Unknown Location-Old Postcard

[d600]

Hi i picked up this old postcard the seller didnt know where the location was,just wondering if anyone can put a name to the location.

 

cheers

[beast66606]

Thames valley area ?

[Xerces Fobe2]

I reckon Pangbourne - Goring area

 

XF

[Lochty no more]

The lineside fencing is L & NWR if that helps

[d600]

Thames valley area ?

 

Hi i thought the thames valley area,could be the pangbourne area thanxs for the info.

 

cheers

[eastwestdivide]

Although the lie of the land looks Thames Valley, I can't make it match any of the locations between Didcot-Reading using Google maps.

[TheSignalEngineer]

The lineside fencing is L & NWR if that helps

 

If LNW I would suggest possibly former loops just north of Weedon with the canal on the left.

[The Stationmaster]

The lineside fencing is not GWR (already noted above as LNW of course) and the topography, especially the relative positions and heights of railway and river do not match anywhere between Reading and Didcot. The track spacing looks a bit odd suggesting to me that the line on the left is an 'additional' one added to an earlier formation - again this doesn't match the way quadrupling was done between Reading and Didcot where a second pair of running lines were added throughout.

[eastwestdivide]

...The track spacing looks a bit odd...

As if the centre lines go through one arch of the bridge and the left-most line goes through an arch added later?

Or as if it's spreading out for an island platform between the two left-most lines behind the camera?

 

 

Summing up what we've got so far:

4-track line

gentle countryside

quite a wide river (don't think it can be a canal)

slightly odd track spacing

LNW style fencing

['CHARD]

Is it up Shugborough/ Colwich way..?

 

Or Great Haywood even, making that a canal - the Trent and Mersey?

[The Stationmaster]

Is it up Shugborough/ Colwich way..?

 

Or Great Haywood even, making that a canal - the Trent and Mersey?

 

I did wonder about Great Bridgeford or somewhere in that vicinity but I can't fit it on Googlemaps and there was a station at Great Bridgeford in, I think, that position.

[TheSignalEngineer]

Track spacing is not right for Great Bridgeford. That bridge has two distinct pairs with a gap in the middle. Also the water looks too wide.

['CHARD]

I'm struggling to see much water at all at Gt Bridgeford. I'm convinced it's the Trent Valley line a couple of miles east, south of Hixon.

[eastwestdivide]

I reckon the water is wider than the T&M canal would be. Can't see any suitable bridges near Hixon.

To the OP: is there anything at all on the back of the postcard?

[Fat Controller]

Rugeley, perhaps? The power station would be just to the left nowadays.

[TheSignalEngineer]

I'm struggling to see much water at all at Gt Bridgeford. I'm convinced it's the Trent Valley line a couple of miles east, south of Hixon.

The River Sow is just by the line at Great Bridgeford, but is nowhere near that wide.

['CHARD]

Aye, I was on Google Earth, natch! The Trent and Mersey, however, IS a wide waterway in that vicinity, and it's pretty compelling - the problem is so much vegetation colonization has taken place in the intervening century (?) that it's hard to judge then & now very easily.

[d600]

I reckon the water is wider than the T&M canal would be. Can't see any suitable bridges near Hixon.

To the OP: is there anything at all on the back of the postcard?

 

Hi the post card dosent have anythink on the back lots of suggestions coming in im lost lol thanxs for all the posts.

 

cheers

[d600]

Hi ive had a look at the card with a magnify glass it looks like 3 tracks and the one furthest on the right looks like a wall it also looks like the 2nd and 3rd track runs into a set of points just on the bend the track looks funny tho the rails seem higher than standered to me.

 

cheers

[Joseph_Pestell]

I thought it looked like three tracks rather than four.

 

Still, nothing that I can place the photo by. One really wonders why such a dull photograph would be published as a postcard.

[Fat Controller]

Hi ive had a look at the card with a magnify glass it looks like 3 tracks and the one furthest on the right looks like a wall it also looks like the 2nd and 3rd track runs into a set of points just on the bend the track looks funny tho the rails seem higher than standered to me.

 

cheers

I don't think it's a wall, as there's a lighter grey to its right, suggesting ballast, as well as it being at the bottom of what seems to be a shallow cutting. Any boundary would normally be at the top of a cutting or the bottom of an embankment- apart from anything else, it allowed the railway to manage their condition.

[d600]

I thought it looked like three tracks rather than four.

 

Still, nothing that I can place the photo by. One really wonders why such a dull photograph would be published as a postcard.

 

Hi i dont think the postcard was published,in the 30's/40's you could buy postcard paper and have your photos put on to it,this is a real photo card and someone i know who collects postcards reckons its from the 40's.

 

cheers

[petethemole]

The watercourse doesnt seem to have towpath, so possibly not a canal,

Pete

[TheSignalEngineer]

Low blue brick walls were a common feature at the bottom of cuttings on LNW lines that had been widened or where loops had been added.

 

That probably leaves us looking for a 2-track LNW line with a loop or slow line starting by a bend in a river just before a road bridge.

[bertiedog]

Rugeley, perhaps? The power station would be just to the left nowadays.

Assuming a look north, it could indeed match the LNWR main line at Rugeley. Possiby church tower matches town. The shot is repeated a bit clearer, purely to show it bettter after photoshop, I expect out of any copyright, and with respect to the original poster.