MidlandRed

Photos (but not that good - NEC lighting is not brilliant owing to height of ceiling - and it’s only a phone camera). Note the body was partially off one of the cars as they were demonstrating the interior.

In terms of locations, the rail route is probably better known to most as the Sutton Park line (runs north from junction west of Water Orton to the former junction at Ryecroft). Both locations are at the southern end - the second photo, as Jim said is across the former A4097 (now dual carriageway A38) just west of Minworth. This is almost at the junction with the New St - Nuneaton/Derby line. I well remember the bridge in the photo, with its painted advertisement. Nice period ‘Ansells Bittermen’ ad as well! Penns (presumably the location of the first photo) is further north on the route and in the south eastern outskirts of Sutton Coldfield.

I just came across this You Tube film covering the branch approaching its closure. There’s some really nice photography of the diesel units operating on the branch, units C127, B132 and B134 being seen (I noticed B135 was in one of the photos in this thread also). They’re all class 121 (W550xx - substitute the last two numbers of the set number to get the unit number). These were provided by Bristol, and during the 1960s, class 122 units also appeared. https://youtu.be/sHV0i94mYJ8?si=W3X0Haiz9y0lCECv

The state of the flood defence wall is somewhat iffy as well! I think this is actually carrying the Medway Valley Line, it’s south west of the A2 bridge and south west of the junction beyond the down end of Strood station.

Indeed it was (probably actually Government because they wanted to make him look bad, politically) - but is no longer happening as TfL has reached an agreement with the TOCs - slightly more than whatever is the standard fare increase imposed annually, for the Travelcard. Much as people malign the Mayor, I find travel in London to be excellent and the complaints about the ULEZ appear to be made by people who live outside of London on behalf of people with non compliant vehicles who live outside London and want to drive in, to the detriment of London residents’ air quality. It’s one area where you could say there is an integrated transport system and decent transport plan in place. Last trip I did into the zone, I saw lots of old cars - they just weren’t diesels! (Apologies - off topic).

I count myself as reasonably tech literate but I have fallen heavily into this category, attempting to use a Chiltern Trains ticket machine at B’ham Moor Street. Out the window went my three trains and one tube itinerary (which had worked precisely until this last step to Kidderminster) as my cluelessness, combined with the similarly dumbfounded person before me resulted in missing the connection. At least there was another one along quite soon - but imagine the angst created if the next was an hour or more away! I realise now I should have gone to the ticket office!! One of the built in issues with the machine was it wouldn’t let me buy a ticket for a train it considered was too close to departure time - by the time I learned to fool it by selecting a later train, it was too late 🤣

Absolutely - as would be obvious to anyone who uses or is involved with railways in the U.K. And the idea also overlooks the fact TfL has to have staff at each barrier to deal with the x% of times rail tickets and travel cards fail to operate the barriers - my own experience suggests the percentage involved is significant enough to be annoying (especially when you’re one of say 1000 people having left a SE high speed service at St Pancras International and either your ticket or the person’s in front fails to operate the barrier - of which about 3 are in use)!! It’s almost as irritating as leaving a Southern service which has called at Gatwick, at Victoria and 50% of the people have significant luggage, there is only one standard gate and only one attended disabled/luggage gate open - forget your connection as it’ll take you three times as long as normal to get through as many attempt unsuccessfully to drag their luggage through a standard gate!!! All of which suggests political whim from a clueless politician to me - many civil servants commute by train from my experience. If you don’t believe such nonsense occurs, the firm I worked for was once instructed to implement a scheme to turn off all the traffic lights in a major town, to relieve congestion (a whim of a very senior politician)!!! 😆 in my experience these whims take a while to disappear (often only when the proponent does)!! Sometimes referred to as the Ministry of Bloody Daft Ideas - some quangos are past masters of this.

As a point of interest I checked my sole remaining spotting notebook (summer 1967 to winter 1969). I noted D02 (Birmingham Division allocated) class 20s, largely at Great Barr (now more accurately named Hamstead), Perry Barr and Bescot around 25 times mostly in 1967 and 68. Not a single one was noted double headed! In fact the only pair noted was D16 allocated, at Bescot (D8170 and D8172). D8199 was noted operating singly also (headcode 0L00). Other headcodes noted were 0Z00, 8T36, 8T56 and 3G19. Whilst by no means a complete sample it does give a picture of what was around north Birmingham at the time. We haven’t mentioned Scotland but I’ve seen a number of photos of them operating singly there also in the 1960s.

They obviously got the wrong message and implemented it early at my local station (joke - the booking office was closed owing to staff illness). Lots and lots of staff - wrong side of barrier - not able to assist intending passengers - and no way to pay at the station by cash at that time!! Revenue protection by siege!! Sort of demonstrates the priorities of the TOC!! I think you may be on to something @The Stationmaster - I got the feeling the whole booking office closure thing started from a simplistic political level - on the basis Khan got away with it on the Underground so let’s apply it to the railway to save money - my theory is it would have had to have come from someone in a senior position with no clue whatsoever about the railways - my guess is, in my opinion, the most badly informed SOS of all time, G Shapps!!

Thanks - that book is something else I need to purchase 😀 Im pretty sure I saw D8038 (and D8039) around Birmingham in the mid 60s also.

I also watched the cams during the same period - the San Remo cam showed the area towards Exeter and at times the waves deposited sufficient water to create pools across the tracks but it soon drained. I thought the volume of ballast around the sleepers on the up, between the rails looked somewhat depleted - whether that was caused by the regular drenching over a period of about 4 hrs I don’t know. However @The Stationmaster is correct. At high tide (around 8 pm the previous day), the wave spray picked up by the south easterly was extraordinary - occasionally actually splashing the camera. Several local trains (150s and 165s) got a severe spraying from waves crashing across the up end of the Dawlish platforms. IETs broke down at Exeter and Newton Abbott. In terms of the station, yesterday morning, one large waves resulted in sea water pouring off the down end of the down platform. I suspect had the civil engineering works not been carried out there would have been serious consequences and flooding around the most exposed areas (station, subway etc).

It actually washed over the whole width of the road two or three times, depositing a lot of stones. The You Tube film in the next post by @woodenhead shows this towards the end.

What era was this @The Stationmaster? I’m afraid I’m stuck in 1966-70 transition era rather than anything else (or even Wipac headlights…)! And was this a nationwide ban on nose end working?

Interesting clip. For clarity, Bescot’s class 20s appeared in summer 1966 and disappeared (to Nottingham Division), some in 1968, some in 1969. The locos involved were D8035,6 and D8040-44 (ex London Division - D01) and D8134-43 (new). The traditional double heading of these locos with the cabs at outer ends on the LMR really commenced with the allocation of D8144-99 new at Toton (although even from there I seem to recall some trips running with single locos). I wouldn’t like to say Bescot’s were used only singly but given the steam work they replaced, it was certainly commonplace to see them running singly on freight. This period was, of course when diesels had proper numbers (not TOPS) and proper headcodes (1966-69 to be precise). Seeing the new model of D8133 (thus definitely on topic, although not related to the models of later era class 20s), I immediately thought this would be a good candidate for renumbering for me, to replicate a Bescot loco (which did get into the northern reaches of the then God’s Wonderful (Region..) in that era, as evidenced by the film of the accident at Hartlebury posted by @Phil Bullock

Certainly did - Bescot had D8134-43 new, plus a handful of D804x at dieselisation of the shed - they usually ran singly on trip freights and could often be seen running bonnet first - particular duties I recall them on had previously been operated by 464xx or 76xxx steam locos. They weren’t around for very long before transfer to Toton - replaced by more class 24/25s.

I’d agree it’s even more blingy than the Ivatt tank I saw at the GCR but it can be toned down by the purchaser if that’s what they want. I must admit I don’t recall seeing many spotless ex GW copper capped chimneys back in the 60s either (but absolutely all models of those prototypes have them). I suspect even those intricately modelled and coloured bits of pipework, handrails and the like on modern very accurately modelled diesels may be slightly out of scale and definitely only visible in that form immediately ex works or within a few days of being so. I guess there’s a balance in these things - a bugbear of mine is the overscale window dividers on some of these - admittedly the latest class 30/31s are light years better than my early 60s Triang ones - but they still look overscale to me - but still good enough for me to have ordered one!!! I think Hornby have done a great job on this 2MT and should be congratulated. Even the slightly odd slope of the cab sides on the prototype is captured.

I’ll be honest, having had 65+ yrs involvement with model railways I’ve never known anything other than pristine models and I suspect that has been the case, as they say, since time immemorial!! Regrettably in my childhood I disfigured several, now quite valuable, model locos with repaints and/or weathering. Because that’s how I saw the trains at the time. I now lament having done so when I get them out of their boxes. But that is why some modellers weather their own locos and there are a number of firms which specialise in it. I shan’t be subjecting any of my Accurascale or Sutton’s Loco Works diesels (or Hornby 9F) to weathering in spite of remembering well seeing the few weeks old class 25s like D5234 in dirty condition running from Saltley with only the numbers, windows and safety markings totally clean. There’s plenty of views on line of 6 month old ML freight locos in filthy condition (and WL passenger ones such as D1953-61). Just my preference but I like the look of them pristine, as they would have appeared at Derby Works open days!! Just my take in it. However the choice is there to weather them if that’s what you want.

Preservation, admittedly - and not quite as blingy as Hornby’s superb 2MT, but I was taken with 41312 at Loughborough a couple of years back, partially because of the clean pipework.

Interesting choice of 25s - no doubt pure coincidence but 5179-82 were products of Darlington and 7624/5 of Beyer Peacock. At least that would put paid to any WR anti-Derby bias (if it even existed at that stage…)!! Did that brake format affect any other transfers? I seem to recall further class 37s from elsewhere had this. On the point about gears on Hymeks, the group allocated for Lickey banking duties had modifications (first gear locked out?) following initial issues experienced.

I recall the Hymeks being used to dieselise Paddington-Worcester/ Hereford - there was an article in Railway Magazine at the time - they replaced 7P rated Castles. I don’t know if the load was reduced but if not, this would surely have stretched their abilities. I don’t remember the exact details, or whether there was any intermediate operation, but these services were operated by class 43 Warships (Type 4) in the latter part of the 60s along with Brush Type 4s. The north and west route was variously operated by brand new Brush type 4s (1964 on) and also Warship class (once again type 4) - presumably until the service was derated to DMUs (although the class 123Inter City Units appeared at one time). The Hymeks were also used on the Cardiff/Bristol/Portsmouth route at one time (another one where class 123 DMUs operated when fairly new). I always thought the class 25s and 31s were given a tough ride by the WR - the 25s were used on duties requiring class 8 or higher steam power in the Peak District, so I’m astonished the WR couldn’t operate them effectively with four coaches (replacing three DMU power cars, effectively) or four GUVs!! I was never sure whether this was caused by operator fallibilities, allocated to unsuitable duties at times, not invented here syndrome, the locos being worn out when acquired by the WR (many were over 10 yrs old when sent although Newport received several of the newest, 5 yr old models, some of which had been used at one time on ex Co Bo duties around Carlisle), worse than not invented here syndrome, invented by Derby syndrome, or simply that the rarified air in the south west and Wales was only suitable for locos of Churchward parentage, or designed and built by Swindon or North British!! Whatever - I think they got a rough ride on the WR where others (basically everyone else) seemed to get good work out of them. I remember seeing the first little group of class 31s sent to OOC at the end of the 60s, and mighty smart they looked too, compared to the squat class 22s, some of which seemed to suffer from WR coach washer paint strip and bits of valances missing - the operators must have relished those 1470 horses compared to the 1100 odd of the class 22. As interested observers, we certainly loved both of the classes but I’d guess the passengers thought the 31s looked better at Paddington’s buffer stops - excepting the handful of overhauled 22s, which looked smart for a while. To answer those questions about retention of Hymeks, they certainly seemed to be successful and modern looking locos. However the fact is BR had far too many locos by the late 60s so it was clear a reduction would occur - starting with the most unsuccessful and troublesome classes - followed by a period of standardisation (removing non standard classes). The WR had a surfeit of type 3s (and type 4s) - at one time around 300 of each. Imagine if their plans had come to fruition there’d have been 400 type 1s as well (curtailed at 56 class 14s). This logic seems to have been based on replacing steam duties on an exact basis (I recall reading 2 out, 1 in for the earlier WR dieselisation schemes) - Beeching and the NTP (national traction planning as opposed to regional planning) put paid to all of this. The WCML effect should not be underestimated as well - when fully on stream in 1967 along with converting most freight and all passenger services to electric haulage, large amounts of diesel power were released.

Excellent photos, as always. However the last photo is not Perry Barr - it’s actually at Winson Green (about half a mile north of the prison)! The first bridge carries the electrified Soho junction to Perry Barr junction line, and the second, plate girder bridge carries what remained, at that time, of the ex GWR main line from Bham Snow Hill to Wolverhampton - Winson Green tram stop is now located the other side of the bridge and it carries the Metro and the line from Snow Hill towards Stourbridge. We are facing north east, towards Handsworth, on the A4040 Handsworth New Road (the Outer Circle bus route operates along here). At this time there was a rail accessed steel terminal on the right, between the bridges.

Many firms (including the one I worked for until retirement) and Govt departments (or arms length parts) have actually downsized on office space and cannot accommodate all of their employees at once any longer so full time office work for many is out of the question - a rota of part time attendance in the office is in place - the employers are reaping the benefits of reduced rent and other overheads for office space and are very unlikely to re let office space, one would imagine. On that subject I recall that a certain Minister used to be in the habit of leaving notes on civil servant’s desks bemoaning their absence when he called to speak to them, because they were working from home at the time (he may not have had access to a phone possibly) - that person seems to have discovered an entirely new way to work away from the office, spending lots of time broadcasting on GB News - makes you wonder how such sitting MPs find time to perform the task they have been elected for and are being financed to do so by taxes….

Rather like HS1 services, when there is disruption people migrate to services from Victoria, Cannon St, Charing Cross, London Bridge - HS2 it would be WCML, Chiltern, GW etc etc. Notwithstanding the other economic factors you mention, journey time on HS2 will surely be commutable and there will be excellent linkages to other routes and modes at the Birmingham end. One of the main changes to commuting has been the growth of hybrid working - say two or three days in the office, the rest at home. I can see HS2 attracting business traffic.

Also two overground services - the North London one via Hackney, Dalston etc is particularly busy. Easy reach by Jubilee line of West Ham (one stop), another significant interchange.

I think you’ll find Birmingham to London is precisely a commuter railway. HS1 was not conceived as a commuter railway - that it gained a very useful longish distance commuter service is precisely because of the strategic local authorities along the route lobbying for such over a significant period - I was there and know that - they also sought and obtained huge amounts of finance for significant highway improvements around Kent resulting from the Channel Tunnel. Im not really comparing one with the other (although this is a thread about HS1 and its development compared to HS2) merely stating a view (with some knowledge of their approach) that the strategic authorities that the route passes through seem to have missed opportunities to lobby for better strategic transportation outcomes (in contrast to HS1).