MidlandRed

As a regular domestic user of St Pancras International pre 2019, and occasional one since, using mostly South Eastern High Speed and sometimes transferring between that and EMR, Thameslink and more frequently to the Underground, occasional on foot to Euston, I don’t recall ever seeing congestion anywhere in the station except at the South Eastern or EMR barriers. Most certainly not for Eurostar. However, I used the station on one occasion about a year ago and took the wrong turning from the underground, emerging into the east side of the concourse at the Euston Road end - I was astonished to see a queue from Eurostar across the front of all the retail premises and the entire length of the east side, along the south side of the ticket office concourse, and out and back down the west side of the road outside. Apart from Covid, from which passenger numbers have, from what I’ve read, recovered to say max 70-80% of previous levels, only one thing has happened since then that would affect throughput in such a way. Of course this was predicted, along with chaos at Dover and everywhere else that people need to cross our newly taken control of borders (and poo pooed as scaremongering by fellas who’ve turned their attention now to prestige banks). In order to manage what appears to be a predicted regular occurrence, there are barriers in place along the sections I’ve mentioned. Presumably St Pancras International was never designed to have a non EU border in it and the arrangements now required cause the problem. That there’s little opportunity to increase international capacity is hardly surprising and it shouldn’t be forgotten that St Pancras is a major domestic interchange station rather than the Cinderella it used to be when purely the southern terminus of the MML.

I would hazard a guess these regional specific lamps died gradually at the end of the steam age on WR (and the areas of LMR affected) combined with the larger scale inter-regional transfers which occurred after 1966 (results of first stages of the National Traction Plan). This will have affected DMUs as well with the ScR transfers of class 116 from 1966, W55000 and the four rail buses at the beginning of 1967. I would agree that the addition of the lower right mounted standard lamp iron would be much more convenient to use as well. It remains to be seen how accurate the lamp irons are on the pre TOPS WR models, when these arrive (end of year/early next?).

Thanks @Phil Bullock - yet another modification on some locos!! Thankfully the ones I’ve ordered from Accurascale (D6600 and D699x) were WR up to a point past the era I’m after (1967-9)!! Not sure if they’d been ‘molested’ by then…. hopefully not!

The WR lost a good number of these class 37 locos to the NER and ScR in 1966 (around 50+ in the D6819 onwards range and a few D690x) - does anyone know if those regions had to have lamp irons (well one at least on each loco) altered to enable the standard BR pattern tail lamp to be carried running ld?

The fact the (curved) windscreens haven’t popped out perhaps indicates the level of vibration subjected in normal operation to the poor unfortunates who had to drive these in the early days!! (Whole class modified to flat windscreens by supplier along with engine mods to correct issues at the beginning of the 60s).

Interesting photos - however I think it’s Charlemont Crossing (a couple of miles south east of the south eastern end of Bescot yard). There was not a junction at Newton Road (nearest are Perry Barr North or the south east end of Bescot yard). The crossing was closed subsequently to vehicular traffic - in any case during winter months the approach roads from each direction were impassable regularly owing to flooding. In the photos, that is the M5/M6 junction south to north west link - in the top photo, the second road bridge is the south to north east link. A very noisy location with not only road noise but the constant thumping of HGVs over the viaduct expansion joints.

The problem with your analysis here, whilst maybe correct in the taxation of the bottom 50%, does not take account of the fact that their average income is a fraction of the upper 50%. And the top 1% earn absolutely vastly more than the average of the upper 50% - look at the income figures - there’s gross inequality!!! We have become a generally low income economy - the top 20%-25% earn the majority of the total income! Sorry for the thread drift.

It may be my imagination, but this looks very much like a Black 5, rather than a Patriot (45528) to me??

I don’t recall seeing these either. It also has the very short lived application of wrap around full yellow end (covers the cab sides). According to Longman - BRITISH RAILWAYS First Generation DMUs, Norwich 32A set 57 for 1972 has E51279 as class 105 power power car, paired with class 105 trailer E56436 - however with the proviso the trailer cars were swapped around regularly and the set number remained with the power car. Presumably, the class 101 was a temporary pairing. However 32A had 12 class 101 sets at the time (5 of which were power twins), as well as 10 class 100 GRCW sets so presumably hybrids occurred from time to time. It’s not very clear, but the class 101 car in the photo appears to be a driving trailer - for 1972-3 (from Railcar.co. uk) we have a choice of E56074, E56362,4,5,9,80 or 83.

@The Stationmaster @Phil Bullock thanks for the info. V interesting. I’m presuming from comments regarding the WTT 1960, that trip freights north of Droitwich (either on the main route towards Stourbridge, or via the Severn Valley or Tenbury Wells lines) may have been run from the Hartlebury, Kidderminster or Stourbridge directions. There are Toads in the GW allocations list with all three of those locations (i.e. Hartlebury, Kidderminster and Stourbridge RU. Interesting that the railcars and class 122s used on the Severn Valley and Tenbury Wells lines appear to have been based at Worcester (and also operated the Bromyard branch - although I have a photo of one of the last batch of class 120s (when allocated to Tyseley) near Suckley - possibly on a through service via Worcester, in a book). All of the WR (Birmingham/ West Midlands) 122s were allocated to Tyseley but parked out at places like Stourbridge J, Leamington and particularly Worcester - the latter had a number of WR railcars on its allocation in the 50s and till they were all withdrawn by 1962.

There were two scenarios I wondered about following these responses:- 1) Noted the van would work other Worcester based workings after the direct line to Leominster closed - presumably it might work trip freight on the remaining branch to Bromyard (if goods facilities actually remained at stations at that stage), but would the route stencil/sticker be removed or simply left in place? 2) After closure of the direct route, is it possible the van might have worked to Hereford via Ledbury - and then onward on either a different train or the same one minus some dropped off wagons, to Leominster? There’s always rule 1 I guess!! I have an old Hornby Toad with a Stourbridge RU notice, presumably possible to get to the Worcester area also (albeit with slightly less homely interior decor and accoutrements)!!

Here’s mine - what a beautifully detailed model - a minor quibble - I’m a little surprised the buffers aren’t sprung. But a fabulous model nonetheless. Anyhow, do any of you guys knowledgable about things WR Worcestershire/Herefordshire in the 60s know which route Worcester to Leominster would be? Via Ledbury and Hereford, or Hartlebury, Bewdley, Tenbury Wells (or either)?

It’s interesting that on TfL’s tram network, there are regular revenue checks - noting all the stops/stations are open with no barriers. The usually rather large inspectors board the tram at a stop and then, using a hand held electronic device, are able to check those people using Oyster or contactless payments that they have a valid journey open on their card/device. They remove any miscreants at the next stop to deal with the penalty fares incurred. It gets interesting at stations where TfL trams and trains operate from adjacent platforms as there are separate tap ins - I personally have validated an Elmers End towards London Bridge journey by accident as I was travelling to Croydon on the tram - and thus got charged the max rate!! Just on this question of removal of station staff, I do wonder if the current crop of politicians are thinking, well Sadiq got away with it on TfL so let’s simply apply the same principle on the railway. Although there are a lot more complexities (not least alternative, cheaper journey routes, rail passes of one sort of another which reduce cost etc etc; group travel), I think it unlikely most of these characters ever get near to a TfL station or other rail station for that matter, or they would have seen that barriers require people in attendance to deal with issues of non working tickets etc etc. A glance at St Pancras International South Eastern in the morning peak will show the vast numbers of people going through from the trains and the congestion caused by the, say 10% of anomalies which occur (it may well be larger - I’ve regularly had valid travel cards fail to activate barriers on both TfL and Network Rail locations, requiring manual assistance. I really do think it may be as simple as this and it not having been properly thought through. I’m sure there are electronic solutions for most of the issues which could be resolved by contactless and purchase of some sort of plastic travel card. However these things are never straightforward - who else has arrived at the queue for an Avanti Pendolino at the barrier at Euston and had to wait whilst the two or three poor folk on the barrier have to try and validate electronically bar code tickets on mobile devices, a vast number taking multiple goes to achieve!! One major issue relying on ticket machines - I took a Sittingbourne to St Pancras Int High Speed South Eastern at around 630 am one day - it was two 6 car sets and packed. All but one ticket machine was out of action and the ticket office was not open at Sittingbourne. I sat in the front set. Now the guard/customer assistant sells tickets on these trains and clearly a number of people were expecting to buy but it appears the chap was in the back set and there is no inter-set connecting corridor. A mob handed bunch of around a dozen revenue inspectors got on at Rainham and between there and Rochester, where they got off, proceeded to hand out umpteen penalty fares - at the time quite an amount when you consider the peak fare, with supplement. This reduced at least one young lady to tears. Incredibly, and one stop after these idiots got off (got off at Rochester, guard appeared at Strood), the guard appeared selling tickets to anyone who wanted one. I suspect the crowded six car set of regular commuters had a very low impression of South Eastern customer service after that experience. I could only see such instances increasing in a non-manned ticket office situation, especially at busy stations.

‘You cannot be serious - there was chalk dust ’……. Wimbledon circa 1978 😀

Not only freeing up Westerns, the WR managed to amass over 150 Brush Type 4s between late 1963 and 1966, giving them 300 or so Type 4 diesels. The group of Oxley based ones in the D1682 - D1701 and D1707 onwards series became LMR locos - however some of the Brush Type 4 locos used on the Paddington - Birkenhead route were allocated to Old Oak Common so remained WR. Whilst on the subject of Hymeks in Cornwall, I have a nice colour slide of D7096 at the head of a postal train (Royal Mail carriages) awaiting departure at Penzance late afternoon one day in the summer of 1965 - photo was taken by my father - I must scan it when I have the equipment to do so. Needless to say it was the only Hymek seen during that family holiday in Cornwall. Plenty of DMUs and Warships though!

Have you noticed how much traffic (and particularly HGVs) uses M6 Toll compared to M6? Tolls are a thorny subject politically as well (as are ULEZ and congestion charges).

Any transport project (or other types of major infrastructure project for that matter), be it rail, light rail, bus, road etc etc, where funded by Government is subject to rigorous justification processes and scrutiny. For a major transport project there is a design life, and transport modelling is used to predict usage at the design year - so any difference between the capacity at design year and the usage at opening is the growth that’s been allowed for. It’s a complex process but it can be upset by very many factors not least budgetary constraints resulting in changes to the project or its timetable. These can have a bearing on future resilience.

It is far more complex than that in reality. By their very nature road improvements occur in sections, each one designed to deal with predicted traffic up to a set design year and accounting for all known traffic growth including that through ‘committed’ development at the time of justification. That prediction in itself can be something of a dark art and as with everything else, can be affected by unknown factors (Covid being a recent one). Although off topic, A34/M3 is an interesting case, that has been affected by various factors - until 1985 or so, the M3 wasn’t continuous from the north end of Winchester bypass (A34) to the junction of M3/A33/A303 so effectively the ‘Y’ junction was A33/A34 at Kings Worthy. From 1985, missing link of M3 was completed and terminated at Winnall where it joined the A34 (A33 being bypassed and becoming a ‘local’ road. Subsequently the A34 was improved as the extension of the M3 between Winnall and the M27 at Southampton - remember the Twyford Down protests? That left J9 as a grade separated junction between A34 and M3, the latter having priority as a motorway. The A34 now has a greater traffic flow and high HGV content so a grade separated scheme was prepared to deal with the current congestion and safety problems at the A34 roundabout. It should be noted there are significant environmental constraints north of the junction on A34 owing to the River Itchen whilst the outskirts of Winchester straddle the M3. The scheme tied into a Smart motorway scheme to deal with congestion between the A34 and M27 - both schemes have been subject to funding and other Policy issues - but the M3 J9 improvement was in the Roads Investment Strategy Programme and ready to go through Statutory process. A1 Black Cat Roundabout is inextricably linked to the A428 Black Cat to Caxton Gibbett roundabout scheme - this high standard dual carriageway scheme which is in the Roads Investment Strategy programme bypasses the existing single carriageway length of A428 which itself is an earlier bypass of St Neots. It requires grade separation at both Black Cat and Caxton Gibbett roundabouts by nature of modern standards and its design brief and links the existing dual carriageways to the west and east, and would reduce existing safety and congestion problems throughout. That scheme is separate to, but would form part of a wider Oxford to Cambridge road strategy which is/was at a much earlier preparation stage. I’ve spent several years of my working life on those schemes!! There are lots of challenges to meet!!

Set numbers are referred to in the class 116 history thread pinned at the top of Prototype Questions. In the early 60s, WR set numbers at Tyseley were carried on stickers or boards located on the second man’s window (bottom right). There are lots of photos on Flickr of units with these or on railcar.co.uk. The Tyseley units continued to carry them after transfer of the depot to the LMR. As examples, class 122 units carried set numbers in the 1xx range, Tyseley class 128 DPUs carried numbers in the P1 to P4 range (units 55993-6). At a later date and certainly by the late 60s, these units carried numbers (carried on boards in the same place) in the TY05x series - the class 116 units at this stage had TY 3xx numbers. There are also references to set numbers on railcar.co.uk and photographs which show these. The numbers on the front below the driver’s windscreen appeared in the early 1970s I think.

Underside detail is as good as the normal view - absolute work of art!!?

Presumably travelling towards Sole Street and Swanley from Rochester and already climbing Sole Street bank?

I already have two on order (green D7599 (I saw D7598 and D7607 on delivery at Derby - some of those spotting moments I remember vividly after 50 + years), and D7666 (the Willesden batch brand new was another spotting memory) so I definitely don’t ‘need’ another). However how could a Brummie Midland (and everything else railways) fan resist - D5232,3,4,6 were amongst the April 64 allocations to Saltley (after a few months, presumably running in (?) at Toton) - removing I think, 4Fs - I remember them looking pretty new though dusty already! The model looks so good - has to be one of, if not the best, representations of a RTR OO scale model 😄

The class 104s had them from new (at least some if not all of them - as did other BRCW units like class 110) - they disappeared on repaint and then on some 104s, got reinstated (by Buxton depot?). The class 110 (Settle Junction) in J956 has the wrap around yellow front (extends to yellow cab doors).

I doubt any could be so incompetent (such as a recent SoS not knowing he’d brought TOC operations into Government control or that Network Rail had been since the catastrophic privatisation leading to the Railtrack debacle). At least another administration may have different priorities which may include a much more positive approach to integrated public transport!! We shall see, as they say!! Meanwhile it certainly looks like the HST’s days are numbered - I had the privilege of travelling on one of the GWR Castle sets on a preserved railway a month or so back (and indeed had to keep pinching myself I wasn’t dreaming!!!). It and the Scotrail preserved push/pull set were so comfortable and spacious as well!!

I thought the main reason that ASLEF (and all the other Trades Unions in dispute currently) was largely because they are fighting for their members to have a cost of living based renumeration increase. This is also exacerbated by the fact that for much of the public sector, wages and salaries have been suppressed for periods over the last 15 years or so in the name of austerity. You could argue that the current administration has created the problem itself and doesn’t really have a leg to stand on - as it could have afforded sensible pay increases years ago over a period of time and would not be saddled with junior doctors and other workers whose pay is said to be up to 30% behind inflation in real terms. Moaning about reds, socialists and tarring them all as layabouts is neither correct and is so 1976. It’s divorced from reality these days. Re HSTs, the ASLEF demands following the crash reports in Scotland are surely there simply as a means of pressurising the industry to improve crash worthiness. Their wishes are likely to be met in part anyway as HM Government forges on with a gradual dismantling of timetables, thus allowing more ‘legacy stock’ to be dispensed with. As others have observed, the ballot box is the place to dispense with less than competent political administrations.