Lner / Southern joint station?

[bbishop]

Well, they started building the Channel Tunnel, so one hopes someone was thinking about the link. Since Watkin had involvement in both the SER and the GCR, I assume it was just a high speed link between the two, somewhere in or around London that was required?

 

All the southern railways had fairly restrictive profiles.  I think (and I'm open to correction) that the LBSC and SER were high and narrow, whilst the LCDR and LSWR were wide and low.  My reasoning is that LCDR van duckets were removed at the 1898 agreement (the SECR adopted birdcages) and that some LBSC locos (eg K class) had their cabs "Maunselled" after grouping.

 

Let us suppose a high speed line to the west of London to the SER line say near Dorking, then a new chord at Redhill and a straight run to Folkestone.  There were a couple of short tunnels to bore out but not that much extra civil engineering.

 

Bill

[Ravenser]

Before the Great War there were SECR services to GNR stations in North London, via Ludgate Hill, the Widened lines and Kings Cross. There were also SECR services to Moorgate, alongside the Midland and GNR ones.

 

All of these were suburban services. After WW1 the only through traffic would have been freight. I think the only place to see SR and LNER express power together was the GCR main line, where some Southern locos worked cross country trains via Oxford.

What exactly would have been permitted down the Widened Lines as far as Farringdon?

 

If you assume that the GC operated through trains onto the Southern companies via Baker St /Farringdon, and that you were modelling Ludgate Hill on the basis that it didn't shut in 1929, and that through trains off the GC changed engines there what could be assumed to get down the Widened Lines as far as Ludgate Hill without bending credibility too far?

 

I know N1s went through Snow Hill and I think J50s as well - but were N2s banned on weight grounds - though they certainly worked into Moorgate?  Could a Director be got down the Snow Hill route ? Or a Jersey Lilly? (Directors are at least available RTR). A3s were used on the GC in the late 30s but I presume would be an absolute no-no on the Widened Lines , even with a touch of modeller's licence. What about  B1? L1? A5??  J11? (B1s are cleared for the W Highland so I think have a fairly good RA ) 

 

Ludgate Hill as an LNER/SR interchange station would have some potential - the spam cans could work in from the south, and although an A4 is too much , some kind of LNER main line loco could be possible under such a scenario. The GC London Extension was desperate for traffic so under Sam Fay the GC was active in developing cross country expresses - a couple of main line trains to the South Coast via Snow Hill would be plausible if the connections had existed...

[Armchair Modeller]

LNER and SR types may well have shared tracks abroad in WW1, though less likely in WW2. LSWR 0-6-0s and RODs were in Palestine, I believe. The Iraquis has some A4 lookalikes too................  

[phil-b259]

LNER and SR types may well have shared tracks abroad in WW1, though less likely in WW2. LSWR 0-6-0s and RODs were in Palestine, I believe. The Iraquis has some A4 lookalikes too................  

 

At some point a batch of Urie Arthur's were loaned to the LNER and did find work in the NE section during WW2 IIRC

 

However the original poster said he was interested two specific types - A4s and Bullied Pacifics and in real life the two types never met on active service.

[stewartingram]

There were a small number of Bulleid pacifics transferred to the GE during the 1950's, primarily whilst there were problems with Brits. As these reached Cambridge, where ECML pacifics also reached, why not model THE proper stretch of railway?

Also I remember reading in the Trains Illustrated of at least a couple of Bulleids on the LTSR line - Tilbury? - with troop trains.

 

Stewart

Edited September 10, 2013 by stewartingram

[phil-b259]

The GCR was built to provide through services to the Continent via the Channel Tunnel. Not sure of the detail of how it was supposed to connect together through London, but surely that idea has the most potential?

 

It wasn't specifically designed as such - the reasons for promoting the London extension of the MSLR (as it was when the bill was passed) had more to do with coal traffic and getting their own route to London for express trains. However because Sir Edward Watkin was the chairman of the MSLR / GC and the SER plus London's Metropolitan railway he was also able to trumpet the possibility of through trains to the continent. Unfortunately he rather overlooked the fact that while the 'London extension' of the MSLR / GC might well have been engineered to what became known as Berne gauge, the metropolitan line (especially the circle line bit between Baker St and Whitechappel was totally unsuitable for continental traffic (though it could presumably have coped with goods trains at night).

 

By the time the route to Marylebone was finished Sir Edward had long gone from the boards of the three railways and relations between the GC and the Met were so bad that the GC had to borrow money from the GWR to build their connecting line from Woodford Halse to Banbury otherwise it would have had no outlet for onward goods traffic heading south.

[phil-b259]

There were a small number of Bulleid pacifics transferred to the GE during the 1950's, primarily whilst there were problems with Brits. As these reached Cambridge, where ECML pacifics also reached, why not model THE proper stretch of railway?

Also I remember reading in the Trains Illustrated of at least a couple of Bulleids on the LTSR line - Tilbury? - with troop trains.

 

Stewart

 

Indeed, however once again I point out the original poster was quite specific about the type of LNER pacific and I'm pretty sure A4s did not work to Cambridge.

Edited September 10, 2013 by phil-b259

[stewartingram]

Indeed, however once again I point out the original poster was quite specific about the type of LNER pacific and I'm pretty sure A4s did not work to Cambridge.

 

I can assure you they did! The Cambridge Buffet Express workings, and similar KGX-CBG workings, sometimes (not all that rare) got exotic motive power, on running in turns or whatever. I have seen quite a few myself, along with other reports/photos. Also, diversions of the ECML were quite common in times past, anywhere south of Doncaster really.

 

Stewart

[Spannerman]

Wow thanks for the amazing response! Lots of food for thought there.

I originally posted more in hope than expectation.

 

Stewart I am certainly interested on the Cambridge suggestion I never knew Bulleids travelled this far north, which is why I thought I would have to focus on London.

 

Whilst I mentioned A4s and spamcans in the original post their involvement is not a deal breaker, just a nice prospect.

 

Again thanks for the great suggestions.

 

Nik

Edited September 10, 2013 by Spannerman

[stewartingram]

Nik, I'm searching for pics, will hopefully be in touch.

 

Stewart

[Nick Holliday]

The trouble with the East London line and the WIdened lines is that the length of tunnels required the locos to be condensing, which would have limited them to tanks only.

However, there is another possibility, in that in the 50's, because of problems with the Bulleid Pacifics, a fairly large number of big LNER locos were drafted in to fill the gap, including, I believe, V2's, and they were timetabled in for a wide variety of mainline services.  It only takes a small stretch of the imagination for various Pacifics to be involved instead.  I also seem to recall that an A4 appeared on some sort of special deep into LSWR territory and it stayed around for a few days working local trains, but I may be creating an urban myth!

[jwealleans]

A4s did not work to Cambridge.

May I refer you to DaveF's fantastic photo thread, specifically this page, where a search for photo JVol1446, about three quarters of the way down the page, will show Silver Fox and the unmistakable Spillers building.

 

As Stewart has said A4s (and other Pacifics) were a very common sight at Cambridge.

[Trog]

Unfortunately he rather overlooked the fact that while the 'London extension' of the MSLR / GC might well have been engineered to what became known as Berne gauge, the metropolitan line (especially the circle line bit between Baker St and Whitechappel was totally unsuitable for continental traffic

 

 

I don't think the GC was built to the Berne gauge, as there would have been no point in doing it at the time even if Berne Gauge had existed. As the railways of northern France were built to a tight loading gauge.

[phil gollin]

The trouble with the East London line and the WIdened lines is that the length of tunnels required the locos to be condensing, which would have limited them to tanks only.  ................

 

I am surprised that the Southern did not extend its third rail through the tunnels and then use electric locos  -  it would have given them a huge advantage.

[roythebus]

Back to the Met line question, remember the original Met was built with very wide tunnels to take broad gauge stock; the track was indeed dual gauge, so there would have been little difficulty fitting continental size stock there. The Met A stock was the widest stock to run on any British railway system!

 

The Widened Lines were built to C1 stock on the St.Pancras bit; York Way and Hotel Curve could only take short suburban stock due to the sharp curves, so no big locos there! Stanier 2-6-2T locos were used on the Midland services to Moorgate.

 

ISTR reading that Watkins' grand plan was for through trains to run from the GCR onto the Met, then via the Circle to Farringdon, then via Snow Hill to the continent.

 

Meanwhile, back to the original question, an A4 ran out of Waterloo in about 1966/67 on a special, so it WAS possible to see an A4 and Buliied pacifics together!

Edited September 12, 2013 by roythebus

[Clive Mortimore]

I am surprised that the Southern did not extend its third rail through the tunnels and then use electric locos  -  it would have given them a huge advantage.

Hi Phil

 

The Metropolitan Railway beat the Southern to laying not only a thrid rail but a fourth as well, except through Snow Hill. It is a pity the GNR did not electrify its London suburban services. The Quad-art sets were built so that they could be quickly converted to electric traction.

 

Steam locos used on the freight trains were ideal for shunting the yards where the trains came from and went to. 3rd rail and shunting do not readily go together. And the thought of having a shunting engine and a train engine for a short journey would have caused many an accountant to have a hissyfit.

 

The Metropolitan line had the potential for all sorts of services. It connected with the GWR at Paddington, the GCR via Baker Street and Harrow on the Hill, the LNWR at Euston (tunnels in place but not used), the MR at St Pancras, the GNR at Kings Cross (west facing tunnel not used), the SECR at Farringdon, and the GER at Liverpool Street (tunnels in place but not used). Add to that their connections with the District Railway and their numerous connections both east and west of London. Sad part about London's railway history is the various company managements falling out with each other and not making use of this potential.

[Ravenser]

I don't think the GC was built to the Berne gauge, as there would have been no point in doing it at the time even if Berne Gauge had existed. As the railways of northern France were built to a tight loading gauge.

 

The GC London Extension was certainly built to a "Continental" loading gauge , larger than the British norm , and this is frequently referred to in accounts of the London Extension. This must mean that Watkin was serious about the idea of through Manchester-Paris trains - though whether he had fully thought out the implications across London is another matter

 

The Chemin de fer du Nord was built to a much larger loading gauge than is normally used in Britain - as can be seen any day of the week at Paris Gare du Nord. The Eurostars are significantly smaller than other stock and "standard" TGVs run to Calais, Dunkirk and Boulogne over conventional tracks . Corails and other standard SNCF coaches were used freely on the old conventional Nord mainline without any restriction that I'm aware of

[Fenman]

...

Steam locos used on the freight trains were ideal for shunting the yards where the trains came from and went to. 3rd rail and shunting do not readily go together. And the thought of having a shunting engine and a train engine for a short journey would have caused many an accountant to have a hissyfit.

...

 

It's true that 3rd rail and shunting don't work well together, but the NER solved that problem way back in 1903 with the dual 3rd rail/OHL ES1 locos, as seen in my avatar.

 

Paul

[The Stationmaster]

Can we please lay to rest once and for all this myth about the GCR being built to 'continental loading gauge'  - the maximum permitted height at centre line on the London extension was 13ft 4.5 4.5inches, i.e 0.25inch less than a GWR 'King'.  The GCR London Extension maximum permitted width at platform coping level over footsteps was 8ft 7.5 inches - i.e. 4.5 inches less than the 1951 British standard on new lines, similarly the maximum permitted width at lower footstep level was less than the figure permitted as the permitted British standard in the early 1950s.  Incidentally 'standard' loading gauge maximum permitted heights in Britain in the early 1950s varied between 13ft and 13ft 9inches

 

And the GCR very definitely wasn't built to Berne Gauge as that didn't even exist when the line was built!  There is no doubt that height wise GCR loading gauge was fairly generous but it wasn't the most generous and in no way whatsoever did the London Extension match continental platform height and width requirements.

 

Source of my information - Paper presented to the Institute of Civil Engineers and explaining in detail the construction of the Southern Division of the London Extension, the paper was prepared by the Resident Engineer on that section so I think we can assume - excluding misprints - that it is accurate.  Incidentally nowhere doesn't it mention the line being built to 'continental' or any sort opf enlarged loading gauge - surely an odd omission if it had indulged in such novelty.

[Armchair Modeller]

Access to the West London Line would have made more sense than using the Metropolitan line - you could then have reached France from the Midlands and Northern England via North Pole. 

[corneliuslundie]

Twp half relevant comments.

 

First, I am pretty sure the curve from the Met at Liverpool Street was used by trains, though later became part of the staff facilities.

Secondly, the Widened Lines have a slightly restricted loading gauge. The BR suburban stoick used before the diesels had the ventilators in a nonstandard position to cope with this. I think the low point is the bridge at Farringdon. Of course this will soon all be history.

[Clive Mortimore]

Twp half relevant comments.

 

First, I am pretty sure the curve from the Met at Liverpool Street was used by trains, though later became part of the staff facilities.

Secondly, the Widened Lines have a slightly restricted loading gauge. The BR suburban stoick used before the diesels had the ventilators in a nonstandard position to cope with this. I think the low point is the bridge at Farringdon. Of course this will soon all be history.

The Liverpool Street and the Euston conection services only lasted a very short time each considering how long the tunnels remained unused. From what I can find is the Liverpool Street conection was only used by the Met Rly and its trains terminated at Liverpool Street, there was no through workings (I may be very wrong on this).

 

The so called problem with the ventilators seemed to be confined to the LMR Mk1 short suburban coaches. The ER coaches to Mooraget had both wide and narrow spacing for the ventilators. The Derby class 116 DMUs when used on the Bedford/Luton/St Albans to Moorgate trains had normal spaced ventilators.

[Armchair Modeller]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the clearance problem was in the curved tunnels before Midland line trains reached the Widened Lines. The belief that coaching stock on the Widened Lines themselves could be no longer than 57 ft was eventually proved to be a myth, I believe.

 

The biggest problem with using the Met and the Widened Lines (even more so before WW1) must have been the intensive services already using these lines. Also, there was the steep gradient up from Snow Hill to Ludgate Hill.

 

Going back to my suggestion about using the West London line, the area north of Willesden Junction appears to have been relatively undeveloped at the start of the 20th Century, so building a connection from the Great Central would not have been particularly difficult - barring objections from the LNWR, anyway. I am not sure what the best route south of the Thames would have been though.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Armchair Modeller

[Spannerman]

Thanks for continued feedback. Sorry I haven't been posting much in the way of responses but searching out where the lines you mention are, is taking a bit time and digging.

 

As you may have guessed this is only a seed of an idea for a plan, and I'm a very slow worker on the practical side of things.

 

Thanks again for all the great info and continued interest.

 

Nik

[phil-b259]

Back to the Met line question, remember the original Met was built with very wide tunnels to take broad gauge stock; the track was indeed dual gauge, so there would have been little difficulty fitting continental size stock there. The Met A stock was the widest stock to run on any British railway system!

 

 

They might of been the widest but they were also fairly low in height terms (as compared to mainline stock) and each carrage was not particularly long either. Just because something was built for broad gauage doesn't allways eqate to more room overall. Also while the bit between Faringdon & Paddington may well have been designed to cope with broad guage, the bit to the east via Moorgate, Liverpool St and out to Whitechappel was only built to standard guage.

 

Also even though A stock used the St Mary's curve to transfer from the Met to the East london line the tunnels were so narrow that two trains were not allowed to pass on it.