Sir Visto

does anybody know if any photographs of stow signalbox are in existance, i have a good many photos of the station buildings both before and after closure but cannot find any of the box itself, other than in the distance in pics taken from the overbrigde etc.

Hi Kingfisher 24

I have pictures and SB diagrams of this box which I'm happy to let you have if you'll just send me an e-mail address.

Roy Graham

Don't know if this has ever been covered on here before, but does anyone have a photo of a BR Standard 3 (77xxx) on the Waverley? I've seen photos of the NER based locos on the Borders Counties (did 77011 traverse the route on the last day?), but never seen any of north of Riccarton.

 

I always thought they were good looking locos and regret none survived, plus a previous generation of my family had experience driving the ScR examples out of 67B Hurlford.....

I'm sure I've seen reports of them toward the end, probably on the 'Skud', though I have to say I never saw one, which is probably why I remember it. That's not to say there weren't photos however.

Roy

Slightly surprised not to have seen a mention of ABC at London Bridge Station mentioned on here.

Roy

Inside St Boswells ground frame, March 1969.

 

Bruce.

As in St. Boswells (GF) formerley known as St. B's south.

Roy

I'd say that was St.B's about 1955, if I'm not much mistaken.

 

Roy

Sorry I should have made it clear St. Boswells (South) circa 1955.

Roy

Another signal box on Waverley Route. Which one? When?

 

Bruce

 

I'd say that was St.B's about 1955, if I'm not much mistaken.

Roy

Is the frame still extant in the 'box, Roy?

Don't think so Matt. I can't think of one that is.

Roy

Is that now in someone's garden?!

 

Was the frame at the rear? Going on the position of the chimney.

The signalman pulled off the levers with his back to the running lines if that's what you mean.

Roy

The garage is not a problem, its the minor fact that the M6 is just a few hundred yards to the south poses a little problem. Mind you it could be the first motorway to have a crossing.....

Strangely enough when the question of the M6/A74 bridge over the route was raised by the DoT in 1969 we (the BURC) suggested that if we were to pay for it we would charge for crossing it. Seemed perfectly logical to me but was met with incredulity. Some people ( civil servants) have no vision. It would have simply become the country's first toll motorway.

roygraham

Especially those shady characters with pots of grease... ;-)

 

Dave.

My point exactly Dave.

Roy

Great to see some new photos from that sad day - I still find it amazing how so many people were allowed to wander all over the place.

Nothing amazing about it, given the site and date. Anyone could go where they liked at Riccarton or anywhere else south of Hawick.

Roy

Matt, no early night needed, there was indeed a question a few months ago about why a V2 was on the Counties line, either that or my memory is going too...................

 

Colin

It was a discussion in which I was involved concerning 'Presflo' traffic, I became involved in it but didn't initiate it. I think it might have been Bernard Lamb or David Spaven.

Roy

D27 at Hawick, 1964.

 

http://www.railbrit....te.php?id=39895

And there was I looking for an Abbotsford. (Teach me to tead the date.)

Roy

They're not my captions (before anyone asks!) ... and I noticed the odd error.

 

Looks like 45235 is south of and on the approach to Riccarton, with the rear of the train crossing Riccarton Culvert and the second (60846) may be the one that Roy P originally posted up with the query over the Border Counties?

Not guilty.

Roy

Hi Bernard,

 

The power unit/ transmission was to be newly installed by Rover Gas Turbine for nothing. They were looking for test-bed facilities. As discussed with their MD Noel Penny. Not quite so Bransonesque as you might think.

 

Roy

I think the price quoted was £1000 each which makes the whole package sound quite a bargain.

i have aslo had a comment that the mechanical gubbins was removed from the units while they were in store pending possible further use.

Would the cost of putting the equipment back have fallen on BR or BURCo? I would reckon it to be the latter seing that the sale was at scrap value.

The tacit agreement can be read into the memo that I quoted above. As you say it is documented. (Several times in memos found at Kew)

One other odd point. I have discussed this with David. There are at least three different figures quoted in BR files for the actual line mileage that was to be offered for sale. The datum varied around both The Lady Victoria area and the Longtown area.

Bernard

 

So far as line mileage is concerned this was complicated by two factors:

1. Indecision by us, BURC, initially as to where the handover was to be at the southern end: Lyneside, Harker, Parkhouse, Brunthill or Gretna.

2. Indecision by BR(Sc) who seemed unable to decide just how much of the Lady Victoria Pit complex they wanted, or were just being obstructive as usual.

Roy

My apologies for hogging this thread with a private dialogue.

It's my OCD tendencies kicking in.

Good attributes for my work and research but not so good for social chat.

I have been immersed in Waverley matters for the last eighteen months or so and don't realize how involved I am getting.

Sorry to get bogged down in such minor matters.

Bernard

"OCD"? ? ?

Roy

I have read about that, but would you have put all your eggs in one basket from day one?

Could the work have been carried out within the projected time scale?

I would have thought that a conventionally powered back up would have been essential given the nature of GT engines in railway use at the time.

Bernard

Hi Bernard,

Our base requirement was three units, by getting two conventionally equipped plus our agreement with Rover G/T we felt fairly well covered.c These new units weren't those in rail use at the time.

Roygraham

I think the price quoted was £1000 each which makes the whole package sound quite a bargain.

i have aslo had a comment that the mechanical gubbins was removed from the units while they were in store pending possible further use.

Would the cost of putting the equipment back have fallen on BR or BURCo? I would reckon it to be the latter seing that the sale was at scrap value.

The tacit agreement can be read into the memo that I quoted above. As you say it is documented. (Several times in memos found at Kew)

One other odd point. I have discussed this with David. There are at least three different figures quoted in BR files for the actual line mileage that was to be offered for sale. The datum varied around both The Lady Victoria area and the Longtown area.

Bernard

Hi Bernard,

The power unit/ transmission was to be newly installed by Rover Gas Turbine for nothing. They were looking for test-bed facilities. As discussed with their MD Noel Penny. Not quite so Bransonesque as you might think.

Roy

Hi Bernard,

 

As David explains in his book, to understand this properley you need to also read the The North British Railway document. It was all costed out but sadly not published had it been I still think the outcome might have been different.

 

Roygraham

Hi Bernard,

For the sake of completeness I've looked out my figures from 1969. The amount allowed for servicing was £46,523 (obviously at 1969 prices)

The question of access to Citadel and Waverley was never fully resolved as you rightly point out however, there was tacit agreement (documented) that this would be done, though not by steam traction.

Roygraham

One source quoted by David Spaven in the new book is the Feasability Study produced for BURCo by David Block Associates. This is quite a hard publication to track down. I have read it and have posted various pieces of information such as wanted lists of stock on here. I have never come across an identification for the two diesel locomotives. Any ideas as to what would have been available and suitable circa 1969?

Going back to my day job I attempted a rough and ready quality audit regarding the proposals as far as the hardware went. I leave any comment on the economic side to those better qualified. The Passenger and service stock was available and in good condition. However the study gave no indication of any plans or costs for ongoing maintainance. Did they plan to employ people for this task or was the idea to contract this work out to BR? One way would have presented difficulties due to the lack of skilled labour available and the other could well have met with a hostile response.

Regarding the use of ex BR DMUs. The Derby Lightweights that had been withdrawn in 1969 and stored at Carlisle, were apparently in very good condition. I have spoken to various experts about using these units and the conclusion is that it would have been viable to run them for a good few years without involving too great an expense on keeping them running. The idea of fitting underfloor gas turbines I will gloss over as a Bransonesque stunt. This leads me to the letter below and a puzzle. Any answers or explanations as to the last bit?

Just one last comment to tidy things up. BURCo never actually obtained an agreement with BR to run trains over the last few miles at either end of the route and thus any idea of running trains into Waverley or Citadel was never more than an idea.

Bernard

 

Hi Bernard,

As David explains in his book, to understand this properley you need to also read the The North British Railway document. It was all costed out but sadly not published had it been I still think the outcome might have been different.

Roygraham