SR third rail - but not everywhere ?

[ThePurplePrimer]

I am planning a small SR layout ( it will be my first ) set somewhere fictitious between 1923 and 1947

 

It will be a simple terminus station with a single platform with a runaround loop for the steam locos plus a few plus a few goods sidings

 

What I am wondering is this ...

 

Would it be acceptable to have a third rail only on the single line of track that feeds into the station and only on the line ( the same line ) that is alongside the platform but not have any other line including the run around loop electrified ?

 

Even if this is not prototypical could it be in any way feasible that it could have happened

 

I would intend to use Peco,parts to add the third rail - I will be working in 00 and wondered what should be done about the third rail around point work ?

[Oldddudders]

Because the Southern Railway only built EMUs in any number, and was largely content to let steam continue with freight etc traffic, then there was little need to electrify run-rounds or extra crossovers, let alone sidings. The Southern famously did not waste money.

[johnb]

for all 3rd and 4th rail info see :-

 

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/russelliott/3rd-4th.html

 

 

John

[Southernman46]

Horsted Keynes on the Bluebell only had the 3rd rail into one of the platforms ??

[10800]

There's a Southern Electric special interests group (if you haven't found it already) which has a links topic containing all sorts of prototype and model information. Russ Elliott's document is very useful for details including how the third rail deals with pointwork.

[Judge Dread]

Because the Southern Railway only built EMUs in any number, and was largely content to let steam continue with freight etc traffic, then there was little need to electrify run-rounds or extra crossovers, let alone sidings. The Southern famously did not waste money.

Or right up to buffer stops.

[johnb]

I believe there was an instance where the SR were so penny pinching that they stopped the 3rd rail so far from the stops that a driver actually ran a 4VEP off the end of the 3rd rail in a bay platform.      It was a known issue apparently, but this guy forgot. 

[Grovenor]

for all 3rd and 4th rail info see :-

 

http://homepage.ntlw...tt/3rd-4th.html

Or perhaps, http://homepage.ntlworld.com/russelliott/3rd-4th.html

Keith

[johnb]

Or perhaps, http://homepage.ntlworld.com/russelliott/3rd-4th.html

Keith

Ooooops!

 

Apologies, thanks Keith.

[bécasse]

I believe there was an instance where the SR were so penny pinching that they stopped the 3rd rail so far from the stops that a driver actually ran a 4VEP off the end of the 3rd rail in a bay platform.      It was a known issue apparently, but this guy forgot. 

Fifty-odd years ago, it was possible to "gap" a 16-coach train at Herne Hill coming down from Victoria, through the down loop platform and then towards Tulse Hill. They found out the hard way - an 8-coach Holborn-Wimbledon&Sutton roundabout train via the loop platform got gapped, so they brought an 8-coach Victoria-Orpington train slowly on to the back of it to get it going again. The assisting train had only moved it a few yards, not enough to get the shoes back it contact, when it discovered that it too was gapped. Fortunately the following down train from Victoria was steam hauled!

[Gwiwer]

It would be perfectly prototypical to have a single platform road electrified and not the rest of the layout though do remember that within the timeframe 1923 - 1947 big changes occurred and that until the early 1930s most electrification was confined to London's suburbs and some of that until 1929 was still overhead.

 

Steam traction powered branch freights, country passenger and main line workings until the major electrifications of the 1930s.

 

If you have a single electrified platform road it would have been likely that there would be no substation provided at the terminus meaning you can dispense with at least one major structure from the equation.  Such branches were powered by single-end feeds from a nearby main line.

 

It begs debate as to whether, had electrification been authorised, the likes of Westerham might still be with us today.  That  and Hawkhurst might make good bases for fictitious locations to suit your plans.

[phil-b259]

It would be perfectly prototypical to have a single platform road electrified and not the rest of the layout though do remember that within the timeframe 1923 - 1947 big changes occurred and that until the early 1930s most electrification was confined to London's suburbs and some of that until 1929 was still overhead.

 

Steam traction powered branch freights, country passenger and main line workings until the major electrifications of the 1930s.

 

If you have a single electrified platform road it would have been likely that there would be no substation provided at the terminus meaning you can dispense with at least one major structure from the equation.  Such branches were powered by single-end feeds from a nearby main line.

 

It begs debate as to whether, had electrification been authorised, the likes of Westerham might still be with us today.  That  and Hawkhurst might make good bases for fictitious locations to suit your plans.

 

Another, and to my mind slightly more plausible option to my mind, are the lines centred on Eridge and Oxted. After all the mid Sussex line got the 3rd rail treatment in 1938/39 and the records show the SR had fairly advanced plans to do the Oxted route in the pipeline.

 

Whats more BR had plans to do it in the mid 60s (following on from the Kent Coast phase 2), but the rapid decline in the finances and the appearance of Beaching put paid to that. Its noteworthy that even after it was authorised, the Bournemouth line electrification was only really a case of 'doing the absolute minimum' compared to the Kent coast phase 1 scheme done 10 years earlier (Kent Coast phase 2 saw plans to put 3rd rail across Romney Marsh ditched in favour of closure - which never actually happened of course)

 

The other suggestion (in SR days) that never came to pass was to extend 3rd rail from Guildford to Cranleigh along the ex LBSCR branch to Horsham. This scheme actually would have been fairly cheap as no substations were needed (it being fed as a stub from the Portsmouth line) and the trains could be provided by extending the existing EMUs that terminated at Guildford (from London via Effingham Junc).

 

Another line that could be done on a stub end basis would be from Polgate to Hailsham and while stub end feeding from Polgate would make things cheap there was no pre exsisting service to extend like with Cranleigh

[The Bigbee Line]

Whats more BR had plans to do it in the mid 60s (following on from the Kent Coast phase 2), but the rapid decline in the finances and the appearance of Beaching put paid to that. Its noteworthy that even after it was authorised, the Bournemouth line electrification was only really a case of 'doing the absolute minimum' compared to the Kent coast phase 1 scheme done 10 years earlier (Kent Coast phase 2 saw plans to put 3rd rail across Romney Marsh ditched in favour of closure - which never actually happened of course)

The footbridge at Rye was part of the electrification works.

 

On the subject of economy, when the Tonbridge - Bo Peep section was juiced, there was a staff competition for anyone who could suggest redundant third rail anywhere else on the system that could be use to save costs.

[bike2steam]

 

It begs debate as to whether, had electrification been authorised, the likes of Westerham might still be with us today. 

 

I thought it was done away with just to make way for the M25, the plans of which were laid down many years before completion.

 

 Its noteworthy that even after it was authorised, the Bournemouth line electrification was only really a case of 'doing the absolute minimum'-

 

 

Was it ? I know the much later Weymouth extension was, but I didn't think there was a limit to the number, and length of trains to Bomo.

[Gwiwer]

Westerham closed in October 1961.  Were the M25 plans so far advanced at that date as to force closure of the line?  I would have thought it was more a victim of low traffic and receipts meaning electrification was never justified and it was that which caused its demise.

 

Economies were made on the Bournemouth scheme.  The rolling stock was mostly converted from Mk1 loose-coupled coaches for example.  Electrical installations were placed at the maximum intervals considered prudent for the planned level of service.

 

As history now tells us both more rolling stock and more power were soon required thanks to a combination of the "spark effect" stimulating traffic and the economies made in the original scheme.

[Southernman46]

On the subject of economy, when the Tonbridge - Bo Peep section was juiced, there was a staff competition for anyone who could suggest redundant third rail anywhere else on the system that could be use to save costs.

I remember this well - as the STO on the SR's electric track equipment section at the time it was my job to keep the SR's conductor rail gauging records which included anything spare or redundant........so you can imagine the content of my phone call to the Project Manager - I never did get the prize either, bless him   

 

In the end brand new conductor rail was used throughout except for some redundant 100lb/yd from the Alton branch singling re-used in St Leonards shed.

[bécasse]

Westerham closed in October 1961.  Were the M25 plans so far advanced at that date as to force closure of the line?  I would have thought it was more a victim of low traffic and receipts meaning electrification was never justified and it was that which caused its demise.

 

Economies were made on the Bournemouth scheme.  The rolling stock was mostly converted from Mk1 loose-coupled coaches for example.  Electrical installations were placed at the maximum intervals considered prudent for the planned level of service.

 

As history now tells us both more rolling stock and more power were soon required thanks to a combination of the "spark effect" stimulating traffic and the economies made in the original scheme.

 

Firstly, the Westerham branch, the "London Orbital Road" was unquestionably in the mindset of the MoT from the late-1950s and the Westerham branch trackbed was seen as the natural route for it. When the TUCC refused the first closure proposal, the Southern Region produced urgent plans to electrify the branch at minimum cost (without any new sub-stations) and some of the necessary equipment had already been delivered to Dunton Green ready for installation when the Minster, Ernest Marples, personally over-ruled the TUCC. Otherwise, electric trains - probably a 2-EPB set - would have started running in the spring of 1962. One electric unit did get as far as the bay platform at Dunton Green when Polhill Tunnel was shut one Sunday and a shuttle service was running between Dunton Green and Sevenoaks; the signalman at Dunton Green reversed the points into the bay rather than the crossover, the same shunt signal came off for both movements and the motorman didn't notice until too late that the wrong set of points had been reversed. 

 

Secondly, the Bournemouth line electrification, which would not have happened if the "cheap" scheme hadn't been developed. In fact, it was a mirror of how the Southern Electric network had come into being in the first place. It had been Herbert Walker's financial wizardry that continually convinced the Southern Railway board of directors that electrification was actually cheaper than straightforward renewal regardless of the traffic generation effects, with the added bonus that much of the cost could be charged to revenue (as a "renewal") rather than to capital (as "new works"). Capital was hard to come by during the 1920s and 1930s and the completion of each new scheme provided the enhanced revenue to fund the next, it was, though, the need for "renewals" which determined the priorities of the programme.

[Oldddudders]

 

 

On the subject of economy, when the Tonbridge - Bo Peep section was juiced, there was a staff competition for anyone who could suggest redundant third rail anywhere else on the system that could be use to save costs.

The Southern Railway idea of economy did indeed persist in cash-strapped Southern Region days. But some economies were more "auditable" than others. On Tonbridge-Hastings - a scheme where no new rolling stock was required, and a lot of 1950s DEMUs were retired - the power-supply system may have been a bit beefier than might have been truly needed. Just before the official opening, a "come and try" day was held on the Sunday, with many more trains between Tonbridge and Hastings than in living memory, and cheap all-day fares. It poured with rain, but the multitude of trains were all bums-out-windows. Yet the breakers never tripped.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Fifty-odd years ago, it was possible to "gap" a 16-coach train at Herne Hill coming down from Victoria, through the down loop platform and then towards Tulse Hill. They found out the hard way - an 8-coach Holborn-Wimbledon&Sutton roundabout train via the loop platform got gapped, so they brought an 8-coach Victoria-Orpington train slowly on to the back of it to get it going again. The assisting train had only moved it a few yards, not enough to get the shoes back it contact, when it discovered that it too was gapped. Fortunately the following down train from Victoria was steam hauled!

 

More recently than that (about 25 years) I was on a train (455) that got gapped between Streatham Common and Balham. The following train was brought forward to couple up and also got gapped. So a 73 was called in from Selhurst but was unable to couple to the second train, apparently due to our being on a curve.

 

So, after about three hours, it was decided that current should be turned off and passengers be detrained. Just as we were detrained and setting off towards Balham, a train ran past us on the down fast which was supposed to be switched off.

[Southernman46]

 a train ran past us on the down fast which was supposed to be switched off.

Unfortunately, lack of traction current doesn't prevent trains running as we found to our cost during a "possession" one night at Cosham in 1978

[Colin parks]

Hi Rob,

 

What about Seaford as a basis for a small terminus with third rail? The present-day station has one operational platform with third rail. It used to have a bay platform, but that could be un-electrified. Best of all, there is a bridge over the track at the outward end of the station throat - just like a model railway!

 

All the best,

 

Colin

[roundhouse]

The Southern Railway idea of economy did indeed persist in cash-strapped Southern Region days. But some economies were more "auditable" than others. On Tonbridge-Hastings - a scheme where no new rolling stock was required, and a lot of 1950s DEMUs were retired - the power-supply system may have been a bit beefier than might have been truly needed. Just before the official opening, a "come and try" day was held on the Sunday, with many more trains between Tonbridge and Hastings than in living memory, and cheap all-day fares. It poured with rain, but the multitude of trains were all bums-out-windows. Yet the breakers never tripped.

I remember that wet day.

 

Robertsbridge 1986.

 

Seaford used to have carriage sidings alongside the main platform. These were still in use after the bay had been removed.

 

Ian

[ThePurplePrimer]

Nice picture

 

Actually that looks like a really interesting location 

 

hmmm

 

Off to see if I can find some more pictures

[phil-b259]

I thought it was done away with just to make way for the M25, the plans of which were laid down many years before completion.

 

 

 

Was it ? I know the much later Weymouth extension was, but I didn't think there was a limit to the number, and length of trains to Bomo.

 

I was thinking more about the general scope of the scheme more than anything else - though Gwiwer does of course highlight some of the specifics.

 

What I was getting at was - you compare the Kent Coast  Phase 1 to the Bournemouth line. The Kent coast scheme not only included some extensive remodelling jobs, but also produced quite a bit of resignalling too. Moreover if you take Phases 1 and 2 together, pretty much every single large Kent town got 2 electrified links to London and linking lines like Dover - Deal - Minster were included. In comparison, the Bournemouth scheme was precisely that, namely Woking - Basingstoke - Southampton - Bournemouth (imagine that instead of the Kent Coast Scheme we had a 'Dover' Scheme with 3rd rail confined to Sevenoaks - Tonbridge - Ashford - Dover or a 'Ramesgate' Scheme confined to Chatahm - Faversham - Margate - Ramesgate and you can see where I am coming from). Moreover with the Bournemouth scheme not only was much of the signalling left alone (Southampton still had semaphore signalling well into the 70s) but routes like Havant - Eastleigh were left out because they didn't form part of the core route - yet had the Kent approach been taken I'm sure they would have got the 3rd rail treatment at the same time.

[The Stationmaster]

Actually resignalling at the time of the Bournemouth electrification was quite extensive with colour light signalling extended from its previous limits over the whole of the quadruple section of the South Western Main Line plus down to St Denys/Northam Jcn with new panel 'boxes at Basingstoke and Eastleigh to control it all, colour light signalling from Totton to Brockenhurst plus other works in the Southampton area and layout changes at Bournemouth Central to facilitate the new push-pull working.

 

The difference between the Sou' Western and the South eastern schemes - apart from the two 'large area' 'boxes was the omission of the major works to increase capacity such as the junction alterations around Chislehurst and additional capacity thence to Orpington and further in towards London.  The provision of two routes was basically - it would seem - part of a strategic decision to electrify both BTR 1 and BTR 2 (the two boat train routes up from Dover) as much as it was for any other reason. And of course money was much more freely available under the Modernisation plan than it was later in the 1960s when much tighter justification and economies were required to get many schemes approved.  Thus the two schemes - Kent Coast and South Western - were carried out under very different financial regimes.