where is the 517 and the 4800? You could use a common chassis;
  
• Where is the Star?
  
• Where is the Saint?
  
• Where is the Bulldog, the 4-4-0 with probably the greatest longevity?
  

Other prototypes might be very popular subjects, even though less numerous or widespread. Anecdotal evidence from observing Ebay and comments from professional kit-builders suggests that the 7200 is in demand as a model, and, Lo, we are soon to have one. I believe that equally popoular choices would be the 4700 and the Aberdare.

 

Coaches? For the principle mainlines, the GW used 70' coaches. For instance, pretty much all Paddington to West of England services (aside from the Ltd's dedicated 60' stock in the '20s and '30s) used 70' stock exclusively. It would be good to see Dreadnoughts and South Wales stock. There were other types, but 4-5 of each of these 2 styles would be representative (say, left and right handed van thirds, composite, and all third in both Dreadnought and S Wales, a brake composite and a Dreadnought diner).

 

For cross country, the Collett bow-ended coaches re-tooled would satisfy most needs (say, left and right handed van thirds, composite, brake composite, all third and diner). For local services, re-tooled corridor clerestories (say van third, third, composite) would be popular I am sure. Hornby just need to remember what Triang had realised decades before them; the thing about panelled bodied coaches is that they had panelled bodies. Oh, and a full brake, that is essential. I know I have just asked for 20 coaches representing 4 basic types, but split between 2 major manufacturers, I don't consider that excessive

 

After all, we all need something to run along side the plethora of pre-war private owners with which the RTR insist on flooding the market.

[devondynosoar118]

In 2mm you could 3d print a 517. The above pretty much reflects my feeling also, not really a diesel fan either. With nearly all the major gaps in the BR fleet filled the manufacturers are going to have to do some of these. Can't understand the dearth of OO GW coaches either. You could add toplights and early batches of b sets to that list too.

[Kris]

We appear to have merrily skipped off the original topic here and on to one that has broader relevance than just for South Devon. I would suggest carrying it on in a different thread so that the original topic can regain its focus.

[Captain Kernow]

Thanks. I appreciate the thought and the link. I have seen the 2mm model in the press. It won awards, I believe. It is beautifully done, really very beautifully done, but is not, I think really a model of Totnes. From whichever angle I look at it, it doesn't look like Totnes. I'm all for compomise, compression and faction, but this version has been too extensively re-arranged to resemble its namesake from any viewpoint.

 

 

I have probably comitted heresey (so while I am at it, I never did see the point of Stoke Summit as a layout - there, said it now).

No heresy at all, but as someone who lives a mere 7.5 miles from Totnes and catches the train to work from there almost every day, I have to respectfully disagree with you about the 2mm model, as I think it captures the 'spirit' of Totnes beautifully, both railway and non-railway parts. I've seen the layout 'in the flesh' a number of times, and I think it's pure magic!

 

[JHWestern]

No heresy at all, but as someone who lives a mere 7.5 miles from Totnes and catches the train to work from there almost every day, I have to respectfully disagree with you about the 2mm model, as I think it captures the 'spirit' of Totnes beautifully, both railway and non-railway parts. I've seen the layout 'in the flesh' a number of times, and I think it's pure magic!

 

Doubtless we all have different views on the fraught relationship between accuracy and "capturing the spirit" of a given subject. I think we could probably agree that nothing close to slavish accuracy is necessay to capture the spirit of a subject.

 

I spent a lot of my childhood in and around Totnes and have walked the ground and surveyed it since. Now, whether you take a platform height view, assume you are standing on the overbridge or the Castle ramparts or, as with most photographs of this model, assume you are floating in the modeller's mythical hotair balloon, the layout presents you with a vista that is jarringly and obviously not Totnes. The station itself is clearly based on Totnes and captures it well, but every viewpoint shows you something beyond the narrow confines of the track plan that shouldn't be there. This defeats the impression that this is a model of Totnes.

 

I choose my words carefully and, while a model of great charm and equisite execution, there is not a single viewpoint so far as I can tell from which this model looks like its supposed prototype. To the extent that I can be said to object, it isn't to this model, which is beautiful, but to the name. Obviously I have a hitherto unsuspected obsessive-compulsive streak (rare, I am sure, in railway modellers) that won't be reconciled to the premise I am invited to accept, that this layout is a model of a prototype location that I know particularly well.

 

The layout is probably best viewed as a number of cameos of Totnes, which in isolation are each characteristic of an aspect of the place. Put together in the way that there are, however, the elements intrude upon one another to the extent that the overall scene cannot be said to capture the prototype convincingly. The layout is a case of "I'm playing all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order".

 

We should all accentuate the positive and avoid adverse criticism of other people's efforts, but I think when a layout is offered up to the public at exhibitions and is presented as representing a particular subject, comment has been invited. And this layout simply isn't what it says on the tin. Glad it works for you, however

[Captain Kernow]

Glad it works for you, however

Yes, clearly it isn't a slavish copy, but what does work for me, apart from the railway areas, are some of the individual buildings and the way they have been placed, for me at any rate, this captures the atmosphere of the place very well. An impressionist view (outside of the railway areas), perhaps. Plus one of the most wonderful backscenes I've ever seen....

[JHWestern]

Yes, clearly it isn't a slavish copy, but what does work for me, apart from the railway areas, are some of the individual buildings and the way they have been placed, for me at any rate, this captures the atmosphere of the place very well. An impressionist view (outside of the railway areas), perhaps. Plus one of the most wonderful backscenes I've ever seen....

 

It is, by any standards, a superb model. Although, for the reasons I have stated, I have found willing suspension of disbelief to be hard to acheive with this layout, it does make you want to like it. It superficially frustrates me, but if I try to look past that, I can see what you mean and I think I can appreciate it better for having had the benefit of your reaction to the model. Good God, I may be mellowing.

[R A Watson]

it is a very good representation of the spirit of the town and as someone who also knows the area well it works for me. Who can say any layout is an accurate copy of the prototype in all regards?

 

The main point to me is that it shows what the town would have looked like if the Normans had decided to build the castle on the other side of the station!

[cary hill]

it is a very good representation of the spirit of the town and as someone who also knows the area well it works for me. Who can say any layout is an accurate copy of the prototype in all regards?

 

The main point to me is that it shows what the town would have looked like if the Normans had decided to build the castle on the other side of the station!

 

"Although I have had to take some substantial liberties with the geography, I hope that the result retains the character of the locality" per the builder. I think he has "overachieved" massively but that's just my opinion.