Brian Kirby

Did anyone notice in the bottom right of this 1962 LB pic, the length of brand-new flat-bottomed track with concrete sleepers, maybe even with pandrol clips? This is a very early example of this kind, obviously freshly laid, witness the stack of spare sleepers on the trackside. Apart from that, where is the interest in this scene, where's the beautifully re-aligned four track formation, where's the technically interesting catenary, where are the far more frequent trains, where's Tornado? :-)) Cheers, Brian (just being a bit devilish!)

I should have added, with regard to the downward appeal of kits, I think many modellers have been scared off, through their experience of some badly designed kit in the past, with poor instructions, perhaps they missed out on the better ones? Construction from scratch or kit of some of the ultra-modern passenger stock seen today, would be a challenge for even the best modellers in the country, with their flush-glazing, and often very complicated liveries, so RTR wins, although freight is a good area for kit-building. There aren't many modellers who buy a kit, merely for the constructional challenge, modellers tend to buy what they require for their layout, so if no decent RTR equivalent is on the market, buy whatever kit is available, no matter how good or bad, it is. When I started modelling in the 1970s, most people were re-creating the Big Four steam period, us BR modellers were the new breed, so it's no surprise that the current favourite modelling period has moved on again since then. There's always been a great deal of snobbery around kit construction, in clubs (and fora) up and down the country, you'll hear sweeping statements like "well I threw half the kit away", or "of course I never read the instructions", or "i've been building my kits this way since 1955", all very off-putting for the novice. Another problem is people are afraid to show their efforts, for fear of being jumped on by over-critical friends or club members. The novice kit-builder should not be dictated to, but gently coaxed and encouraged, besides it's always best to learn by your own mistakes. In the great scheme of things, people who build brass kits tend to look down on whitemetal modellers, or anyone who uses glue. EM modellers tend to look down on OO modellers, and P4/S4 modellers tend to look down on both. About 15 years ago, I built a SE Finecast LNER K3, and gave it a compensated chassis, then a P4 modeller asked why did I bother doing that to the chassis? (bit snooty) I replied "well to improve adhesion and power pick-up, it works the same in all gauges" Building loco or coach kits is not the be-all-and-end-all, it is not an absolute requirement when there is a perfectly decent RTR equivalent, besides not having to struggle with a kit, leaves more time for layout construction, RTR mods and scenery making, plus developing new skills like track building and electronics. Live and let live. Cheers, Brian.

On the subject of modelling contemporary railways (I hate that term "modern image", which sounds superficial), how can they be boring? Today, there are more trains running, carrying record numbers of passengers, and once again the railways are expanding to meet demand, after years of nationalized decline, and lack of investment. Travelling down by train to see Tony on Tuesday, there was plenty of interest to see, in fact it went past too quickly, often obscured by one of the frequent trains in the opposite direction. I remember the old GN out of King's Cross in the early 1970s, half as many expresses, dwindling freight, brutal track rationalization, and one off-peak local train per hour, to either Welwyn Garden City or Hertford North, in a noisy vibrating Craven DMU (the ex-Lea Valley hydraulics were smoother). On Tuesday I saw the impressive new Hitchin flyover for the first time, plus the enlarged Peterborough station, LNER semaphores in New England yard, the Mallard 126 speed sign, whilst at Stoke Summit we had a severe slack, due to emergency repairs (signal failure or broken rail?), which enabled me to have a good look at the new LED main line signals, north of the tunnel. People used to moan about how boring and featureless, was the ride between Sandy and Peterborough, well now you can watch the wind turbines! Coming back, I was dropped off at Grantham station, where I just missed a London train at 20:40, the next one would be 21:54, so I went into town, and had a beer in the excellent Tollemache pub. I returned to the station a good twenty minutes early, just as a southbound container train came hammering through (60-70mph), then a northbound Hull Trains DMU arrived, plus local trains arrived and departed from the bays. Following the Hull train, another container train shook the place to pieces going north (75mph?), this long train was only halfway through, when a southbound steel train came racing through (60 mph?), towards the sanctuary of the four-track section, and getting out of the way of the following express. The noise was unbelieveable, you couldn't hear yourself speak, and it was actually a bit scary, who says today's railways aren't exciting? On the modelling side, I can see the complaint about passenger trains being so similar, the local trains being so short, and the freight trains being so enormous, but there's a lot more to it, than just the trains. Cheers, Brian.

Thanks to Tony for posting the pic of my half-built DMUs, on their first continuous test run, i'd only attached the pick-ups the night before! We had twelve cars to play with, which made up into four 3-car sets, in various combinations, including the later fixed 6-car formations with buffet and trailer first in the middle, but Paul and Tony were both yawning and nodding off by then. They all ran around LB perfectly well, but we had one or two derailments, and the odd wobble, but i'd put that down to lack of flexibility in the inner couplings and lack of weight in each body. For the record the cars were: DMBS W79091, Buffet W79441, iDMBS W79083; iDMBS W79084, TFK W79473, DMBS W79092; DMBS ScR51034, TCK ScR59403, DMS ScR51023; DMS ScR79168, Buffet ScR59098, DMBS ScR79111. If this hasn't bored the pants off you, here's a link to their construction thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81538-more-swindon-and-derby-dmus/ Cheers, Brian.

Hi Tony, We certainly had some good fun playing trains on Tuesday, and a jolly good natter (I can natter for England, one of my many faults), many thanks for being a fine host. Thanks also for re-producing your new photo of my Hornby Crosti pulling one of your coal trains. Awhile back on the RMweb Crosti review thread, I received some stick over the weathering, suggesting i'd over-egged it with the white staining. That was down to my ignorance of camera settings, and the white was being over-emphasised. I nearly gave it another fine spray of black, but it looked okay to me in the flesh, Tony's superior photograph shows it as it is. Paul's panniers look good, I like the way he has neatly removed the top feed. I do love the fine handbuilt trackwork on LB's scenic section, some of the best 'OO' track you'll ever see. More of Tony's photos will hopefully follow, including my naughty half-built diesel train, that was on a shake-down test run, which de-railed and unfortunately clouted one of Little Bytham's ground discs. Whoops! Cheers, Brian.

Thanks Kevin, that all makes sense, and yes of course, Paddington Praed St. with it's arched roof, is south of the road. However, it's odd that they built the side walls to follow the reverse curve and built the arched entrance in the corner. It used to look as though track once ran into it, latterly (1970s/80s) it seemed to be used as a pw store? I haven't looked in recent years. BK

Ever so slightly off, or away from topic, SW of Praed St. Jct. and towards Paddington Praed St. station (Circle/District), there is a left-hand reverse curve. Tucked into the SE corner of these curves, I seem to remember a single track tunnel mouth or arched doorway, large enough for rolling stock. Does anyone know of it's original use? Cheers, Brian.

Both you and Natalie could be right, the line i'm thinking of is this same line you mention branching off at Portobello Jct. at the west end, I remember seeing the disused bridge or tunnel mouth from passing trains. It would have passed through what is now Westbourne Park bus garage, which was built 20 years ago or more. I'm not totally sure of the rest of the routing, I vaguely remember seeing the relevant R.A.Cooke plan showing the route, and thought the line re-appeared at Bishop's Road? I haven't got a copy of Cooke's London plan book at present, but if anyone else has a copy, they could settle any confusion. There definitely were tracks on the northside of Bishop's Road station continuing under Bishop's Bridge Road, serving coal sidings alongside the canal, but at a higher level, although there may have been other tracks underneath? BK

Just to add to Mike The Stationmaster's interesting piece, and i'm sure he already knows about this hence his referral to only passenger lines, but there was also the goods line double track tunnel which joined the Met at the east end of Bishop's Road station, the angled formation of the junction can still probably be seen. This tunnel weaved it's way around the back of the huge GWR goods shed, which has since been demolished, hemmed in by the canal on it's northside. The other end (west) of the tunnel came out halfway down the goods yard, although a lot probably disappeared under the Westway flyover scheme. I think it was still in use until the 1960s, but I could be wrong, perhaps this deserves a separate thread, or further discussion on the parallel London tunnels thread? BK

My information regarding the planned extension of our mystery tunnel to Praed St., actually would have meant Praed St. Junction, which is where the Hammersmith line via Bishop's Road peels off, not Praed St. station at the front of the Paddington terminus. What a shame the Metropolitan Railway never added the second "Widened Lines" tunnel between Edgware Road and the short distance to Praed St. Jct,. making it four tracks. If they had, the present day H&C service and the terminating Circle/District services could have been completely separated, thus cutting out conflicting moves between them. It's still do-able, but would cost a few bob, and close off the east end of Praed St. The Edgware Road might carry on with one of those raised street "umbrellas", like at Oxford Circus many years ago. BK

More information has come to light, thanks to some scans sent to me by Natalie in Warwickshire. A 1962 article in Railway Magazine tells us that our "mystery tunnel" was a continuation of the 1868 Widened Lines from Moorgate, sponsored by the Metropolitan Railway with the aim of extending the extra tracks to Praed St. (Paddington), and not to the LNWR. The tunnel extends to the western end of St.Pancras station (Midland Road)(as can just be made out on the map above), it was built as a statement of intent, to avoid any future blocking by the Midland, further extension was to be deferred until increasing traffic required it. Also of interest, is that the new west end central bay platform was not created in 1941, but some years later, it was a single track with double-sided platforms, connected to both running lines by new pointwork. The points were never connected to any form of control, just clipped and padlocked, nor were any signals ever installed, before the work was stopped. Maybe this work was cancelled at the same time that the Northern Heights plan was dropped, due to the austere times? The plan had been to terminate either trains from an extended Putney to Kensington High Street service or selected trains from Metroland. I believe the track was used later as a works siding, perhaps the two platforms still survive? Maybe they could be put back into use? BK

The copy of the engraving shown above, does seem to show the GN connections in both directions at KX (but not the York Road tunnel, which would be behind us here), so this must be circa 1863. According to the "Steam On The Widened Lines. Vol1" book, there was an interruption here in July 1867, when the junctions were rebuilt to accommodate the new "Widened Lines" on the north side. I suggest this may have been when the GN north-to-west spur was abandoned, when the new tunnel cut right across, throwing off new GN and MR connections to the north, and continued along Euston Road to our "mystery tunnel" section. These new junctions and new line to Farringdon were complete and running by 1868. According to the same book, thanks to the rebuilding, the LCDR had to delay the beginning of their Continental boat train service from the GN York Road, the GN even provided a French-speaking booking office clerk here. How ironic that today's continental service is but a stone's throw away, in the opposite direction. BK

If you mean the various dive-unders and flyovers at Primrose Hill, one little snaggipoos, is that they weren't built for nearly another 50 years after our 1868 mystery tunnel. I've also recently found reference to those pre-WW1 services, how extrordinary, the services from Victoria and points south to various GN and Midland destinations were apparently quite frequent, not only that the trains were supplied by the GN, the Midland, the SER and even the LCDR, all the way to places that are now on the Northern Line. All of this was eventually killed off by the trams and the new deep-level tubes. There was also even a service from Moorgate westwards to East Ham, which would be a very circular route. Shame they never finished our mystery tunnel, a service from London Bridge to Willesden Junction via KX would have been useful. BK

If the tunnel was aimed at joining the LNWR near Euston, my best bet would be that the tunnel would emerge at that strangely vacant plot on the eastern side of the LNWR, just north of Hampstead Road and Granby Terrace, where the 1950s signal box used to stand, this spot would also be handy for accessing the dive-under just north of there. If so, the tunnel from KX would need to curve NW, once clear of the new St.Pancras station and run diagonally under what became St.Pancras goods yard, later known as Somers Town goods yard. I would presume the tunnel was killed off with the advent of the alternative LNWR access to The City, via the NLR to Broad Street? The LNWR already had direct access to South London via the West London Line, so the KX tunnel link would be regarded as unnecessary expense and possibly more congested south of KX? Cheers, Brian.

Yes Roy, I well remember the bricked-lined open cutting behind the KX shop, apparently you can walk directly over it now, within the new shopping complex. To be fair to Harsig, his two Widened Lines plans are dated 1926 and 1956 respectively, I believe the banking loco siding located at the north end of Farringdon came later, presumably after the trackwork to the GN/LNER goods depot (closed in 1956) was swept away. Does anyone know precisely when the new siding went in? I seem to remember the siding was rather unorthodox, having a direct facing link from the northbound track, plus the expected trailing connection for buffering up southbound, the siding was also rather inclined too. To answer earlier suggestions, yes I'd already checked out the Disused Stations, Abandoned Stations and District Dave websites, but didn't find much on our tunnel, plus I had a brief look at London Reconnections, but the info is probably buried in various threads. Thanks for the idea though. Cheers, Brian.

I certainly never regarded anything as irrelevant, I agree that all sorts of info snippets can be picked up through discussion, but the topic was going way off target. Meanwhile, I've found a reference to this tunnel in the book "Steam On The Widened Lines" (Vol.1) by Geoff Goslin. On page 57 he states: "In 1926 a single track was laid from the outer rail of the Circle Line at King's Cross to the Up Widened Line which was electrified through to Moorgate. This enabled trains from the outer rail to reach the terminal bays at Moorgate, without crossing the inner rail on the level. The link at King's Cross made use of a previously un-used tunnel, built in 1868 as part of an abortive scheme to connect the LNWR to the Widened Lines. The facility was used by electric trains from 15th March 1926, until preparatory work on the re-siting of King's Cross Circle Line station involved (engineer's) possession of the link from 27 April 1935.". Thus we learn that the LNWR was the most likely target of the mystery tunnel, the loop wasn't only for freight and had fourth rail power supply, three of the four tracks were electrified from KX to Moorgate for ten years between 1926 and 1935 (a similar situation to the North London Line for a time). I would suggest that Met 'T' stock from Metroland to Moorgate were the most likely trains using the loop and GN/Mid service track, both in service and as ECS. This also explains the provision of extra crossovers at Moorgate before WW2. As far as I can see, two questions remain, how far does the unused mystery tunnel run under Euston Road to the west, and how did it relate to the sole north-to-west curve from the GN? Cheers, Brian.

Yes, the railway line to Timbuktu was built in stages, - whoops!, there I go off-topic again. :-) Many thanks for all the replies so far, but if we could stick to the mysterious black hole at the western end of King's Cross station please! This strange disused double track tunnel truly is a black hole, when it comes to information about it. It's alignment seems to be a continuation of the Widened Lines tunnel, after the GN and Midland have peeled off to the north. Mention has been made of the erstwhile GNR north-to-west tunnel here (that was never used/ or was hardly used, and with no reciprocal west-to-north tunnel), did that aim directly at the westbound Circle Line or else perhaps into our mystery tunnel? If our tunnel wasn't going to the LNWR, could it be a planned relief tunnel to the Circle/Met or maybe an unfinished connection into Somers Town goods yard? Does anyone know when the two tunnels were breached and the goods loop put in, obviously an afterthought, why else would our mystery tunnel carry on westwards? Was our tunnel ever used for wartime storage? Presumably our mystery tunnel was built by cut-and-cover, like it's Circle/Met sister tunnel alongside, and maybe around the time St.Pancras station was built, right alongside it? Could it be something to do with Edward Watkin/GCR and his ambitions to get to the coast via the Thames Tunnel? They did plan to run trains from the GC via the Met and SE&CR via this route, wasn't he involved with these other two companies as well? Cheers, Brian.

Here's a link to a modern drawing of the track layout from 1926 to 1940, the current eastbound Circle/H&C/Met Line platform was built on the goods loop leading towards the Widened Lines seen to the left, which by 1940/1 was re-routed back to the Circle line at the eastern end. BK http://harsig.org/PDF/CircleWidened.pdf

Early in WW2, the LT Circle/Metropolitan Line station at King's Cross was moved 200 yards west to it's current position, with the creation of a new island platform. The existing double track running tunnel was converted into the current booking hall concourse, a new tunnel was dug for the westbound platform, and the eastbound platform was built in an already existing spare double track width tunnel on the northside, as still seen today. Prior to WW2, part of this northside tunnel was already in use as an eastbound freight loop from the Circle line, complete with colour light signalling, a hole having been cut between the two parallel tunnels at the western end. The former freight loop used to continue east and join the eastbound "Widened Lines" track, rather than back to the Circle Line, , so was probably used by GWR goods trains to Smithfield, Commuters may have wondered why the western end of the eastbound platform is so curved, with a large dark void behind, this is because it is following the loop alignment. The big question is, where does this empty double width tunnel disappear to westwards, what was it's intended destination, and how far does it go? Many years ago, it was suggested to me that the alignment was aimed at joining the Euston LNWR lines to the Widened Lines, but was never completed? Cheers, Brian.

Thanks for the info Tony, The M&GN is not my No.1 subject, but like the GC, it does have an enigmatic quality, at least to me. I've followed the entire route on the various aerial maps, what a wonderful tool, in many places the line has been ploughed over, but the scar of the alignment remains when viewed from above. The most shocking change is at Spalding, large housing estates are now covering the M&GN avoiding line and connecting chords, the embankment of the former has been flattened. I remember arriving on a special off the long closed GN&GE joint line from March, behind the repainted green Deltic circa 1981/2, i feel so old! All the abandoned formations and embankments were still to be seen back then, including the relatively large station, five or six platforms in those days. Even the line to March has been partly built over, but there are still some surviving surprises, including the low river bridge within the town, still seems to have track too. Also a very short rump of the avoiding embankment survives, where it crossed the GN&GE, alongside a short section of the east side M&GN connecting chord from the town station. I wonder how strong the girder bridge at Little Bytham was, it's a very wide span, presumably stipulated by the GN underneath? It appears to be a classic Warren Truss bridge, think of Crumlin Viaduct and The Golden Gate bridge, which should stand it in good stead. Maybe the line's weight restrictions were governed by the line's swing bridges and wooden trestles, rather than the Little Bytham bridge? Could the line take anything larger than Class 4 locos? Cheers, Brian K

Hi Tony, I wrongly assumed that the M&GN bridge at Little Bytham was single track only, then i discovered it was double, then i saw the photo of the real east side facing crossover, in what seemed an odd position? Today, i've just seen your track plan (above) and all is becoming a little clearer, it seems the double track ends east of the bridge and only the northern side of the span is used for through traffic, the southern side track is merely a headshunt or over-run siding, which is also very odd over a girder bridge? Was the bridge built as double, in expectation of the line west of here being doubled to Saxby at the western end? Did i read that you are working on a replacement girder bridge, to replace what looks vaguely like a Hairyfix? Your original has been quite convincing, who would know without reference to a pic of the real thing, it's had me fooled so far, but i can see the difference now, the real one was not unlike a Bailey Bridge. Talking of things M&GN, i've just found a long disused section of the line on the north side of King's Lynn (it shows up on 1940s O.S. maps), apparently it was the original alignment of the fledgling Lynn & Fakenham Railway, later to become the Eastern & Midland, and then the M&GN. Through trains had to run in and out of the GE terminus by separate routes, but the northern exit was abandoned when they opened the avoiding line east from South Lynn, which even predates the M&GN. Spalding was another in-and-out station, where the line connected with the parental GNR, again an avoiding line was built later. The western end of the M&GN is also interesting, a huge re-alignment of the MR was made to accommodate the junction with the M&GN, the evidence still shows up clearly on today's aerial views. Cheers, Brian K (so as not to confuse with all these other Brians)

Thanks Pete, So does that mean that with a Plymouth to Saltash/Liskeard 2 auto + loco + 2 auto formation, only the two leading coaches would have the regulator connected, and then vice versa on the return? If the rear cars were left regulator connected, would the levers move on their own in the cabs, or was there a dis-engaging/slip clutch device? Also, would intermediate car regulators be always connected, or were they by-passed underneath? BK

Thanks Tony, I thought there was a knack in it, some chaps could tell at a glance, as long as they knew where to look. I shall dig out my relevant books and start studying, were A4 boilers only fitted to A3s post WW2? Cheers, Brian.

Many thanks Kernow Pete, Your information is so very useful, and helps to explain several features. I've read before that the auto gear could be stiff, so the Plymouth to Saltash and Liskeard (2 auto + loco + 2 auto) service must have been the most demanding. In times of difficulty, did they ever disconnect the auto gear, and yet still run in service, or was the gear always connected by rule? Regarding the lamps, so you suggest, at least around Plymouth, that lamps remained in place at each end, and with a red lens added when at rear? It looks like the front white window lining disappeared by the mid-50s, but lingered on the side cab windows until the 60s, at least on some. Thanks also for confirming the "pea green" bus seats. Cheers, Brian.

Hi Tony, I've always had trouble identifying A3s with A4 boilers, what should i be looking for in photos? BK