Engineer

Confirm the teak to brown change, taking place during the LT era. Dreadnought brake ends were painted red from the early 1950s, and there had been some experimental livery trials early in the LT 1930s era - one train of six Dreadnought vehicles in Olive green with red waist, another train of six vehicles light green with red waist [source: Surface Stock Handbook, Hardy, B. R.]. Have posted before, but just for reference, the brown colour was formally title 'Metro Brown' and is one of the colour sample cards in the images here:

Just a few years ago I was giving a careers talk [as a volunteer] to a primary year 6 [or thereabouts] class. Going with the flow of dialogue I held up an A3 size picture as an example of a steam train of the past. One student challenged quite precociously and insistently that the picture showed a 'steam engine', not a steam train - not quite an error as there was an H Class 4-4-4T at the front. Rapidly, it passed through my mind to explore the distinction of locomotive engine and stationary engine. However, I suggested that the class should notice also the six coaches that were an important part of the train for all the people travelling. Deviating from topic momentarily, by contrast at other primary schools I was asked how couplings [bar, auto, etc.] worked and, by a female student, how do railway wheels follow the track? Pretty sure these weren't planted questions. In the latter instance we used the rest of question time for a quick demo of 'guidance' with a couple of paper cups.

Adding to the OP theme of 'pointless trivia' ... Although the Underground label of 'car' is near universal, as already mentioned, the colloquial usage of 'bogie' and 'truck' is more interchangeable. Both words show up in drawing titles and documents, and it's hard to say if there was a clear pattern in the past. In the old Acton Works, there was a Truck Shop, but also there was an outdoor area between workshop buildings known as the 'Bogie Park' where bogies and/or trucks were stored. Formal and documented distinctions of 'car' and 'coach' seem relatively robust on the Metropolitan Railway with a small minority of exceptions, and the use of 'vehicle' is an important and valuable distinction in working timetables. From the diagram book, 'Car' = saloon layout, electric stock with side sliding doors [early vehicles had gates, replaced by sliding doors quite early]. There were two Pullman cars and the Rothschild Saloon which was in the 'coach' family - a one-off special, a bogie vehicle with hinged doors that substituted for a Pullman at times and had been made from two 6-wheel saloons. 'Coach' applied generally to ‘Compartment Stock’ [a term also used in the diagram book], all the way from rigid 8-wheel vehicles, through loco-hauled vehicles to the electric stock of its latter years. Two single motor coaches used mainly on shuttle services had been created from damaged saloon motor cars and given coach bodies of 'Main Line Stock' style as pilots for the design of that vehicle family. Type identification within Coach stock was moderately consistent in correspondence and drawings. 'Jubilee' for the 4-wheel vehicles of the 1880s-1890s [one preserved]. 'Bogie Stock' was the family of the Metropolitan's first passenger vehicles with bogies [five survivors] that operated in various steam/loco-hauled and electric stock forms. Although popular naming calls these 'Ashbury', there seems to be only one early use of this name in 'The Engineer' in the 1890s that recorded the first build by that Firm, and no other Metropolitan or early LT documents use the 'Ashbury' label. The family of loco-hauled coaches formally recorded as 'Main Line Stock' was also referred to as 'Dreadnought' both colloquially and in some internal documents. In later times, further references developed to 'Steam Stock', noticeably after some former loco-hauled coaches were incorporated in electric stock trains. The label 'vehicle' was used carefully in Metropolitan Working timetables to identify detail of planned stock utilisation. Electric trains of saloon stock were identified as '3-car', '4-car', '6-car', '7-car'. Electric compartment stock was identified as '3-coach' '4-coach, '6-coach', '7-coach', '8-coach'. Electric trains with a mix of types were identified as '-vehicle'. Compartment [or sometimes saloon] motors with compartment-style coaches, designated as W or Y Stock, were identified as '8-vehicle electric train' or 9-vehicle electric train' respectively in the timetables. Compartment-style motor coaches running with saloon stock trailer cars were identified as '7-vehicle train'.

Another stretching of this topic. Today, a planned trip was aborted, thanks to a cancellation en route. Instead, in a limited time I explored areas of Plymouth I'd not visited before. I realise now there is much more to see if time had permitted further detours. I walked as far as Turnchapel and Mount Batten, part of the way using a footpath on the alignment of the Turnchapel branch. It felt like a scaled-down version of the Weymouth-Portland railway path, and unfortunately the Turnchapel route lacks interpretation boards. At one place, the track path is crossed by a local footpath which runs for quite a distance around the area and its waters' edges and is marked by several purpose-made signposts. One of these is the excuse for posting in this thread. The signposts use worn bullhead rail, well cleaned and with the path name cut crisply in the web. I didn't spot any remaining railway features in the pathway, though beyond its end there are the substantial remains of the rail bridge leading to Turnchapel station. Alas, I'd not done any preliminary research, but I did recall some of the content of the excellent thread to do with the area: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118820-turnchapel-branch/&tab=comments#comment-2574051

Some Broad Street references on this thread page: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107070-lt-kings-cross-mystery-tunnel/page/8/&tab=comments#comment-4090314 Thread includes link to useful OS: https://maps.nls.uk/view/103313324 Britain from Above: https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EAW011198 As noted in that past thread, a great-Grandfather and Grandfather of mine worked at Broad Street Goods, probably up to about 1950. No recollections or information handed down, alas. I do know that my grandfather had use of a 'railway' flat in a street close to the yard, which was handy for shift work having been relocated far out of London after bombing in East London. I always like to find out what work and life was like for my forbears but haven't found much. I was told that there were one or two articles on Broad Street Goods in the LMS house journal in the mid-1930s - haven't had opportunity to follow up as yet.

I wasn't around to see any steam operations on the Bishop's Road territory but at quite an early age I was shown the spur tunnel where the electric locos had waited. I thought there had been some kind of opening above and I have found evidence to support this. Generally, I'd suggest the answer to the spur's usage is somewhere in the middle - the spur was a relatively confined space that could hold engines if necessary but generally tended to be holding space for electric locomotives to be closest to their departure point - when their service was operating. For operational practicality it would seem best sense for the incoming GWR engine [off a City-bound train] to move ahead on the running line and then return swiftly to the departure end of the Suburban station, ready for its next work. Once the Up/Eastbound line is cleared, an electric loco can run from the spur to the running line, then back to the train to couple, brake test, etc. The am peak service started with electric locomotives arriving from Neasden - in Met times, it would be usual for four locos would be mechanically coupled, leading loco doing the work though all were crewed. East of Baker Street Outer Rail/Up the lead loco would detach and head to the City. The remaining three locos would change direction and run together to Bishop's Road. I'd guess that the locos might reverse via the Royal Oak siding and, among other peak traffic, either make their way to the spur or pick up the first train. For some other research, I began the slow process of unpicking the electric loco working across the Met for the 1919 era, admittedly pre-dating the loco spur layout. Findings seemed to suggest that at least one loco reached the City with its GWR train then came back for another train during the morning while others fed in from Liverpool Street and Aldgate loco working. In a few timetables, two electric locos laid over at Bishop's Road between morning and evening peaks, otherwise the spare locos returned to either Baker Street or Neasden. More to discover in due course. There is a drawing of the civil construction for the loco spur at Bishop's Road. It's a concrete arch tunnel and at the 'Buffers' end, there is a sump draining to the cut and cover tunnel and a vent shaft above with a 17' x 12' grille, which makes me think that provision was made for adequate ventilation if engines used the spur. It's not entirely clear from the drawing but looks like about 100' of spur, clear of the fouling point, so allowing for signalling installation, maybe space for two electric locos. I've not taken a closer look in modern times, but with much construction at the surface the spur tunnel may have been truncated.

I'm grateful, Stationmaster, for the time taken to add expertise and information to the story, and I've learnt more of the rationale of the area and the workings. I've made further use of the 1935 'WoC' document to reverse engineer a summary for all SX and SO trains that seem to be relevant to the City service and their use of Royal Oak siding. I reckon I've accounted for all the moves of the sets involved, though there are a few things to look at, for example what seems to be one longer layover at Aldgate. Latest version of the summary attached, former version removed from previous post.GWR Working of Coaches London Division extract summary through City services 1935 07 08 R2.pdf An aside: Interesting to note that the changeover time allowance is around 3 minutes, much the same as the times for changes at Wembley/Harrow or Rickmansworth. I feel that the layouts at those sites might have been been marginally more favourable for swift, parallel moves compared to Bishop's Road and Paddington [Suburban] - though I guess there are very many factors, checks and balances involved. https://harsig.org/PDF/H_C51.pdf 1951, covers Paddington Suburban area https://harsig.org/PDF/Rickmansworth195319621996.pdf Rickmansworth 1953, after re-signalling and loco change facilities still present https://harsig.org/PDF/Met1933.pdf 1933 overview including a little of the previous Bishop's Road layout, and Rickmansworth with semaphore signalling

It's beyond my area of expertise to know the answers for sure. The siding may have been long, but there's also large gaps between consecutive trains. It could be that train sets weren't on top of one another but instead moved in as required, either from remote sidings or from an incoming terminating train, in between. The previous attachment was a summary of the service by GW trains into the City, rather than a WT extract, which may have a little bit more detail on the Metropolitan side of the action. As the boundary to the Metropolitan Railway was East of Paddington Suburban, very likely that moves on the GWR side would be in the STT, supported and detailed in the 'Working of Coaches' documents. Summary extract of GWR 'Working of Coaches' for 1935 07 08 ufn in extended form now attached to later post.

https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwa/S1.htm The sample diagram, though small, shows the 1930s lay of tracks including the western end middle siding. https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwa/T3026.htm Bishop's Road 1919 for comparison Undergound News No.571, July 2009 included some comments on the same 1930s photograph. I've not seen the original edition so can't assess the context, nevertheless the LURS editorial team and contributors work to a high standard and are reliable. I found the reference via District Dave, which gives an extract: "The Met. loco with coaches photographed west of the [Paddington] station was empty coaching stock in the siding (or just leaving it) and the (electric) loco was ready to begin a journey to the City in the evening peak. One GWR train started up from Paddington siding east to Liverpool Street (Paddington depart 17.50) in the evening peak. The siding west of Paddington finished in a dead end with access only at the Paddington (east) end, so the empty stock must have been propelled into the siding, unless a locomotive was to remain trapped at the buffers. Short workings of GWR passenger trains between Paddington and Liverpool Street carried passengers in the counterflow direction of the peak". The layout makes sense for the likely moves required. I'd suggest that GWR engine(s) at the western end of the coaches in the siding would be positioned nicely to take ex-City trains forward. A former colleague whose father was a Driver's assistant on the electric locos before the Second war, and a loco driver after the war, tells me that the through trains used the inner platform roads at Paddington Suburban.

For interest, summary of GWR trains to the City, from July 1939: GWR trains to City 1939 WT 68 1939 07 17.pdf

Recently I had a chance to walk the routes of the Sheerness tramways, closed 1917, and visit the depot site that's now in commercial use. No track in sight there but nearby there's a footpath along the former trackbed of the Sheppey Light Railway. East of the site of Sheerness East station, the footpath shifts to one side of the trackbed for a while to share the access road to a golf club. At this point, a set of iron gates remain, maybe the remains of a farm crossing. The gates are quite a distinctive design, well mangled now, but still have their posts which appear to be re-worked bullhead rail - or look somewhat like it [this being the reason for inclusion in this thread]. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4261297,0.7809439,3a,60y,155.5h,67.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLB5RfCvZ8vv2A7ghIVdgVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e2 A little more research found some web pages that relate to the gates: http://lettersfromsheppey.blogspot.com/2013/10/ http://amy-elisabeth-curtis.blogspot.com/2011/09/isle-of-sheppey-light-railway.html On the homeward train journey I spotted similar gates, this time across the 'main line' tracks about half a mile south of Kemsley. Online mapping shows a view from a nearby road: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.3568525,0.7304113,3a,15y,323.25h,91.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seSHzpsFUX3hszAjhJzUqMw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e2

In response to last Saturday evening's enquiry: "Those are Met District (ie District) Railway locos, usually used to haul the through trains to the LT&S, but I’m not sure those are LT&S coaches. Does anyone know for sure?" I don't know for sure - and wary of speaking out on subjects I've not studied. However, I have some initial thoughts, and if a separate thread emerges, maybe others will be able to provide further evidence or find the reference material faster than I can! The image in the LT Museum collection is dated 23 July 1927. It's an agency picture and I feel the date is reliable. Naturally we might expect the stock to be the LT&SR corridor vehicles built for the Ealing-Southend run. There were two trains of these vehicles, the last survivors being on the Shropshire/Montgomeryshire line at least to the late 1950s. Southend services, until the later years, tended to require three trains to cover the workings. Very likely the image shows the 'third' train, using more conventional stock from the LTSR/LMS fleet - or it could be vehicles standing in for maintenance - or perhaps could be an extra for a busy day.

A former railway crossing on Rushenden Road, Sheppey. No rails visible either side of the crossing. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4113547,0.7453425,3a,60y,21.79h,92.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfAFota8OOaIEnX70TPNoUQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2 This seems to be a remnant of a now-closed branch from Queenborough to a pier. https://www.simplonpc.co.uk/Queenborough.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBJkorJTtLc

Recently I walked the Sheerness Tramway routes [closed 1917]. One route headed west-ish from the town and adjacent rail station, crossing into 'Blue Town' which sat at the walls of the dockyard. Below is West Street, location of the tramway terminus. No rails to be seen, though. A few minutes away on foot, there are rails in the road, however. Part of a former branch from the main line leading to the dockyard gate is still present, crossing Brielle Way then alongside it with several forms of paving.

A couple of examples that are right on the edge of the theme of abandoned rails, just for interest and maybe for modelling ideas. Wheelock station, near Sandbach, line now closed and converted to a path. The station building remains, in use for other purposes now. The access road to the side of the building also gives access to the path down to platform level. At the edge of this roadway and at the foot of the building, there are short sections of rail which seem to be laid as a form of kerb to define the roadway edge and prevent wheeled vehicles from getting too close to the building.

Now found my old notes and various documents. From these, the Metro-Cammell 1956 Stock train numbering from mid-1960s was: [A End] 1000-2000-9001-1001+1002-2002-1003 [D End] Formation: DM-T-NDM-DM+DM-T-DM Worth checking other sources on the detail: Full autocouplers fitted to the outer A End and D End DMs from mid-1960s for compatibility with 1959 Stock. Also, 1956 DMs will have a 5-aperture marker light array on the lower offside cab front, modified to incorporate a red stabling light from the 1970s.

Referring to the recent mention of Glasgow Subway. Some references, including Wikipedia, mention Shoogly or Shooglie as a nickname, particularly referring to the ride quality of the system in its previous form. A while ago I was chatting to a Glasgow resident and they also confirmed this nickname.

Under London Expedition? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qoG0ACt3UA Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnCTRV5EwPk Part 2 Having trouble getting links in place, so far, will try again. Hope the above is enough to use. Early in my career, I was fortunate to make a site visit to King William Street, and walk down the tunnels as far as the construction shaft under the river. The whole site is totally altered now, thanks to redevelopment above.

"...operation of the loop points? " Image below shows good detail of part of a set of points at Oystermouth, presumed at the Swansea end of the loop. Also visible in the background is one of the single line signal location cabinets. Noticeable in the detail is a feature which may be a depression bar. Final side comment - the photographer's later career was as a very senior railway Engineer. https://www.flickr.com/photos/taffytank/4392466678/in/photostream/ For reference I've added the album of images to the collection of video and other items that's in a previous post.

"... my first instinct was that the extra rails were "negative reinforcement", i.e. old rails bonded into the return circuit to reduce resistance, which is commonly done on single-line railways because with just two running rails its difficult to keep the resistance within acceptable bounds, but they might not be." I'm with you, also by instinct. Alas, the references to tram and trolley technology I seek haven't yet turned up, plus I'd like to be confident on the location of traction supply inputs to the railway. However, I think the answer is a bit of both - electrical returns and resistance, and signalling, with the factor of a marine environment also relevant. Looking at the all the images of the Sw&M route I can find, the paired centre rails, seemingly non-contact, are laid in the single line sections only. Close views of the track are scarce, so can't see evidence of running rail to centre pair bonding, but also no good evidence of 'longitudinal' bonding at joints. Best images so far: https://www.flickr.com/photos/taffytank/albums/72157625334161862 [album] https://dewi.ca/trains/swansea/pres0006.html https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Recent-uploads-and-queries/Recent-uploads-road-transport/i-4jp2JxJ/A https://transportsofdelight.smugmug.com/RAILWAYS/RALWAYS-EXCLUDED-FROM-THE-1923-GROUPING/SWANSEA-MUMBLES-TRAMWAY/i-BRjrxBx https://www.flickr.com/photos/55877117@N05/7809703830/in/album-72157630691827628/ [several images in albums above] http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qrytXJXvxeM/VINc4gvYPlI/AAAAAAAAA14/eFCL7SDLpfs/s1600/mr11.jpg See also the linked films below including views from cab en route. Tentative speculation is required. We know that there is a signalling system for the single line sections which are long enough to be unworkable on line-of-sight. On tramway lines, if signals were provided, they are likely to be worked from the passing or presence of a vehicle. Such systems will require information to pass from the 'striking-in' end of the section to the protection signal at the far end of the section [and another bit of information to clear the section once the vehicle leaves it]. The technical solution for tramways could use contacts in the overhead wire with a separate signal wire between the section ends, or it could use a more primitive system that detects the continuous presence of a current return via a tram in the section, which could be detected at either end. This would be dependent on a good return path and a good end-to-end circuit, plus good pole and wheel-rail contact. It just could be that the Sw&M used such a simple solution. Continuing to search for contemporary technical information. Another 'low-tech' tramway that used single-line signalling was the Kinver Light Railway - references yet to surface. A more sophisticated solution was used by the Belgian SNCV interurban network - reference in French and lacking circuits,https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalisation_SNCV_pour_voie_unique https://jonroma.net/media/signaling/railway-signaling/1911/Contact Signals for Electric Railways.pdf The paper above has turned up and while it gives no answers it is sort-of relevant to the technology for single line signalling. There is a bonus interest for me in that the author is a Mr Nachod. That name is linked to the US company that provided all sorts of rail and signal technology including impulse recorders for measuring performance of trolley and tram lines - used on the London tramways and also used as the "See how they run" clocks on the Underground at Piccadilly Circus and St James's Park. Further reference added on the Nachod single-line signalling solution for electric trolley lines, which might be an interesting contrast when we discover the details of the Sykes system used by Sw&M. Nachod [possibly as a sales pitch] is helpful by including circuits, and the basic principle is to use quite complex contacts attached to the overhead wire at section ends. Control is over two separate wires linking the electromechanical equipment at each end of the section and there is a ground return required for these circuits, too. The solution also appears to have permissive features and includes the sophistication of a vehicle counting-in/counting-out mechanism. These features might have been useful on an interurban tramway such as Sw&M with occasions of very dense multi-vehicle traffic. https://www.jonroma.net/media/signaling/railway-signaling/1911/Automatic Block Signal System for Electric Railways.pdf General interest video of railway at time of closure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU9Cq-v9dvA Swansea Museum talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK9UXq26lLk Huntley clips Welsh Railway Research Circle page on Sw&M: https://www.wrrc.org.uk/s&mrrc.php Article on history and line remains: http://philtpics.blogspot.com/2014/11/whats-left-of-mumbles-railway.html

Sounds like happy memories. I hope you spotted the other post with Britain from Above late 1940s views of Sturry station and main line and the adjacent gravel workings with their machinery, conveyors and rail lines. https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/163553-abandoned-rails-in-the-roador-elsewhere/&do=findComment&comment=4515219 There's another post referring to a different gravel site and some nice images of the machinery there: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/156456-narrow-gauge-gravelsandaggregate-railways-distance-from-pit-to-end-of-line/&do=findComment&comment=4526892

"As a teenager (80's) you could walk along some of the old track bed near that bridge - there was still rail and sleepers." For samples of present-day Sturry site remains of track bed, sleepers and rails, see posts: Thank you for adding your recollections.

Many thanks for introducing the 1936 aerial perspectives here. My attention is drawn unavoidably to the Leeds Corporation tramway, with a lot of inspiration for modelling. Its electric 'Middleton Light Railway', which continued from Hunslet alongside the 'Middleton Railway' via Parkside and colliery area, climbed through Middleton Woods to new housing developments, eventually joining a later link from the other side of Hunslet and Belle Isle to form a return loop. Making use of an aerial image adjacent to the previous posting with another 'for learning' scrap view : https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW050760 The left to right image axis is roughly North-East to South-West. In particular look at the centre left area of the image and to the left of the new 'Middleton Bogie' class tram that's headed Outbound from City towards the Middleton terminus. Just to the left of the tram, there are two sets of gates and gateposts where the Middleton Railway crosses the road. Next, here's a view on the ground, apologies for another linked image, from 1956 showing another Outbound 'Middleton Bogie' headed to Middleton Estate and within a year or two of the [premature] end of its service. The electric light railway service continued but closed on 28th March, 1959. Note again the gates: https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/8683736042/in/photostream/ Now, here's a [relatively] modern view from Geograph, looking roughly WestNorth-West: https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1018373 © Copyright philld and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence. Accepted it's not abandoned rails but it's at a road-rail intersection and to the left of the image is a gatepost [I reckon it's the 'highest' visible one in the aerial image]. Looks like it's providing an important extra service, steadying a photographer.

"... Dartmouth Works (Engineering) ..." The original post's image includes mention that the crossing served Clayton, and 'Dartmouth' seems to be one of their sites: http://www.leedsengine.info/leeds/histclayton.asp The reference gives no clues on site detail, however, though these images include some views inside the Dartmouth site: https://andrewstransport.smugmug.com/BritishheritagerailwaysI/Middleton-Railways-Leeds-1960s/i-hsfMgzM

Earlier post "Middleton Railway to Moor Road coal depot and Leeds Corp. tramway to Middleton." showed the tramway still in use. Here, a 1960 image shows the double-track electric tramway abandoned, rails not yet removed. Leeds car 601, part of a preservation project, stands on the Middleton line crossing https://thetransportlibrary.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=145564 I believe the crossing is at the centre of this map extract: https://maps.nls.uk/view/125642515#zoom=6&lat=4250&lon=5337&layers=BT