James Brake Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I'm in need of some help & figured this was the best place to look... I'm modeling the southern section of a fictitious mainline offshoot from the Waverly Route. The line I'm modeling is double track and runs from Riccarton Junction following, more or less, the route of the Border Counties line as far as Bellingham, then along the Wansbeck Route to Scots Gap thence through Belsay, Ponteland to a terminus at Percy Street in Newcastle. There's a junction at Ponteland with a single-track freight only branch connecting to the North Tyne Loop and the former Blyth and Tyne lines. I imagine a large colliery at Plashetts (similar in size to Ashington) and timber extraction at Kielder being the primary sources of outgoing freight. There are 3x daily Percy Street-Waverly semi-fast passenger trains plus 3x daily Hawick-Percy Street stopping services. There are also regular suburban passenger services running from Percy Street to Ponteland. I'm modeling c1977-78. I'm currently devising the operating sequence and, in so doing, I'd like to have an idea of how my imaginary services might integrate with services on the main Waverly Route, assuming of course that it hasn't closed. I have all the current Waverly Route books, videos, etc and therefore have access to the various working timetables and public timetables published therein. They all, however, seem to be dated in the 1950s. What I was hoping for help with is the question of how dieselisation affected the timings over the route. I can imagine that a Class 45 or a Metro-Cammell DMU might be an improvement over their steam predecessors in terms of acceleration and speed. Unfortunately, I live and work abroad, so a research trip to the local area in search of the "raw data" isn't really feasible. Any info would be much appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 James, I have a 1968/9 Scottish Region passenger timetable at home which may be of some use, I'm away at the moment but should be able to give something more definite tomorrow. If you wish, I can scan the relevant pages for the Waverley route and email them to you - I don't think I'd be able to post them on RMweb due to copyright. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
37175 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I don't think I'd be able to post them on RMweb due to copyright. Nationalised timetables? I reckon you'll be fine, can't see copyright being too much of an an issue, unlike photos, books, magazine articles etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Brake Posted October 13, 2012 Author Share Posted October 13, 2012 That would be fantastic, Bon Accord!! Exactly what I'm looking for. You could email me via RM Web address. I really appreciate it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Stephen, I'll get them done tomorrow and email them to you. I'd advise you edit your message and remove your email address, as apparently those naughty spammer types scan websites for such things and then deluge your address with their nonsense! Matt, They're the A5 size blue all-Scotland timetables - it's amazing the junk you find when moving house. I'll see if I can post a couple here as well for those that are interested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Apols all for being so lazy tonight. I've got the relevant info but no scanner, and don't fancy creating a table and linking it at this time of night. Plus, as I've never seen the blues that Jim's got access to, I'm keen for a sight of them too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Jamieson Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I also have the 1968/69 timetable but am unable to scan it. Just one thing to watch out here is that there was a late amendment affecting the winter service from 5/10/68 - the down Thames-Clyde Express was retimed earlier from St. Pancras resulting in the Edinburgh portion (1S65) leaving Carlisle at 15.58, rather than 17.00. This affected the 17.04 SO Hawick to Edinburgh dmu which ran an hour or so later, departing Hawick at 18.07. Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I also have the 1968/69 timetable but am unable to scan it. Just one thing to watch out here is that there was a late amendment affecting the winter service from 5/10/68 - the down Thames-Clyde Express was retimed earlier from St. Pancras resulting in the Edinburgh portion (1S65) leaving Carlisle at 15.58, rather than 17.00. This affected the 17.04 SO Hawick to Edinburgh dmu which ran an hour or so later, departing Hawick at 18.07. Bill That's a really useful detail, Bill. We are indebted to Kenneth Gray for the number of photos of 1S65 in its final weeks, and that view of the Type 4s approaching Stainton is a signature image for me certainly. It is fact that had it not been retimed, few if any pictures of this service would exist. As it is, dusk is setting in on the shots that must be captured around 16.04. We never need an excuse for one of these: http://www.railbrit.co.uk/imageenlarge/imagecomplete.php?id=31623 Off to lie down and let the Sulzer reverberations subside... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
62440 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 If it's of interest or use: in 1896, the 06.00 ex-Hawick to Riccarton Junction arrived at 06.32, taking 32 minutes, stopping at Stobs and Shankend. in 1948, the 06.15 ex-Hawick to Riccarton Junction arrived at 06.47, taking 32 minutes, stopping at Stobs and Shankend. in 1968, the 06.41 ex-Hawick to Carlisle arrived at Riccarton Junction at 07.09, taking 28 minutes but without stopping at Stobs or Shankend. This was latterly a DMU working. in 1968, 08.45 from Hawick (ex-Waverley) reached Riccarton at 09.14, taking 29 minutes, stopping at Stobs, Shankend and Whitrope. In the reverse direction, in 1896, the 18.28 from Riccarton (ex-Newcastle) reached Hawick at 18.47, taking 19 minutes non-stop for the 13 miles 1 chain. in 1948, the 19.03 from Riccarton (ex-Newcastle) reached Hawick at 19.27, taking 24 minutes with stops at Shankend and Stobs in 1968, the 18.13 ex Carlisle (FSX), leaving Riccarton at 19.18 reached Hawick at 19.42, taking 24 minutes with stops at Shankend and Stobs. This was latterly a DMU working. in 1968, the 19.44 ex Carlisle (FSX), leaving Riccarton at 20.35 reached Hawick at 20.55, taking 20 minutes non-stop. I leave it to you to judge the impact of the impact of diesels and DMU working over the section of the Waverley (there's an "e"!) Route you are interested in. http://www.railbrit....te.php?id=22698 I am told that this DMU is a Derby Lightweight (earlier series from 1954), to the best of my knowledge Metro-Cammell DMUs did not work south of Hawick. Bruce Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 That is indeed a DLW, Bruce. The recorded use of Met-Camms south of Hawick is restricted, to best of my knowledge, to holiday excursions from Tyneside via the Border Counties. We have seen shots of the 6(?)-car set stabled at Hawick and standing at Riccarton, from memory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Jamieson Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 That's a really useful detail, Bill. We are indebted to Kenneth Gray for the number of photos of 1S65 in its final weeks, and that view of the Type 4s approaching Stainton is a signature image for me certainly. It is fact that had it not been retimed, few if any pictures of this service would exist. As it is, dusk is setting in on the shots that must be captured around 16.04. We never need an excuse for one of these: http://www.railbrit....te.php?id=31623 Off to lie down and let the Sulzer reverberations subside... That's right 'Chard - even so I think some of Kenneth's shots of 1S65 must have been taken more in hope than expectation! Robin Barbour even attempted a shot of it passing Riccarton Jn. on the last Saturday. Unfortunately scanning has chopped off the bottom half of the picture (perhaps Bruce knows why) but the upper half is quite atmospheric with the lights in the compartments of the leading coach glowing brightly. Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
62440 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 This one, 'Chard? Bruce Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Gents, As requested, here's a scan of the 1968 timetable. I was quite surprised to see the whole thing (both directions) only warranted one page. The squiggly lines down the columns denote that the listed train does not run for the full duration of the timetable, as denoted by the letters/notes at the bottom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Fantastic that, Jim. I'm amazed it compresses onto a single page of the Scottish T/T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Fantastic that, Jim. I'm amazed it compresses onto a single page of the Scottish T/T. Amazed and somewhat depressed that BR felt 98 miles of mainline warranted such a sparse timetable. Thank you for posting though Jim, certainly very interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Amazed and somewhat depressed that BR felt 98 miles of mainline warranted such a sparse timetable. Thank you for posting though Jim, certainly very interesting. I've only just come to this thread otherwise could have posted my own copy. It's a reminder that many services back then bore no relationship to what would nowadays be considered an acceptable frequency - indeed it's not surprising the route was considered expendable! I love the romance of the old network but If the line had survived it would no doubt have a much better service but at the necessary expense of rationalising all that redundant trackwork and signalling - a bit like the (to be) revived portion! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 It is actually incredible - I expect only the Port Road could compete in such minimalist terms. The reasons behind this are thoroughly explored in David Spaven's recent book, but basically no initiative was taken into trying to make the service pattern more attractive, and the given excuse was that service patterns were fossilized once a line was under consideration of closure. The decision was finally taken in summer '68, so the minimalist pattern is what you see above. In real terms it had stagnated to much the same format as the branch services were pruned off one by one. The only real initiative was introduction of Sunday services between Edinburgh and Hawick, although that was somewhat earlier. Apart from these, the timetable cast in '68 looks virtually the same as its '63 counterpart, the only other notable exceptions being the Edinburgh to Gorebridge short workings, of which but one daily vestige remains, as far as Eskbank. The W/T/T does include staff only services that were unadvertised in the public timetable, such as to Harker, and also the set-down/ pick-up at Whitrope. What this skeletal timetable does permit, of course, is a fairly forensic analysis of actual stock workings during the last year. The freight service pattern was by now similarly sparse; admittedly there are a few parcels workings to add, but it's possible to get an oversight of a whole year's movements across a main line, encompassing almost certainly fewer than 500 locos, once diagrams are taken into account. This is a major part of its poignant appeal in the WR's latter days - a pattern of familar locos going about an almost parochial, family business, basically marking time as legal processes work themselves out several hundred miles away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
62440 Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Amazed and somewhat depressed that BR felt 98 miles of mainline warranted such a sparse timetable. Note to moderator - please remove this posting if you think fit - I won't hold it against you; after all, this is a modelling forum! Several posters have mentioned the frequency of the services. However, may I make these comments having been a user of the line between Hawick and Edinburgh regularly from 1964 to closure? If you lived in Hawick and wanted to travel to Edinburgh, either one way to the city, or to have a morning, or afternoon or whole day in the city, returning to Hawick, then the 1968 train service was adequate: not wonderful, but acceptable. The Hawick (1961 population 16,324, 1971 population 16,530) of the 1960s was very different from that of today. In doing research for David Spaven using the local papers, I saw that there were literally page after page of job adverts for work in the town. The town then had a wide variety of local shops and services. The question I ask is WHY Hawick people would WANT to use a regular interval train service in vastly increased numbers with an improved service as the town, in 1969, offered nearly all that the population needed? I'd consider my own family were typical railway users - high days and holidays. But Hawick didn't offer everything - there was a need to travel for hospital appointments, for students for further education &c. I guess that there must have been a sprinkling of commuters, but in going up and down the trains with "Help Save the Border Railway Pens" in 1968 after closure was announced, I can't recall speaking to any. There were a few who travelled to Hawick by train as several of my teachers at school did. In my class at school, I had several class mates whose whole family had relocated from other Border towns to Hawick rather than just the bread-winner commute daily. As I went round doors in Hawick collecting signatures of support for BURCo's intended service, not one person said we need more trains, simply, "We need the trains back" or, sadly, "I never needed to use the train", often with the comment that any shopping could be done in Hawick. However, by far and away was the SOCIAL need for retention of all, or part, of the line and that is why after Madge Elliot had the gumption to stick her head above the ramparts, some of us 1960s students tried to help her. 21st century Hawick (2001 population 14,573) is a vastly different place and I'm sure that a regular service to Edinburgh would see increased daily usage. I am first to agree that the above is a self-centred, myopic view of an ex-user from Hawick, but hand-on-heart I can't see that in 1969 an improved timetable ~ perhaps retaining only Hawick to Edinburgh ~ would encourage Teries to start using the reprieved train service daily in the vastly increased numbers needed to make BR accountants rub their hands in glee. I would find it interesting to read the views of other ex-users from other Border Towns. Bruce Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 That's perfectly appropriate Bruce, as far as I can see. We've been a wee bit light on the social aspects of the line of late, and it's a key part of the WR group remit, so I'm offering a vote of thanks for this very keenly personal contribution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fegguk Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 The 1969 timetable may not look brilliant but as Bruce says it met people needs when going to work meant a walk to the mill or pit head. It was a least something that could have evolved to meet the needs of people today which are quite different. Closure ensured that this could not happen. Today we are faced with a considerable bill to restore even part of that which we discarded in 1969 for the sake of short term savings. Though it has to be said in 1969 the future probably looked a lot different to today’s reality. It is equally difficult to speculate how different the local economies in some parts of the Borders might be today if the closure had not happened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 "...in 1969 the future probably looked a lot different to today’s reality..." True, hindsight is a wonderful thing and even as a kid in the early 1970s I remember all the talk that in the future, automation and advancing technology would ensure that people would enjoy lots more leisure time rather than spending hour after hour in tedious work. If only folks had the perception to see the shocking reality that such a euphemism ultimately masked. All of this is now academic and the world and our society have changed so much that what was previously viewed as an outmoded form of transport has re-emerged as a new and vital need as long-distance commuting and dispersed families become the norm. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.