Dave F's photos - ongoing - more added each day

[DaveF]

3 hours ago, lmsforever said:

The shots on the Blyth and Tyne  are interesting especially reading of the ongoing campaign to reopen it ,are they any nearer to putting passengers back?

 

 

I understand Northumberland County Council have agreed to fund a study, to look at costs and possible usage.

 

The council wold like to see it reopened.

 

There are some details on the council website.

 

David

[Davexoc]

1 hour ago, brushman47544 said:

 

Possibly the TSO was locked out of use being moved to a depot where it was needed, or an extra due to peak traffic. It looks outside the standard formation tacked on the rake like that.

Seems to be missing an FO and possibly a BSO at the other end. The previous photo is also interesting in that the only Mk3 coach in that set is the catering vehicle.

[talisman56]

12 hours ago, DaveF said:

 

 

I understand Northumberland County Council have agreed to fund a study, to look at costs and possible usage.

 

The council wold like to see it reopened.

 

There are some details on the council website.

 

David

 

Let's hope that it doesn't take as long as the protracted Portishead branch saga...

[62613]

On 27/04/2019 at 20:18, Market65 said:

 

 

[62613]

Hillmorton J6562; quite an eclectic collection of carriages!

[beast66606]

On 03/05/2019 at 21:34, Davexoc said:

I was thinking that too. One blue spectacle and one green, but neither lit or shielded from being backlit, so presumably only used in daylight hours??

 

I believe this signal came from Liverpool Riverside, the signal box (more of a hut) which Steamport had at the time was certainly from there.

It was in the Liverpool Dock system and therefore not under the normal rules and regs, it's probably also had a replacement spectacle fitted

[DaveF]

 

The Grantham to Nottingham line at Bottesford again today.

 

For the benefit of anyone who has not been looking at this thread for long when Dad went out to take railway photos he took a picture of every train he saw (as long as he could afford film).  When I started taking railway photos I did the same.

 

That means that I have lots of photos of everyday trains, which show a lot more variation than you might expect.  For a number of reasons passenger trains did not always run correctly formed and some freight trains could be very odd. 

 

 

Bottesford Class 104 Grantham to Nottingham Nov 80 J7290.jpg

 

 

Bottesford Class 114 Nottingham to Skegness Aug 81 J7537.jpg

 

 

Bottesford 47568? Parkeston Quay to Manchester Dec 81 J7612.jpg

 

 

Bottesford 20077 and 20016 Leicester to Skegness Sept 82 J7741.jpg

 

 

Bottesford 31207 down freight May 83 J7947.jpg

 

 

David

Edited May 15, 2019 by DaveF

[iands]

J7947: Looks like concrete sleepers in the wagons - presumably from Tallington?

[DaveF]

22 minutes ago, iands said:

J7947: Looks like concrete sleepers in the wagons - presumably from Tallington?

 

 

I would think so.

 

David

[caradoc]

The fact that you and your Dad photographed everything is what makes this topic so wonderful David; The everyday railway, commonplace at the time but long gone now, was recorded. Many thanks again. 

[Market65]

Hi, Dave. I like the Grantham to Nottingham photo’s which are full of interest as always. In the first one at Bottesford, with a class 104 DMU, on a Grantham to Nottingham service, in November, 1980, J7290, you can see how the first class is designated. The DMCL has the first class window stickers, but no yellow stripe above the two windows, whereas the TCL has the stickers and the stripe. I feel some passengers may well have been caught out by this inconsistency.

I recall my father asking a porter on Brighton station where the first class was and being advised to look out for the yellow stripe. That unit was a 4BIG, EMU.

 

With warmest regards,

 

Rob.

[brushman47544]

Hi Dave

J7612 is not 47535, which didn’t get a SF white roof. It looks like it could be 47568, which was a SF loco and had a white roof at that time.

[45125]

4 hours ago, Market65 said:

Hi, Dave. I like the Grantham to Nottingham photo’s which are full of interest as always. In the first one at Bottesford, with a class 104 DMU, on a Grantham to Nottingham service, in November, 1980, J7290, you can see how the first class is designated. The DMCL has the first class window stickers, but no yellow stripe above the two windows, whereas the TCL has the stickers and the stripe. I feel some passengers may well have been caught out by this inconsistency.

I recall my father asking a porter on Brighton station where the first class was and being advised to look out for the yellow stripe. That unit was a 4BIG, EMU.

 

With warmest regards,

 

Rob.

The DTCL has got the yellow strip it just doesn't stand out very clearly, the destination brackets show signs of yellow.

 

[35A]

J7741:  20 077 appears to have only worked once in September 1982, on Saturday 18th, when it was paired with 20 016. They worked 1E86, 08:50 Leicester - Skegness, and 1M02, 12:35 return.

[DaveF]

 

Today's photos head in a northerly direction along the ECML from Darlington.

 

 

Darlington 37079 and 37003 23rd May 87 C8520

 

 

Aycliffe Class 47 Newcastle to Kings X Aug 76 J5386.jpg

 

 

Sunderland Bridge GNER Class 82/2 Glasgow C to Kings X 18th Oct 97 C23145.jpg

 

 

Durham Class 254 HST up Jan 83 C5914

 

 

Low Fell 47600 up l e from Carlisle line 28th May 88 C9467.jpg

 

 

David

Edited May 15, 2019 by DaveF

[Market65]

Hi, Dave. I like the ECML photo’s from Darlington. They are as interesting as ever, and bring the memories flooding back. Thank you for posting them. In the last photo’ at Low Fell, with 47600, on an up light engine movement from the Carlisle line, on the 28th May, 1988, the crossover at the rear of the 47 appears to be out of use with some replacement rail in place. I wonder, for I cannot recall, if the complete crossover was subsequently lifted?

 

With warmest regards,

 

Rob.

[DaveF]

 

Hougham today, between Grantham and Newark on the ECML.

 

The first two photos show trains at the site of the station, taken from the roadbridge.  The remaining photos are looking north at this bridge and the next one just to the north.

 

 

Hougham 47542 down June 78 J6144

 

 

Hougham Class 254 down June 82 J7658

 

 

Hougham Class 254 up Sept 81 J7582

 

 

Hougham Class 47 Kings X to Edinburgh Oct 75 J4956.jpg

 

 

Hougham Class 47 up Aug 78 J6326

 

 

David

[iands]

22 hours ago, Market65 said:

.... the crossover at the rear of the 47 appears to be out of use with some replacement rail in place. I wonder, for I cannot recall, if the complete crossover was subsequently lifted?

 

With warmest regards,

 

Rob.

It might just be that the 'common crossing' had developed a fault that required that half of the cross-over to be plain-lined whilst a replacement was sourced. From my time on the signalling at York in the mid 70s, I remember being told by a supervisor that the common crossings had to be made specially, and therefore were expensive, and it couldn't be justified to hold any in the as spares in the stores. As the GPL is still "lit" (and not bagged over/white cross), the EP point machines and valve chests still in-situ, I think it likely the plain-lining is a temporary "maintenance fix" rather than a prelude to taking the cross-over out altogether. However, the cross-over might well have been removed a few years later during the Tyneside resignalling scheme.

[Market65]

Thank you, iands, that makes good sense. I didn’t know the common crossings were so expensive, and most probably accounts for some of the Beechng era closures where track costs were mentioned.

So the photo’s of Hougham, on the ECML, Dave, are all full of interest, and bring back yet more memories. The two photo’s of HST’s starting with one on a down service in June 82, J7658, and the next one from September, 1981, J7582, are from early in the trains career and today that is now nearly finished as the class 800’s takeover more services.

 

With warmest regards,

 

Rob.

[LNERGE]

3 hours ago, DaveF said:

 

 

 

Hougham Class 47 up Aug 78 J6326

 

 

David

Is this a photo of the worlds fastest Not To Board?

[DaveF]

52 minutes ago, LNERGE said:

Is this a photo of the worlds fastest Not To Board?

 

 

I'd never noticed it before in that photo (J6326).

 

Is it more likely to be someone hanging a red cloth or something out of a window?

 

I really don't know.

 

David

[43110andyb]

On 15/05/2019 at 15:20, DaveF said:

 

Today's photos head in a northerly direction along the ECML from Darlington.

 

 

Darlington 37079 and 37003 23rd May 87 C8520

 

 

Aycliffe Class 47 Newcastle to Kings X Aug 76 J5386.jpg

 

 

Sunderland Bridge GNER Class 82/2 Glasgow C to Kings X 18th Oct 97 C23145.jpg

 

 

Durham Class 254 HST up Jan 83 C5914

 

 

Low Fell 47600 up l e from Carlisle line 28th May 88 C9467.jpg

 

 

David

My favourite 08 is lurking in the background in the Darlington pic- Thornaby's 08 867 Ralph Easby in black (unofficially named).

[Oldddudders]

17 hours ago, LNERGE said:

Is this a photo of the worlds fastest Not To Board?

It happens. Nearly 50 years ago, in my Control days, I arrived for early turn to read that the 08.37 Horsham - Victoria would be cancelled due to the stock , 8-Cor, being “Depot Only” for worn brake-blocks. Imagine my confusion when the train ran normally - some sort of confusion at Horsham, plus a “spare day” bloke on that Area. No signals were overrun and the passengers had no idea they’d been lucky!

[DaveF]

Back to Carlisle for today's photos.

 

Despite the photos being taken on three visits the sun never put in an appearance.

 

The Class 155 was brand new and must have been on test as there are several wires coming out of the windows and running down the bodyside.

 

 

Carlisle 47546 Stranraer to Euston 1 Sept 87 C9109

 

 

Carlisle 155307 on test 27th Oct 87 C9203

 

 

Carlisle 81017 down empty steel 27th Oct 87 C9209

 

 

Carlisle 87001 Euston to Glasgow 12th April 88 C9416

 

 

Carlisle 86227 Manchester to Glasgow and Edinburgh 12th April 88 C9421

 

 

David

Edited May 17, 2019 by DaveF

[iands]

22 hours ago, Market65 said:

Thank you, iands, that makes good sense. I didn’t know the common crossings were so expensive, and most probably accounts for some of the Beechng era closures where track costs were mentioned.

 

Hi Rob,

From memory the relatively high cost was (I think) down to the crossings being manganese and having to be cast to certain requirements/specifications. For instance, in the "web" of the crossings, holes were required to be cast (about an 1", again from memory) to take a mild steel 'plug' that could be drilled for track circuit connections ("goal posts") and bond wires, as the manganese was too hard to drill on site with the normal drills provided. If any flaws were detected (ultrasonic?) with the crossing in the manufacturing process, it was immediately scrapped and returned to the furnace for recycling.