DavidBird Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 I found this photo here on flickr... 45137 and 46003 at Beeston (Nottingham) Freighliner Terminal in 1977... (sorry, don't seem able to link to the photo) http://flic.kr/p/9r8CyZ In the comments section "Gang of 3" has said The traffic was dwindling somewhat, but still enough to keep it open. BR wanted to shut it, so ran it down (no doubt all politics) but when Boots, which was opposite, heard it might be closing they asked BR if they could run trains for them. This chucked the spanner in the works for the managers so to get out of it they said OK as long as you pay for the building of your own wagons!! Does anybody know any more about this? Did Boots intend running Freightliner trains instead of BR? Or did they want to use the terminal for their own traffic - as they had an internal rail system of their own but it was oou by this time? I was still at primary school at this time, but my pal's dad was a lorry driver for Boots, I've since asked him and the Boots rail system was oou by the time he started as a driver. He said his favourite run was delivering to Boots store in Birmingham Bull Ring, which he always managed to time for a lunch break. We would hear stories of the Westerns & 50s in New Street, all of which were highly exotic to us in Beeston! Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Did Boots intend running Freightliner trains instead of BR? I doubt that's what he means, I don't see how they could have done so on the 70s/80s BR. Open Access basically didn't exist at that point... Or did they want to use the terminal for their own traffic Is a more plausible interpretation of the quote. My gut senses a degree of hearsay and speculation in the quote though, was BR really faced with loads of big contract traffic that it was shutting down "because politics"? I know by the end of the 80s it was forced to walk away from lots of marginal traffic (Speedlink) as it didn't make a big enough return - but this suggests earlier? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 I doubt that's what he means, I don't see how they could have done so on the 70s/80s BR. Open Access basically didn't exist at that point... Is a more plausible interpretation of the quote. My gut senses a degree of hearsay and speculation in the quote though, was BR really faced with loads of big contract traffic that it was shutting down "because politics"? I know by the end of the 80s it was forced to walk away from lots of marginal traffic (Speedlink) as it didn't make a big enough return - but this suggests earlier? By this time, Freightliner was beginning to concentrate on deep-sea traffic, as opposed to the domestic traffic that the original network had been set up to deal with; those terminals that dealt almost entirely with domestic flows, such as Danygraig, Beeston and Dudley were soon closed. The domestic flows had never taken off to the extent envisaged in the original Beeching Report. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Quite true, but should a customer have walked up and said "we'd like to put X trainloads per week through your terminal, here's a stack of cash" which is the inference*, I can't see them walking away... (*It also infers Boots apparently had no intention of using it until BR tried to close it, which makes just as much sense...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.