looe branch help

[ianvanorak]

I know from basic research that the Looe to Liskeard branch was mainly worked by GWR small prarie tanks, but were these only the 4500 tanks which I have photographs of, or did the larger side tank 4575/5500 class work the line?

Many Thanks

Ian

[fender]

I know from basic research that the Looe to Liskeard branch was mainly worked by GWR small prarie tanks, but were these only the 4500 tanks which I have photographs of, or did the larger side tank 4575/5500 class work the line?

Many Thanks

Ian

 

yes. I have numerous pics of them on the line.

 

edit: here are some from the CRS, although may all have been taken on the same day.

 

http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/looe-branch-including-moorswater.html

[ianvanorak]

Thanks for the information and photos.

That book is on my shopping list, unfortunately libraries in the West Midlands dont appear to have heard of Cornwall apart from the holiday section

Many Thanks

Ian

[glenng]

Have a look at this site http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/image/epw033110?search=looe&ref=9 it has photos taken from the 1930’s from an old plain.

[fender]

Have a look at this site http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/image/epw033110?search=looe&ref=9 it has photos taken from the 1930’s from an old plain.

 

fantastic. I wasn't aware of this site.

 

I registered an account and the zoom feature is brilliant. loads and loads to see.

[ianvanorak]

Ian,

 

What era are you modelling?

Late 50's-early 60's steam to diesel transition.

[fender]

Late 50's-early 60's steam to diesel transition.

 

do you know if they used Class 08s on the line after the end of steam but before Looe goods yard was closed? I've been wondering that, but haven't seen any proof. I know they switched to DMUs for pax work in 1961.

[fender]

Sample photos show;

4585: 2/7/58,11/7/59, 29/9/59

5553: 7/8/61

5539; 19/6/59

5531: 20/8/61, 9/9/61

5572: 6/9/59 (auto fitted, but not auto train)

5573; 9/61

DMUs took over on 11/9/61

 

 

 

Very unlikely.  Photographic evidence shows D63xxs.  This makes sense because of the gradient up from Coombe Jct to Liskeard would be a struggle for an 08 with a loaded clay train.  Then there is the need to trip the clay to Lostwithiel (for Fowey) or St.Blazey.  Again, an 08 would not be very suitable.

 

oh yes, sorry I should have been clearer. I knew they worked the Moorswater, but was wondering about Looe goods yard. did the 63xxs get down there as well?

[ianvanorak]

According to the Wild Swan book, freight services on the branch, with the exception of the Moorswater China Clay, ceased on 4/11/63, so the assumption is yes, but I have never seen any photos to confirm this.  I do not have a copy of the relevant WTTs for the era either.

There was a photo of a Class 22 on a freight on the Looe branch, I think at Sandplace, in what appeared to be Blue livery with full yellow ends? It was on E-bay. Bit late for normal freight on the route, Engineering work connected to station rebuild/ goods yard removal? Thanks everyone for the information, 4575 tanks definitely used on the line.

[fender]

you're welcome.

 

could you tell us anything more?. I assume this is for a layout you're planning.

[ianvanorak]

you're welcome.

 

could you tell us anything more?. I assume this is for a layout you're planning.

less a layout, nearer a diorama, based on Sandplace, small halt with a road overbridge, road continues alongside railway past cottages, farm track over small crossing with small stream (ex-canal) alongside track. Stopped there on holiday about 4 years ago, unusual in that building today looks more like model railway building than building in the steam era.

[fender]

that sounds like a nice idea for a project. I've been thinking about doing something on the Looe branch as well, although I've also been thinking about just about everywhere else in Cornwall!

 

I was just reading about the Looe Line on wikipedia and this section might interest you:

 

The line was classified as "uncoloured" for engine restriction purposes, but special authority was given for 45XX 2-6-2T locomotives (classified "yellow"), 90XX 4-4-0s (classified "blue") and 0-6-0PTs 9700 to 9710 (also "blue"). In practice the line was in the hands of the 45XXs. Two were based at the sub-shed at Moorswater.^[9]

 

here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liskeard_and_Looe_Railway

 

so although there may not have been any actual use of them, there are a few options for locos without straying too far from what may at least have been permitted. if I do end up making something on the Looe branch I will probably have my Pannier 8750 running on it under Rule One.

[Miss Prism]

The line was classified as "uncoloured" for engine restriction purposes, but special authority was given for 45XX 2-6-2T locomotives (classified "yellow"), 90XX 4-4-0s (classified "blue") and 0-6-0PTs 9700 to 9710 (also "blue"). In practice the line was in the hands of the 45XXs. Two were based at the sub-shed at Moorswater.^%5B9%5D

 

So much for Wikipedia! The 90xx were yellow engines (they would not have been built otherwise), and quite why anyone should make a connection between the big condensing Panniers and the Looe branch is beyond me.

[ianvanorak]

So much for Wikipedia! The 90xx were yellow engines (they would not have been built otherwise), and quite why anyone should make a connection between the big condensing Panniers and the Looe branch is beyond me.

As a mature student the fact that wikepedia is wrong does not surprise me in the slightest. 90xx locos were lightweight but mainly used on the Cambrian,9700-9710 panniers used around London on the Metropolitan lines.

[fender]

So much for Wikipedia! The 90xx were yellow engines (they would not have been built otherwise), and quite why anyone should make a connection between the big condensing Panniers and the Looe branch is beyond me.

 

in fairness I have not seen it, but it gives Operation Cornwall as a reference for that section.

 

didn't mean to cause confusion. I apologise.

[ianvanorak]

in fairness I have not seen it, but it gives Operation Cornwall as a reference for that section.

 

didn't mean to cause confusion. I apologise.

no problems, no confusion caused, I have at least one lecturer who will fail anyone who references Wikipedia, facts can be changed too easily and no checking before displaying. Pannier tank usage not a real issue compared to some historical errors.

[fender]

I have just acquired the Middleton Press Branch Line To Looe book and the third picture is of a branch locomotive restriction board for the Looe line.

 

on it it says, "Only Uncoloured 060T YELLOW 45XX and 57XX 97XX engines may pass this board". the pic is from 1948. perhaps this is just a standard board which was stuck up, with no relevance to the actual locos used on the branch (apart from the 45XXs of course), but in this case there may be something to what wikipedia says.

 

edit: I should also add that the book, like all the other books containing Looe line photos I've seen, contains zero pics of pannier tank locos. plenty of early saddle tanks, but it looks like once the 262s took over they either dominated completely or no one was around to photograph other loco types if they were ever used.

[ianvanorak]

I have just acquired the Middleton Press Branch Line To Looe book and the third picture is of a branch locomotive restriction board for the Looe line.

 

on it it says, "Only Uncoloured 060T YELLOW 45XX and 57XX 97XX engines may pass this board". the pic is from 1948. perhaps this is just a standard board which was stuck up, with no relevance to the actual locos used on the branch (apart from the 45XXs of course), but in this case there may be something to what wikipedia says.

 

edit: I should also add that the book, like all the other books containing Looe line photos I've seen, contains zero pics of pannier tank locos. plenty of early saddle tanks, but it looks like once the 262s took over they either dominated completely or no one was around to photograph other loco types if they were ever used.

Maybe just a standard GWR sign which included 97xx class as they were a seperate class to 57xx class,87xx class covered as sub class of 57xx class. Brake trip gear and condensing equipment not much use in Cornwall

[Miss Prism]

...on it it says, "Only Uncoloured 060T YELLOW 45XX and 57XX 97XX engines may pass this board". the pic is from 1948. perhaps this is just a standard board which was stuck up, with no relevance to the actual locos used on the branch (apart from the 45XXs of course), but in this case there may be something to what wikipedia says.

 

The sign doesn't make much sense in axle weight terms, the 97xx condensers being at the heavy end of the blue range, and nearly 4 tons heavier than a standard 57xx. Or maybe the branch was built that strong? In terms of the engines that were actually allowed, the sign should probably have said "Anything you like provided the coupled wheelbase isn't greater than 14 feet."

[The Stationmaster]

There were of course plenty of engines in the 97XX number series which weren't condensers.  The reference is certainly odd but then so were some Western Region (if not GWR?) references to loco classes by number series which could turn out to be illogical (e.g using 70XX for 'Castles' instead of '4073'.  I don't know if any 97XX series panniers were in that area but it could quite literally have been the case that someone locally had seen engines numbered in that series and therefore made sure they were on the board - such strange goings-on were far from unknown on the railway.

[The Stationmaster]

An extract from the BR(W) 1960 Locomotive  Route Availability book (B.R.31451.2):

 

img287.jpg

 

Extracts from the 1960 Plymouth Sectional Appendix BR 30009:

 

img288.jpg

 

img289.jpg

 

img290.jpg

 

There appears to be a contradictory statement about the length of stock permitted!  

But at least it's a right side failure

[Captain Kernow]

Superb, Paul - excellent to see the old SA!

 

The restriction on passenger-carrying rolling stock still applies on that curve!

[Miss Prism]

The restriction on passenger-carrying rolling stock still applies on that curve!

 

Hmmm. I'm glad the SA wasn't consulted when allowing SRM 93 to ride the branch!

[The Stationmaster]

Hmmm. I'm glad the SA wasn't consulted when allowing SRM 93 to ride the branch!

If even half the restrictions which used to be in place were applied to some of the modern steam style workings I doubt we'd see hardly anything move!

[Captain Kernow]

Hmmm. I'm glad the SA wasn't consulted when allowing SRM 93 to ride the branch!

Perhaps I should clarify - my apologies for not expressing myself clearly enough. Rolling stock that is capable of carrying passengers is permitted around the curve, but the passengers are not allowed to ride in said rolling stock, they have to walk around to the branch platform...