WT12 - Full

WE S T E RN T IME S ISSUE No.12 - SPRING 2025

The history periodical for students of the GWR and BR(W) £12.95

ISSUE No.12 - SPRING 2025

OUT

OUT

NOW

NOW

ISSUE No.12 - SPRING 2025

Contents Introduction

3

Ross on Wye - To Close a Station (and a Railway)

5

Thoughts on ‘The Lonely Giant’

20

Tender First London Approaches: From the Archives of R C Riley

23

The Pannier Story: Part 4 - Pre-Grouping Swindon Built Locomotives

28

The Disposal of Name & Number Plates

46

Book Review

49

Banbury in 1950

50

Welsh Signal Boxes in Colour

58

The Wellington-Shrewsbury Joint Line

by Leslie Price

62

Trip to the Beach

71

ACV / BUT Railcars on the Western Region

76

The Great Western Trust (GWT) - Bulletin No.11

78

The Guard’s Compartment

79

WESTERN TIMES

Above: Probably the least documented of the Collett 14xx 0-4-2T survivors is No. 1442, which today resides within the Tiverton Museum of Mid Devon Life. This year marks the 90th anniversary of the locomotives construction, emerging from Swindon Works as No. 4842 in April 1935 and working first in the Thames Valley. Following withdrawal it was moved to Tiverton for outdoor display in October 1965, and is recorded here in March 1974 prior to being moved undercover into a purpose-built extension to the museum in 1978. The engine’s connection with the town stems from its time at Exeter and Taunton sheds, where it was a regular performer on the ‘Tivvy Bumper’ service along the 4¾ mile branch from Tiverton Junction.

Transport Treasury.

Front Cover: Having received permission to proceed eastwards, North British-built Type 2 diesel-hydraulic No. D6337 erupts into life on the Down through at Newton Abbot on 7 June 1971. Its train laden with stone from Stoneycombe Quarry is most likely initially bound for the short dash into Hackney Yard, prior to a later transfer ‘up country’.

John Turner courtesy Railimagecollections.

Rear Cover: A detailed study of the cast aluminium nameplate and British Railways crest adorning the side of Swindon-built ‘Warship’ No. D806 Cambrian. Released to traffic in June 1959, the locomotive retained its original green paintwork until receiving maroon in June 1966 and finally blue livery in March 1971. It spent its entire life based in Devon at either Laira or Newton Abbot, before withdrawal in November 1972 and scrapping back at Swindon Works.

R C Riley (RCRC 0608).

© The Transport Treasury 2025.

ISBN 978-1-915281-16-6 First Published in 2024 by Transport Treasury Publishing Ltd. 16 Highworth Close, High Wycombe, HP13 7PJ. Compiled and designed in the UK. Printed in Tarxien, Malta by Gutenberg Press Ltd. The copyright holders hereby give notice that all rights to this work are reserved.

Aside from brief passages for the purpose of review, no part of this work may be reproduced, copied by electronic or other means, or otherwise stored in any information storage and retrieval system without written permission from the Publisher.

This includes the illustrations herein which shall remain the copyright of the respective copyright holder.

Every effort has been made to identify and credit photographers where known.

2

ISSUE 12

INTRODUCTION recurrent fear in writing about railways is failure to Charles Rous-Marten discussed the matter in his A ensure accuracy. The most egregious example is article ‘Some Railway Myths’ in The Railway Magazine probably Clement Stretton whose name is blighted by Volume 1, page 155, and advised that the timings were

his practice of relying on invention rather than research.

He was called out by Sekon, editor of The Railway Magazine, and mutual antagonism resulted. Another situation concerns proof-reading, often induced by ‘word-blindness’ which can be easily detected by a fresh set of eyes. More insidious are inadequately reported matters that acquire ‘validity’ through repetition, and a random glance at The Railway Magazine for March 1939 provided a reminder of this phenomenon.

entered in the guard’s journal (apparently since lost). E L Ahrons commented on the absence of any ‘authentic confirmation’ while E T MacDermot (who had access to official company documents) described the run merely as ‘a long-standing Great Western tradition’. In a letter to Fellows dated 1 June 1931, Sir James Milne advised that he was unable to give any official confirmation. Yet despite these authorities, the fable has persisted.

Rous-Marten also noted the assumption that the guard was responsible for timing the train. He stated ‘Precise timing is not their particular metier, and now and then especially when a “record’ has been established or broken one does find a guard too enthusiastic or too much carried away by natural excitement to be entirely trustworthy.’

An article written by a Canon Reginald B. Fellows explored the background to Paragraph 133 of the Report of the Royal Commission on Transport dated 19 December 1930 which stated: ‘No doubt the trains run in the middle of the last century were very light compared with the immensely heavy loads hauled by express locomotives today, but it is certainly remarkable that there has been practically no improvement in locomotive speed in this country for the last eighty years.’

The writer has long doubted some accounts of high speeds. Compared with the means of measuring land speed records for internal combustion-powered vehicles at Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah, the methods used in the days of steam were primitive. Performance on the salt flats is measured over a prescribed distance with a flying start and a return run within one hour. The officially recognised speed is the average of the two.

Evidence by Lord Monkswell in the preceding paragraph, had stated: ‘The GWR has itself stated that one of its trains ran fifty-three miles, start-to-stop from London to Didcot in 47.5 minutes, in the year 1848 (average about 67 mph).

The fastest booked run on any British railway today, is timed at about 62 mph, start-to-stop, and the average of the best runs is no more than about 55 mph.’ Challenged under cross-examination, the witness admitted that he was only concerned with speed without considering the distance run or the train’s weight. Nonetheless, this statement derived from the claimed performance of a Paddington-Bristol express on 11 May 1848 and was the only information to support the broad contention in Paragraph 133. Under the authority of the Royal Commission, it became virtually unassailable ‘evidence’.

Under this regime, the results under the pretence of brake tests down Stoke Bank on 3 July 1938 would only be legitimate if averaged against the speed in the reverse direction with the same load within an hour (or down and then up Wellington Bank for that matter). A group in the USA is intent on creation of a new example of the Pennsylvania Railroad’s high speed ‘Duplex’ Class T1 four-cylinder 4-4-4-4, a design intended to overcome the limitations of hammer blow. These engines under favourable conditions were magnificent but in less clement circumstances, absolutely dreadful. One objective of the reincarnation is to challenge Mallard‘s record. Hopefully Bonneville-style monitoring standards will establish what steam can achieve – with accuracy.

The Canon asserted that the documented evidence for this achievement was a card that stated: ‘GWR BroadGauge Engine Great Britain which accomplished the fastest journey on record, viz., from Paddington to Didcot 53¼ miles in 47 minutes. The train was the 9.15 Express to Bristol, and consisted of Four Carriages and Van and driven on May 11th 1848, by J. Michael Almond (Driver), Richard Denham (Fireman).’ He pointed out that this ‘evidence’ was worthless because (a) there was no 9.15 am departure from Paddington in 1848 (b) the distance of 53¼ miles was from the new Paddington station, opened in 1854 (c) the card was evidently prepared many years later.

--- o O o--Editor: Andrew Malthouse Editorial Assistant: Jeremy Clements

To contact the editorial team please email: WesternTimes@mail.com For sales, subscriptions and back issues of Western Times please go to: www.ttpublishing.co.uk 3

WESTERN TIMES

Above: The railway as a common carrier meant that prior to the Great War, Ross station handled virtually all freight for the local area. This is the western end of the station with various horse drawn wagons ‘on parade’. The legend on the tilt of the left-hand vehicle denotes ‘G.W.R., R T Smith & Co, Agents’. Richard Smith was contracted to deliver goods on behalf of the Company at 25 stations including Ross. The Siphon at extreme left suggests perishable traffic e.g. milk or market produce.

Below: Ousted from its original suburban duties, ‘Small Metro’ No. 627 (of that class’s second batch) stands at Ross bound for Grange Court/Gloucester before the Great War. This locomotive carried a succession of different boiler types before withdrawal in May 1934 and here the boiler is round-topped and probably an S3 or S4 type. The train is equally interesting with the first vehicle apparently a diagram D24 Non-gangway Brake Third of which a significant number were built November 1899 to August 1903, with 28 surviving into BR days. The matching height of the starting signals on the bracket implies equal priority to the Monmouth and Gloucester lines; this was altered later with the Monmouth arm mounted on a lower doll.

4

ISSUE 12

ROSS on WYE TO CLOSE A STATION (AND A RAILWAY) recent expedition by rail to Gloucester led to some Background A thought of a possible continuation to the ‘nearby’ City of Hereford, which until 1959 was feasible by the After false starts, the broad gauge Hereford, Ross following alternative routes:

and Gloucester Railway opened on 1 June 1855, was absorbed by the GWR seven years later and converted to standard gauge over five-days in 1873. Ross gained further importance in 1873 by becoming the junction and terminus at the northern end of the Ross and Monmouth Railway from Lydbrook (the Wye Valley line). A proposed connection from Ross eastward to Tewkesbury never proceeded beyond 1856 parliamentary approval. Services were withdrawn between Hereford and Grange Court on 2 November 1964 although Grange Court-Ross freight trains continued until 1 November 1965. The Wye Valley line from Lydbrook Junction to Ross closed to passengers on 5 January 1959 and to all traffic on 6 January 1964.

1) The ‘great way round’ to Newport, there to change/ reverse via Pontypool Road and Abergavenny.

2) The West Midland Railway to Cheltenham, Ashchurch, then change/reverse at Worcester.

3) GWR branch via Newent, change/reverse at Ledbury.

4) Through service via Grange Court and Ross-on-Wye. Circuitous journeys are still possible between the two cities using Options one and two. However, the Ledbury branch closed to passengers in 1959, and to all services in 1964. The fourth route offered the only direct connection thereby avoiding the inconvenience of changing trains, and the shortest journey mileagewise albeit at a leisurely place. The line via Ross-onWye was typical of so many secondary routes that criss-crossed the GWR network and formed an integral part of rural life in Wales and the West. Intrigued by the ultimate demise of this modest link, an intensive search of the surviving archives (as referenced at the foot of this article) prompted this analysis of the factors closely inter-related with its decline and closure, with particular focus on Ross-on-Wye, the route’s principal station.

The name Ross was used until 1931 when changed to ‘Ross on Wye’ by the General Post Office, ostensibly to avoid confusion with the Scottish Ross. The GWR might have already marketed the town with the ‘on Wye’ appendage to identify with the river valley’s natural beauty as a popular tourist destination. Pastoral views of the area taken by the GWR photographer were common in carriage compartments, and Camp Coaches were based at nearby stations although never at Ross itself. Use of hyphens in the names of both town and station appears to have been discretionary; the station was relabelled with hyphens in 1933.

5

Above: The track layout at Ross circa 1924 shows that were two signal boxes. That denoted as ‘North box’ was installed at the Hereford end on an unknown date and replaced by another (with 26 levers) at an immediately adjacent site on 28 March 1915, as appearing on the diagram. ‘South box’ at the Gloucester end of the station dated from 1890 having also replaced an earlier structure. By 1904 it had 20 levers while reportedly the frame was increased to 48 levers in 1920 but without any record of major track alterations around this time, this seems to be a clerical error. Both boxes were fully interlocked in 1889 as advised to the Board of Trade. Nameplates reading ‘Ross North Box’ and ‘Ross South Box’ were ordered on 25 September 1894 and presumably affixed soon thereafter.

Layout and Signalling at Ross

even during the railway’s ‘golden years’. The fate of the four displaced employees is unrecorded but their futures were doubtless bound up in the seismic changes in work patterns later in 1914.

The working of trains at Ross must have been a most interesting exercise by virtue of the three single line routes that converged at the junction. Northward there was a single line section to the next station at Fawley and likewise southward to Micheldean Road (the Wye Valley line was also single). None of the signal boxes on these lines could be switched out of circuit so during the early years when there were signal boxes at either end of the site, the platform lines at Ross were effectively a short double track section. It is likely that absolute block working was in place between these two signal boxes at either end of the station located on the eastern side. These were replaced with effect from 11 November 1938 with a single signal box on the western side platform adjacent to the Wye Valley bay. (The pre1938 arrangement was akin to that in use today on the Severn Valley Railway at Bewdley where the North and South boxes control absolute block working on the main lines).

On the Grange Court-Hereford route, the more flexible electric train token working was installed on an unknown date while the Ross-Monmouth line retained electric train staff working. Fortunately, a Webb-Thompson train staff instrument from Ross was saved and is now at the Didcot Railway Centre.

Between 1880 and 1950, minor track alterations at Ross were instituted but the basic track layout remained with a double line through the station flanked by platforms. A dead end bay with run-round loop at the eastern end of the station served the needs of the Wye Valley Line which curved away southward to pursue a generally south-south-west course towards Monmouth.

Throughout most of its life, this route connected with the Grange Court-Hereford route by means of a double junction at Ross. A small, single road engine shed was located In the ‘V’ of the junction. Access to the shed was across a turntable that had been installed at least by 1879; its removal was authorised 24 November 1938 and apparently enacted the following year.

A traffic census undertaken by the GWR in June 1914 informs that the Grange Court-Hereford route was worked by electric train staff (Webb and Thompson instruments). In that year, there were 23 trains during ‘normal working hours’ and an additional ten occasional workings. The purpose of the census was to assess the feasibility of introducing the Economic System of Maintenance (ESM) on the line but it was concluded that this was impossible ‘owing to heavy traffic’.

Goods facilities were concentrated at the Hereford end of the site on the western side and remained largely unaltered for most of the station’s life, save for changes during the 1880s to improve access to the goods yard and to provide an end-loading facility. In 1934, one siding within the yard was shortened to allow for a new warehouse which on the track plan is referred to as ‘Store’. Also, the existing head shunt which paralleled the line to Hereford was substantially extended (the formation between Grange Court and Hereford had been built to allow for route doubling which of course never occurred). A pair of loop sidings were sited on the eastern side of the station with access from either end of the main running line. A third loop siding, referred to as ‘marshalling’ on the diagram was added circa 1904. Siding capacities together with the location of other features (weighbridge, yard crane, cattle pens) can also be identified from the official diagram above.

Concurrently, the suitability of ESM for the Wye Valley line was investigated which up until then had been worked by Train Staff and Ticket supplemented by Auxiliary Block Telegraph. Conversion to electric train staff would facilitate change to ESM at an estimated cost of £800 for installation of staff machines. Although this route is slightly incidental to this article, in due course introduction of ESM cost £263 and yielded a saving of four men and concomitant aggregate annual wages of £218. Based on the total cost of the conversion/ ESM project, the expenditure would be recovered within five years. This is informative in the context of the search for improved operational efficiency and cost reduction, 6

ISSUE 12 North and South boxes were replaced on 12 November 1938 by a single ‘Central’ box located at the Gloucester end on the platform which served Hereford-bound services and the Wye Valley bay. The new structure was christened ‘Ross Signal Box’ with nameplates (ordered on 4 January 1937) facing the ’main line’ and the ‘branch’. This box had 76 levers at 4” centres with VT 5-bar locking. It remained in use as a block post until 3 November 1964 and was retained, perhaps as a ground frame, until complete closure a year later.

Despite the official station name change to Ross-onWye, the signal box nameplates remained unaltered.

provides details of whistle codes for movements at the east end of the station relating to the locomotive shed area and the Monmouth line (but nothing regarding the goods yard/ sidings): Up Main line 1 whistle To/ from Monmouth Branch and Main line 2 whistles Engine from Shed to main Line 1 crow To/ from Monmouth Branch and Bay Line 3 whistles To run round Loop Line from Bay 1 crow and 2 whistles To and from Branch to Loop Line 2 short whistles On occasions, Ross must have been a noisy place!

Before 1938, working the goods yard was relatively straightforward as shunting movements were easily monitored from the North box. When a shunt required access to the other side of the station or onto the mainline, co-operation with South box would have been necessary. The new signal box diagram dating from 1938, shows the need for changes in the method of shunting supervision. A dedicated track circuit (R3T) indicated the approach of trains from Fawley but was of no help with shunting. This box was awkwardly placed to observe movements around the goods shed so shunting bells and telephones would have been provided to communicate with the signalman e.g. to request a point change. By the standard whistle code of three short sounds the driver could confirm that engine and wagons were ‘in clear’ i.e. the points could be restored/ reversed. The Sectional Appendix

Engine Shed and Locomotive Allocations The shed is believed to date from 1871 (according to information within the building) and survives as a garden centre café. The structure which has red sandstone walls and a slate roof, was internally measured as 91’ long and 20’ 3” wide and contained an 80’ 6” long inspection pit. Inside the shed an old coach body served as offices and store. For most of its life a sub to Hereford, it came under Gloucester’s control from January 1961 and was closed in October 1963.

Sample locomotive allocations from published sources are: 1921 - Nos. 536, 1062, 1422 and 1465. 1934 - Nos. 829, 1455 and 1509. 1947 - Nos. 1404, 1405, 2102 and 7420.

Right: The shed at Ross is one of two remaining railway buildings and has been repurposed as a garden shop and café.

Dating from 1871, the curve of the brickwork defines the form of the original broad-gauge entrance arch; one door is now missing.

Seen here in 1956, it has acquired ‘Limited Clearance’ warning boards and a grounded ‘Toad’ body, the latter’s purpose is unknown. In the foreground the line curves away towards Monmouth, while the Hawksworth-era auto coach used on Wye Valley services stands on what was previously termed an ‘Engine Shed Siding’. There is no sign of the coaling stage with hand crane mentioned in early records. Perhaps this had fallen into disrepair to be replaced by coaling direct from an adjacent wagon. There were no watering facilities at the shed as parachute type water tanks and columns were placed at both platform ends.

Local instructions in Appendix to No. 7 Section of the Service Timetables dated March 1941 (UFN) state:- ‘Engine Shed Road – Passenger vehicles must not be placed in the Engine Shed Siding at Ross-on-Wye as there is not sufficient room to admit these passing the Coal Stage’. A further local instruction stated ‘Long Coaching Stock including Trailers must not be placed in the Cattle Pens Siding from the north end, or on road through Goods Shed’. (At the opposite end of the former station site, the goods shed survives in commercial use. At one end, shuttering now covers the rail entrance on to which has been painted the mural of a GWR tank engine).

Neville Stead (NS 201028A).

7

WESTERN TIMES Looking from the end of the down platform; left for Grange Court and right for Monmouth with an 0-4-2T Class 14xx and auto-coach coupled behind, standing on the engine shed road (no offending coaling stage in evidence). Auto coaches were standard fare on the Wye Valley line although up to mid-1950s GWR diesel railcars were occasionally used. This view was taken on 27 December 1958, a few days before termination of Wye Valley line passenger services.

To provide some illumination around the area, oil lamps were used at various locations.

James Harrold (H458).

Above: Coloured station forecourt views are rare; this example dated circa 1962 depicts a busy interlude with a Bedford OB coach (Gloucestershire registration number JDG 4) which has delivered a party of scouts to the station after a camping trip probably in the Wye Valley. The troop’s flags are leaning against one of the poster boards. Also prominent is a black Morris Minor Traveller (Herefordshire Registration number RCJ 49) with a black van behind. Slightly out of shot to the left is an Austin K9 lorry, a type used

by British Railways for parcels services, with an unusual part canvas tilt. (Fuel for BR road vehicles was available from a pump near the goods shed). What price for those registration numbers nowadays?

The station building is looking rather dated; it has been painted at least once in WR chocolate and cream but looks due for a refresher. Whether this occurred is unknown although the re-painting cycle could be implemented without reference to future use as there were cases of stations being redecorated shortly before closure. Within the station building, a privately-run refreshment room traded as the ‘Coffee Pot’. The decorative ironwork was a J E Banks design feature, since copied at the new Kidderminster station.

(Other GWR stations featured decorative roof ironwork. One example was Teignmouth although the building was to a different architectural style).

Courtesy Neil Parkhouse.

8

ISSUE 12 Station Accommodation The original station building probably survived through to opening of the Wye Valley line but structural details are lacking. Typical of early station buildings, piecemeal extensions have been added as traffic grew and it possible that the initial structure may have been in red sandstone blocks conforming with the engine shed. A footbridge between the platforms was added in 1873 together with a Third-Class waiting room on the Grange Court-bound side. Later a new main building was opened on the down side, apparently on the site of the original; information on any changes to the other side are lacking.

The new building was to a contemporary albeit rather austere GWR brick and slate design by architect J E Banks, which was embelished with decorative ironwork.

Similar designs were provided at Winchester, Stourbridge Town and on a larger scale at Ealing Broadway. In the late 20th century, the new Kidderminster Town station built by the Severn Valley Railway followed the same outline as Ross. (Banks is also credited with the main building at Slough and was partly responsible for the stations at Torquay and Truro.) Public access to the station forecourt was from Ryefield Road.

Above: Taken from the side road, No. 1445 and trailer occupies the Monmouth bay. Apparently, the platforms at Ross were never officially numbered – unlike today where everything has a number! Great Western spear fencing is to the fore. James Harrold (H460).

Right: The Wye Valley service is standing in the bay platform which had been extended in 1896 meaning that the 1938 Central signal box had to be ‘built-in’.

Driver H Williams of Ross is in the driving compartment. Note that there was no position for an upper headlamp so it was placed immediately below the driver’s window. This vehicle was one of the last purpose-designed auto coaches built by the GWR (Diagram A34 Nos 1668-71 in April 1939). Viewed from the side, their compartment-style layout resembled a suburban brake third except for the driver’s door. They also worked on the Severn & Wye Joint line, the Lydney-Berkeley Road service, South Wales suburban services, and the Exe valley branch. The generous amount of van/ guard’s space made them ill-suited to high-density suburban work but useful on rural services. Also making up this train is a BR-built auto coach to the more traditional saloon-type layout coupled next to the locomotive. Locally, the Monmouth service was nicknamed ‘The Bullet’.

James Harrold (H461).

9

WESTERN TIMES Large Prairie No. 4161 is seen arriving from Gloucester on 25 May 1963. Compared with the connection from the main line, the condition of the Monmouth bay rails suggest recent use. The bay starting signal has its balance lever mounted part way up the post which was usual when located on a platform to prevent injury to passengers. Lack of a counterweight is explained by the short controlling wire as the photographer has his back against the signal box. The weight of the spectacle plate would automatically return the arm to ‘on’ in the event of the wire snapping.

Mark Warburton courtesy Mrs M Warburton.

No. 6349 awaits arrival of an approaching train and transfer of the single line token before it can proceed toward Grange Court in this undated view. The platform edge has been freshly whitewashed using an ‘L’ shaped brush for this purpose.

It is uncertain whether there were set-down and pick-up posts at Ross, otherwise all token exchanges were by hand. The Mogul was a Gloucester Horton Road engine from June 1962 until withdrawal on 10 August 1964. Courtesy Neil Parkhouse.

10

ISSUE 12 Traffic Patterns Studies of freight movements around Ross demonstrate how rail services were intertwined with the fabric of local agricultural activity and commerce. Tuesday was market day and to cater for this event the 8.15am freight which started from the Docks sidings at Gloucester and due to arrive at 9.57am could be delayed beyond its scheduled 11.50am departure if the Ross station master deemed necessary, subject to agreement with Control, presumably at Gloucester. A further local arrangement concerned freight working generally when a through goods load exceeded the line limit. Provision of an assisting engine coupled to the front between Hereford and Ross was authorised but on arrival at Ross would be uncoupled to be attached at the rear between there and Micheldean Road. (The maximum load depended upon train engine. For example, 364 tons was the gross load limit for a Red route engine).

Alternative timings were also permitted and are believed to have applied following cessation of passenger services.

Locally-orientated perishable traffic to/from stations on the Grange Court-Hereford route reflected the railways’ ‘common carrier’ obligation. A census conducted on an undisclosed date in the 1962/3 period revealed the diversity: Outward

Inward

Cases of milk samples [3]

Boxes of fish [39]

Boxes of plums [6]

Parcels of meat [3]

Crates of pigeons [13]

Carton of pigeon [1]

Parcel of fruit [1]

Carton of sausages [1]

Game (boxes or brace?) [3] Boxes of chicks [5]

An indication of the intensity of freight operations in 1954 was that a Ross-based locomotive (presumably 0-6-0T) was rostered for three hours of shunting Monday to Friday plus local freight train workings. The roster was:

Salmon [3] No other information is available (e.g. names of stations involved) but in an era before specialised road transport, it was the railway’s duty to handle such varied, timesensitive loads which was usually discharged with a high level of efficiency.

– Off shed at 7.00am to shunt yard at Ross.

– Work 8.45am freight to Lydbrook and return, shunting as required.

– Work 12.05pm freight to Monmouth and return.

– Shunt at Ross from 6.00pm until 7.30pm.

Above: No. 4161 awaits departure for Hereford on 25 May 1963. The platform canopies included wind breaks and there was a covered cycle store at the end of the down platform. On the other side the appearance of the roof gives the impression of it having been cut off although there is no evidence that the goods line to the rear of this platform was ever intended for passenger use. In the background can be seen the water tower; the purpose of the wooden shed is unknown. At the time, No. 4161 had been a Hereford engine for three weeks following transfer from Gloucester Horton Road. It moved to Worcester on 8 November 1964 from where it was withdrawn a year later and scrapped at Cashmore’s Newport in July 1966.

Mark Warburton courtesy Mrs M Warburton.

11

WESTERN TIMES

Above: An unidentified Collett 0-6-0 is drawing up with a short freight from Hereford. The area to the right had originally been a timber yard but in the closing years, the three sidings behind the up platform were often used for wagon storage although tank cars could sometimes be seen stabled and unloaded there. The concrete provender-type store was a standard GWR building mounted on stone supports to keep out vermin. The 1954 working timetable shows eight down passenger services and three freight trains Monday to Saturday with a matching frequency in the opposite direction. For that year’s summer timetable there was also a Sundays-only through passenger train, the 8.45 am Plymouth-Crewe with no scheduled stops other than to exchange the single line tokens. On a similar basis there was also a Crewe-Plymouth Sundays-only service. Another unusual working was the 4.01 am Crewe-Bristol parcels which operated Tuesday to Friday and was due to pass Ross at 9.15 am. This and the Sunday trains were the only scheduled non-stop runs over the line. On the Monmouth branch an average of nine passenger and two freight turns ran weekdays-only although some covered only part of that route.

Decline and Closure As noted above, withdrawal of services to Ross commenced in the pre-Beeching period with termination of passenger services over the Wye Valley route in January 1959 and freight services almost exactly five years later while reportedly, closure of the Grange Court-Hereford route had been under active consideration for some years. In November 1964, the Ross-Rotherwas Junction section closed completely and passenger services between Ross and Grange Court were withdrawn, leaving freight services to survive for another 12 months over the southern section. (Reference files and papers held at the Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, Chippenham – see bibliography). Locally, closure fears dated back to about 1956, consequential upon traffic censuses here and with other secondary BR(W) routes.

years 1961/2 confirmed continuing traffic decline at Ross and over the line as a whole:-

The census on the Gloucester-Hereford route 1956 for revealed 106,735 passenger journeys which equated 341 per day or 27 per train with six daily services each way, yielding £6,711 in direct revenue. These totals included an average of 21 staff journeys weekly. The

It was noted in the file that slightly more passengers were carried in 1963 compared with 1939. Specific reasons were undefined but the savage winter of 1962/3 saw railway services maintained while roads were impassable for quite long periods, as would be

1956

1961

1962

Total passenger journeys

106,735

48,117

44,454

Total revenue - £

6,711

13,511

13,205

Direct income/passenger - £

0.06

0.28

0.30

Total passenger journeys

n/a

14,783

13,218

Total revenue - £

n/a

8,432

8,393

Direct income/passenger - £

n/a

0.57

0.63

Year

Grange Court-Hereford:

To / From Ross:

12

ISSUE 12 recorded during the TUCC closure review. Passenger numbers handled at Ross slightly exceeded those of all the other stations combined.

by road alone could be more convenient and often delivered within a shorter elapsed time.

There was official speculation concerning a ‘goods concentration depot’ at Gloucester from where lorries would deliver and collect ‘smalls’ shipments thus allowing closure of goods facilities at rural stations in the area, including the Gloucester- Hereford route.

This idea and the alternative of retaining general goods facilities at Ross seem to have been run concurrently as BR was clearly keeping all options open. (The report also referred to another census when during the sample week [dates unrecorded], no perishable or livestock traffic passed through Ross. For interest only in the same week it was noted that of the other stations combined just two baskets of poultry were handled).

Parcels receipts in 1956 totalled £667 but either no figures were provided for more meaningful goods receipts or they have failed to survive. Aggregate figures for Ross probably suffered from a loss of interchange traffic with closure of the Wye Valley line.

Further, trading losses attributed to these services were estimated at £14,292 annually, almost three times the gross amount earned from ticket sales.

Retention of freight services on the southern section for a further year was apparently based on the hope that Ross might have a role as a concentration point.

There seems to have been a belief by BR(W) that freight previously deposited, for example, at Symonds Yat on the Wye Valley line for transit by rail would in future be delivered by the consignor to Ross (at his own expense) for onward movement. BR policy in this respect contrasted with that of the GWR whose road cartage services were fashioned to integrate closely with the rail network. In cases where goods had to be transported between points remote from railheads, the complete journey was conducted by railway-owned road vehicles such was the importance placed on relationship management to retain custom. Under the new regime, shippers soon recognised that freight

It was recognised that concentration of goods handling at specific locations, was only feasible for certain traffic categories, primarily ‘smalls’. It would be impossible to process what would now be classified as bulk traffic through a railhead distant from the customer.

In contrast Kerne Bridge on the Wye Valley line was conveniently placed to handle certain bulk cargoes. In 1956, 16,439 tons generated gross revenue of £50,910 ‘…which gives justification for the retention of facilities’.

This traffic was probably the rationale for maintenance of the Gloucester-Ross-Kerne Bridge-Ross-Gloucester freight service into the 1960s.

Up to 1959 this was the informative running in board and illuminating oil lamp – no whitewashed edging here! Nearby is evidence of the platform gardens now gone to seed. With the Wye Valley closure, the wording was soon altered to remove refence to the Monmouth connection. The sidings behind are still well populated.

James Harrold (H456).

13

WESTERN TIMES

ISSUE 12 Projected Savings – Personnel

1 x corridor brake second - saving of £131 1 x corridor brake composite - saving of £148 2 x corridor seconds - combined saving of £289 2 x non-corridor brake seconds - combined saving of £226

A contentious aspect of 1960s ‘rationalisation’ was swingeing personnel redundancies and those resulting from removal of passenger services at Ross comprised: Class 4 Clerk

Driver

Class 2 Relief Signalman

Fireman

Class 3 Signalmen [two]

Guard [two]

Alternative Diesel Power Thus far, there was no evidence that provision of diesel power was seriously considered. The methodology applied by BR to prove the viability of dieselisation has been questioned; for the Gloucester-Hereford route, the annual cost was estimated at £25,300. Against this figure BR admitted that closure would yield lost revenue of about £19,500. The calculation of these figures remained unchallenged at the public enquiry but perhaps to ward off penetrating enquiry, BR mentioned the possibility of lightweight diesel sets (presumably railbus types as then working the Kemble and Tetbury branches) but attributed an annual loss of £2,700 to this solution. This proposition was fallacious as railbuses suffered the most extreme limitations of fixed formation trains with virtually no flexibility to cope with ‘small’ and perishable traffic. Even if this option was operationally viable, associated infrastructural costs remained. (Note that £1 in 1960 equates approximately £29 in 2025).

Junior Porter

It is unclear whether the footplatemen and guards were based locally, or at Gloucester or Hereford.

Given the number of personnel deployed, the absence of a station master from the list is curious. Additional personnel savings would be possible at intermediate stations although the freight-only regime, required an extra porter at Ross. Total annual savings in staff wages were estimated at £7,441.

Savings – Mobile Fixed Assets The content of reports recommending route closures differed and, in this case, estimated annual savings in locomotive and rolling stock costs were provided, consequent upon passenger service withdrawal. Three locomotive types are referred to:

Infrastructural Expenses Additional to direct income and expenditure were overheads deriving from the need to maintain the route’s physical infrastructure. For the period 1962/ 3, these were estimated at £7,200, apparently for the whole route between Grange Court and Hereford.

2-6-2T Class 41xx – £389 0-6-0 Class 22xx – £348 2-6-0 Class 43xx – £427 Each had an estimated working life of 40 years which indicated an unamortised element with the more modern 2-6-2T and the 0-6-0. Closure recommendations claimed a combined annual engine mileage saving of 150,299, which considering the restricted service then extant does appear a somewhat high figure. Other classes observed on the line included ‘Grange’, ‘Manor’ and BR Standard Class 82xxx but presumably their infrequent appearances failed to justify inclusion in the ‘savings’.

However, the most significant challenge, revealed on 15 October 1963, was that 517-yard Fawley Tunnel between Ross and Ballingham required relining which BR costed at £85,000 (say £2.2 million in 2025 values).

It was advised that ‘this factor must be taken into consideration when freight services are investigated.’

Ironically, while surplus land was sold off, the obligation to maintain the tunnel stayed with BR Property Board and its successors. Despite the implication that essential repairs were imminent, it was 2010 before a contractor undertook the work. An access road had to be built to the tunnel and the entrance seal removed. The work was hazardous because of excessive methane gas due to years of accumulated bat droppings.

The numbers are even worse for carriage miles where a savings figure of 488,342 miles is quoted. This cannot be accepted as correct considering the limited number of services and length of the line.

The four types of vehicles concerned being:

Opposite Page Top: On 31 October 1964, the final Saturday of service, Shrewsbury-allocated No. 7801 Anthony Manor arrives from Hereford. It is passing the goods yard and part of the ladder crossing that led from the sidings to the up main. The engine is in the then usual work-stained condition while the dull maroon train (Hawksworth brake third leading) failed to enhance the overall appearance. No. 7801 remained a Shrewsbury-based engine until withdrawal on 18 July 1965. The long rodding run on the right hand side suggests that some lever pulls in the signal box required much effort. A maximum speed of 35mph for all trains applied on the line, with lower restrictions at stations. Apart from the local coaching stock restrictions, 8-coupled engines were prohibited from various sidings at Ross, while ‘Red route’ engines were restricted to 30 mph throughout.

The Transport Treasury (FW44-8).

Opposite Page Bottom: Shortly afterward, the same train awaits departure. The line closed two days later on 2 November, the Wye Valley bay on the opposite side having similarly suffered five years earlier. Closures were becoming all too frequent; Martin Firth in his website ‘Register of Closed Railways’ lists 102 route closures during 1964 of which 23 were on the Western Region. Three other photographers appear to be recording the scene at a station otherwise devoid of passengers. The same photographer recorded this and the previous image which meant he had time to traverse the length of the station. The train was probably on time or even early, as a shortage of custom helped punctual timekeeping.

The Transport Treasury (FW44-7).

15

A repeat view (for the best of intentions) from Western Times Issue 1 showing the Monmouth bay in September 1966, nearly a year since its last use.

Removal of assets has commenced:- the tops of the oil lamps; a ‘Passengers Must Cross the Line by the Bridge’ sign from the platform end; the running in board detached from its original position. However, the signal box still looks oddly complete with its back name board and ‘Private’ door sign in situ, fire buckets still ready for action, and no sign of broken glass. Just visible in the right distance, the corrugated iron shed used to store paraffin supplies is now redundant. Otherwise, all is quiet but soon demolition contractors would remove rails, signals, canopy supports and any salvageable metal. The buildings would follow, demolished without consideration for their history, and the railway at Ross consigned to memory.

Graham Smith.

WESTERN TIMES

16

ISSUE 12 Closure Proposal and Objections Decline in revenue combined with existing/ proposed bus services made inevitable the plan to remove passenger trains from 18 November 1963. Quite apart from BR’s accounting tactics in justification, the railway’s viability was burdened by the need to absorb all fixed and direct costs whereas a bus service’s obligation towards infrastructure cost was limited to payment of road fund tax. A possible compromise was considered in the form of ‘one engine in steam’ operation over the whole line, including the Wye Valley route with the intention of removing two signalman’s positions (locations undisclosed) which suggested financially a slim marginal saving. The Fawley tunnel situation was ignored – perhaps this was BR’s ‘ace in the hole’ Closure objections were lodged by the City of Gloucester College of Art and the Hereford and District Master Printers Association, plus 38 from private individuals.

Most focussed on the perceived inadequacy of the proposed replacement bus service as several school children travelled daily from Ross to Gloucester, and in fewer numbers to Hereford. Other objections related to concerns such as delivery of newspapers to the smaller stations, and the impracticality of carrying prams and pushchairs on buses. On the other hand, a local bus company announced improved services around Fawley.

the Ross populace in defining increased journey times by road, the inadequacy of both existing and proposed bus services, increased travel costs where road/ rail combinations were unavoidable, and the inability of a bus to convey larger personal items. Apparently, objections by others were generalised and unspecific.

The most extreme social hardship threatened the residents of Ballingham village for whom the railway was a lifeline as no bus operator was willing to offer a service due to the unsuitable nature of the local roads.

BR’s assessment stated that the line lacked a role as an alternative route for through passenger or freight services. This statement also appeared verbatim in supporting papers for closure of the Wye Valley line.

The comprehensive title for Dr Beeching’s mission was ‘Reshaping of Britain’s Railways’ which BR(W) aped in cloaking its intentions as the ‘Reshaping of Railways Gloucester-Hereford’.

The Transport Users Consultative Committee (TUCC) for the South West based at Bristol noted that several objections essentially duplicated the same issues which were reduced to 22 specific points. A public enquiry was convened and held at Hereford in early January 1964. Minutes of the proceedings are unavailable but one objector apparently commented that ‘closure would lead to depopulation of rural areas’. It was noted that no written or oral protest was lodged by Charles Loughlin, Labour MP for West Gloucestershire (1959-1974). In 1965 (the actual year of closure) he took up the first of three appointments as Parliamentary Secretary to different ministers.

Most objections were from individuals based at locations other than Ross and related to the inconvenience of road travel compared with rail. (Statistics for 1961 show that approximately one-third of households owned or had access to a car but there was no breakdown of how this varied between rural and urban areas.) One objector cogently reminded how in extreme wintry conditions, rail services continued when road transport failed.

Several of the objector’s letters are included within the files. That from a Mr K W Alford described in three closely typed pages the inconvenience resulting from withdrawn train services. He alleged that bus connections at Gloucester were awkward and that with road congestion in the city, bus/ train connections were unlikely to be assured. His message spoke for much of 17

Contemporary marketing. Two handbill-type notices perhaps supported by posters in similar style were attempts to encourage fresh traffic. This modest form of promotion was applied to other routes both under threat and destined to survive.

WESTERN TIMES The TUCC duly assessed the arguments for and against which included a letter dated 14 January 1964 from Sir Frederick Burrows, who was unable to attend in person. Sir Frederick was a native of Ross, a former local railwayman there, a past-president of the National Union of Railwayman (1942-45), and later a politician who was the last British Governor of Bengal (1946-47). According to his Wikipedia entry, “He had endeared himself to the Burrah Sahibs of Calcutta (Kolkata) with one of his first speeches when in alluding to his modest railway beginnings, he stated ‘when you gentlemen were huntin’ and shootin’, I was shuntin’ and hootin’. Sir Frederick’s submission, probably the most pointed and best informed, is quoted in part:

It was all to no avail as the TUCC concluded that most hardships could be alleviated by amending certain bus services. Recommendations were passed to Ernest Marples, Minister of Transport, who was no friend of the railways. The BR regions were required to contribute to the cost of their respective modernisation plans (which for the Western included diesel-hydraulics and blue Pullmans) partly through closure of loss-making routes and stations. Proof of savings by each region was a pre-requisite to availability of new investment funds from the BR Board and as noted above, passenger services ceased on 2 November 1964. Concurrent with complete closure north of Ross, stop blocks were erected supposedly at 132 miles 20 chains but this was short of the west end of the passing loop which would have made shunting difficult.

‘With reference to the possible closure of the passenger service, I forward my synopsis which may meet the demands of the British Railways.

In the first place, may I draw your attention to the figures of the numbers of passengers travelling on the line during the great freeze in the winter of 1962/63, when all road transport was at a standstill, and most people travelled by the British Railway. …. . On the question of hardship, bus travellers are badly hit: no comfort, no convenience for natures requirements, standing in the rain, the sky the only shelter…. .

There remained one daily goods from Gloucester to Ross and Lydbrook, departing at 6.10 am with 12.53 pm return. Immediate post passenger service plans included closing the line completely in advance of freight concentration. Trackwork due for removal and demolition/ retention of structure at Ross were detailed in a subsidiary schedule which remains untraced.

History shows that reduction to freight only operation often presaged total closure within a finite period, especially in the 1960s with the prevalent haemorrhaging of business to the road lobby. Total closure to Ross and the Wye Valley line followed in just under a year. The Divisional Manager at Bristol advised that the track formation was now for disposal but no details appear on file regarding contracts for demolition and material recovery.

‘The British Railways advertised their wonderful fast passenger service and every comfort: see ‘Railway News’. Does this only apply to certain areas? What about Ross to South Wales (Pullman), Ross to Birkenhead, Ross to Worcester and Birmingham and London? Ross is on the connecting line between two cities, Hereford and Gloucester.

BR continued to subsidise for some years what had been competing bus services. An undated note states, ‘£13,000 paid to Red & White (bus) Services as a ‘subvention’. There is no information on the period covered but presumably this arrangement commenced immediate upon passenger service withdrawal. Further payments were also noted for 1967/8 but there is no indication of how long this support continued. From 2 September 1968, there was also £312 paid to support a Hereford-Holme Lacey bus service. Another record notes payments totalling £963 to the Birmingham & Midland Metro Service for buses between Holme Lacey-Hereford and over other routes in the period July-December 1967. It is also known that BR had to subsidise coal merchants for road mileage incurred to reach more distant supply sources.

‘With reference to the £85,000 cost of relining Fawley Tunnel, this amount should be allocated to general maintenance (another objector to closure had said, without reference to source, that the relining of tunnel could be done cheaper by contractors). How has it been allowed to get into this condition since 3 October 1947, when Strangford Bridge (carrying the railway over the River Wye near Fawley) collapsed? I maintain these conditions were allowed to become retrograde during the economy drive in the year 1947.

‘If Ross-on-Wye loses its passenger service the town will lose its status and revert back to over a hundred years and will henceforth be known as a ‘place’ situated between the cities of Hereford and Gloucester, with the only means of transport by bus. Bus services do not connect with the railway service in these cities. Solution: to run twin diesel trains, Hereford to Gloucester, rail time 36 minutes, with rail connections at each end. Bring down rail fares in equal relation to bus service, and the number of passengers will increase.’

The subsidies for replacement services combined with BR’s opaque accounting methods which seemed to highlight negatives while skating over existing or potential positives leaves the impression that the case for closure might have been less persuasive than as presented. As with other closure proposals in the 1960s, ‘evidence’ relied on accounting processes mobilised toward the inevitability of service reduction.

18

ISSUE 12

Above: A scene of abject desolation as the station awaits its fate. All re-usable infrastructure has been removed and nature begins to take hold. Demolition of the station buildings began in early 1975, but the goods and engine sheds were to survive. Sean Bolan.

References

The fragmentary nature of information presented at the time and the sketchy documentation that has survived suggests that on the basis of financial information alone, the decision might have been more finely balanced than BR pretended. On the other hand, however passionate the sentiments, the counter arguments presented to the TUCC apart from those presented by well-informed and professionallyqualified Sir Frederick Burrows, appear amateurish and lacking in weight.

The history of Ross-on-Wye station is ably covered by the Great Western Journal Issues No. 2 (Spring 1992) and No. 50 (Spring 2004). Other sources are Ross, Monmouth and Pontypool Road Line by Stanley C Jenkins (Oakwood Press, 2002), Branch Lines around Ross-on-Wye by Vic Mitchell (Middleton Press, 2008) and useful detail may be found in GWR Goods Services, Goods Depots and their Operation by Tony Atkins (Wild Swan, 2009).

Closure of the Gloucester-Hereford route and the associated Wye Valley line had peripheral adverse effects. Symonds Yat and other stations had hosted Camp Coaches (‘Camping’ in BR terminology) and their removal saw termination of the railway’s effort to tap the area’s considerable tourist potential. Oakle Street on the South Wales main line closed on 2 November 1964 as did also Grange Court. A final thought concerning the latter, did any other station bear a name as evocative of Great Western motive power?

With grateful thanks also to the facilities at STEAM Swindon and the Wiltshire & Swindon History Centre, Chippenham. References for the latter archives are: • • • •

Editor’s Note: Further investigations into line and station closures are in preparation, for inclusion in future issues of Western Times.

• • 19

93 2515 Box 11321 KU3/21/2 79 GloucesterHereford.

94 2515 Box 11321 KU3/36/4 101 Ross-on-WyeMonmouth Troy.

304 2515 Box 11330 03096/131 GloucesterHereford Branch 02/02/1962 to 16/10/1964 Rosson-Wye. 555 2515 Box 11339 KU4/4128 572 GloucesterHereford.

590 2515 Box 11341 KU6160A Part 2 611 Gloucester-Hereford.

826 2515 Box 11354 None 08/1963 GloucesterHereford.

WESTERN TIMES

THOUGHTS ON ‘THE LONELY GIANT’ he first decade of the 20th Century was a fascinating target ‘inclusive’ (presumably average) speed of 40 T period in the steam locomotive epoch as Chief mph failed to be achieved, although a maximum of 50 Mechanical Engineers confronted market demand for mph was reached. heavier, more comfortable trains and reduced journey times, and thus the need for a quantum leap in tractive power. Without indulging in design comparisons and partisan debate, perhaps the judgement of the entertainingly iconoclastic engineer and author Prof W A Tuplin will suffice. He maintained that only one British railway company ever fully mastered the challenges presented by the four-cylinder 4-6-0.

Two comments on this exercise seem relevant. Driving wheels of 6’ 8½” diameter were incompatible with freight haulage. Also, the day-to-day feasibility of such lengthy trains threatened stowage limitations like those that impeded operational flexibility with 100 wagon loads hauled by 2-8-2 Class P1 on the East Coast Main Line. Nevertheless the test helped prove what was probably already obvious – that the locomotive could competently handle unassisted the heaviest passenger trains of around 400-430 tons.

The reasons behind Churchward’s attempted emulation of his wonderful Star Class through The Great Bear has fostered endless discussion to which little fresh can be added. However, some years ago when working as a commercial model builder in Gauge O and larger, a customer presented a pair of 7mm scale BR Class 9Fs in need of attention. No. 92220 (the Beauty) required minor attention while an accompanying Franco-Crosti boilered machine (the Beast) needed more extensive surgery. Work completed, the pair stood temporarily on the workshop’s cripples siding together with the author’s GWR No. 111. It was immediately striking how the 2-10-0s, usually regarded as ‘large locomotives’, were dwarfed by Churchward’s ‘Lonely Giant’. On its introduction in February 1908, the impact upon those of a traditionalist mindset must have been stunning.

Only one fully recorded log of a journey with No. 111 has apparently survived (published by OS Nock in one of his works) and paucity of published reports probably added fuel to the speculation that the locomotive was a design failure. However in his self-published work The Great Bear – Britain’s First Pacific Locomotive, Charles Fryer provides some helpful anecdotal evidence. (Fryer is a name possibly unfamiliar to English enthusiasts but he is regarded as a reliable authority; for many years he was the organist at the Protestant Cathedral in Cork, Ireland – hence his nickname ‘the Holy Fryer’).

He noted that on one occasion, No. 111 with a load of 200 tons had arrived one minute down against a two-hour booked schedule Paddington-Bristol via Badminton which on a journey bereft of any signal checks was unimpressive. On the other hand, another working of this train when loaded to 400 tons was completed in three minutes under schedule. Both journeys were noted by W J Scott who also reported a comment by an Inspector that it was general practice to work under ‘easy steam’ to avoid over-heating the trailing truck axle bearings.

Unfortunately, little was published to confirm or deny that this impressive size could consistently translate into road performance. It is believed that an early intention had been employment in a mixed traffic capacity. To this end one Sunday morning in 1909 it was subjected to a test run eastward from Stoke Gifford yard with a specially assembled train of 100 wagons that yielded a gross load in excess of 1000 tons. Specific journey details are unavailable but the

The Great Bear as built prior to replacement of original superheater with the No. 3 type. Awkwardly located front foot step in situ.

20

ISSUE 12 By extension, it could therefore be construed that underwhelming performance had an aesthetic cause i.e. installation of outside bearings would have solved the problem while concurrently destroying the ‘open wheel’ symmetry of the whole ensemble. When the locomotive underwent modification at the works (installation of No.3 superheater in substitution for the original No.1 type), failure to ignore stylist constraints and seize the opportunity to cure this Achilles’ heel was regrettable.

monotonous journey with its undemanding schedule continued. After Didcot, boiler pressure which thus far had hovered around 200 psi rose gradually to blowing off point where it held. On being questioned whether his firing technique was normal, the fireman replied that the boiler had just been washed out, the coal was excellent quality, and he wanted to see if this method [of which the driver apparently disapproved] would work. The observer alighted at Bath (reached one minute early) and beyond the fireman’s preparations in the London area, Harrison speculated that the fire would see the train through to Bristol without further attention.

Prevailing fashion had another effect with an earlier modelling experience before completion of No. 111.

An Irish friend commissioned a scratchbuilt model of square-framed 4-4-0 No. 3804 County Dublin and an ill-judged remark that this engine had once run with No. 111’s tender invoked an unplanned amendment to the order. Model building often induces mental assessment of the original design logic and the importance of ensuring that the tender visually ‘complemented’ the engine seemed an exercise in futility without worthwhile benefit. The open eight-wheel bogie style, reminiscent of the LSWR ‘water cart’, was operationally pointless and enforced placement of the pick-up gear equidistantly between the bogies. The cheapskate insertion of the filler hatch in the dome amid the coal space inevitably converted futility into a costly compensation exercise through a combination of an insecurely closed hatch, probably over two thousand gallons of water gathered from a trough, and the fragility of the end-gangway door in the leading coach. The tender seems to have been there ‘for show and not for blow’.

This episode suggests that perhaps Churchward felt that he had learned all that was necessary concerning four-cylinder six-coupled mechanics and that his interest in the pacific stemmed from continuing exploration of boiler capacities and combustion factors. Certainly, this abiding fascination was evident in his personal supervision of the Brotan-boilered 0-4-0T Siemens on his ‘home trainer’ at Swindon (refer to Western Times Issue No. 10).

No. 111’s lacklustre reputation highlights the impressive success of Churchward’s other initiatives, helped in part by his freedom from the millstone of parochialism that condemned enlargement exercises elsewhere to chequered results. Churchward’s focus on overseas developments did him proud but ironically much of the enlargement ‘know-how’ already existed in the UK, among the commercial locomotive manufacturing community. This is exemplified by the exploits of David A Hendrie who is regarded by many as the father of the large British steam locomotive.

Fryer’s book contains an account by E K Harrison of an evidently illicit night-time footplate journey (hence names and date were never disclosed) which revealed something of No. 111’s boiler potential. The fire had been carefully built up before leaving Old Oak Common and while reversing to Paddington, the fireman continually loosened the glowing coal with the long fire iron to maintain the draft before the blast made this unnecessary. He also built a small stack of large lumps of coal adjacent to the firedoor which further reduced the limited available space on the confined footplate.

Hendrie was the gifted Chief Draughtsman for the Highland Railway who designed Britain’s first 4-6-0, the celebrated ‘Jones Goods’. Such was the faith in the Inverness team that the HR’s directors approved acquisition of 15 of this design in a single order from Sharp Stewart in 1894. Significantly, in the period 188993 Hendrie had worked for Sharp Stewart and then Dübs, two manufacturers experienced in building large engines for overseas markets. Despite this success, he was passed over for promotion in favour of a less able colleague following Jones’s premature retirement through ill health.

After leaving Paddington and about three miles out, the driver set the regulator at three-quarters open and shortened the cut-off to that which he thought acceptable, but did nothing else beyond watching the road ahead for the next forty miles. Meanwhile the fireman had added coal to the back of the firebox until it had reached the back of the deflector plate which he removed with his shovel and placed in the tender coal space. He then fed the large coal lumps one by one through the firehole, and added more coal to every part of the firebox he could reach. He then closed the firebox door almost completely, sprayed the tender coal and footplate with hot water to clear away the dust, and washed his face and hands as if going off duty. He then took up post on the left hand side to watch for signals.

In due course, Hendrie became Locomotive Superintendent of Natal Government Railways and occupied a similar position with the newly formed South African Railways in 1912. To reinvigorate the NGR fleet, in 1903 he designed and then ordered straight from the drawing board fifty examples of the NGR 4-8-0 Class B (later SAR Class 1) for passenger and freight work between Pretoria and Pietermaritzburg. Viewed against conservative contemporary UK practice, this exercise might have been regarded as dangerously courageous; the last member of SAR Class 1 was withdrawn in 1975. It is unknown whether Hendrie and Churchward ever met but if they had, they could well have seen eye-to-eye.

Water was taken on Goring troughs and the fireman then replaced the now cool deflector plate, and so the 21

WESTERN TIMES Sketch drawings of The Great Bear showing leading dimensions of the locomotive and boiler, and the section form of the firebox.

22

ISSUE 12

TENDER FIRST LONDON APPROACHES FROM THE ARCHIVES OF R C RILEY s noted in the earlier article in Issue 11 ‘Tender First Train reporting numbers (TRN) mounted on smokebox A in the Provinces’, the best opportunities to observe doors were a useful means of identifying the service tender-first large locomotive haulage of substantial being hauled. These numbers were affixed/ removed loads were between Newton Abbot and Torbay. For a fundamentally similar reason (i.e. minimisation of traffic congestion), the practice was common with empty stock movements over the crowded Old Oak Common-Paddington stretch, in addition to many light engine movements.

at Old Oak Common so the TRN of a locomotive reversing towards the terminus, light engine or hauling empty stock identified its next revenue-earning task.

Conversely, an engine departing in reverse from the station towards the shed carried the evidence of its last mainline journey.

Above: Bereft of a Train Reporting Number (TRN), Reading-allocated Churchward Class 43xx 2-6-0 No. 5368 was reversing away from Old Oak Common shed yard on Sunday, 13 March 1955 by way of the Overbridge line. The engine is presumably due to collect a down freight train, judging by the lamp code. Built in June 1919, it was renumbered 8368 in February 1928, before reverting to its original guise in June 1944. Outside steam pipes were fitted in May 1946 and withdrawal came at the end of September in 1958. Its respectably clean black livery suggests a recent works visit and heavy overhaul, probably its last such treatment.

(RCR 5678).

23

WESTERN TIMES

On Monday, 20 August 1956 No. 5087 Tintern Abbey is hauling the empty stock of an earlier up arrival toward its long-term home (Old Oak Common), to be deposited at the nearby carriage sidings. No. 5087 carries TRN 711 which provides a small mystery as this denoted the Tuesday to Saturday 3.55 am Fishguard Harbour-Paddington or the Sunday only 4.25 am Fishguard-Paddington. This apparent discrepancy reminds that train designations or their related records could be inaccurate.

(RCR 5786B).

Later the same day, Swindon shed’s No. 6850 Cleeve Grange is also recorded hauling empty stock at Old Oak Common East. Research suggests the tender is No. 2259, one of the Collett 3500g design to Dia. A118, of which 27 were constructed in 1929/30. This example features the shorter spring shackles and interestingly still bears evidence of the final G (Crest) W livery beneath the layers of grime.

(RCR 5788).

24

ISSUE 12

Above: Generally speaking, Kings and Castles in the 1950s were maintained in tidy condition but Gloucester’s No. 7035 Ogmore Castle which was backing into Paddington on Saturday 27 August 1955 looked decidedly unkempt, exacerbated by what seems to have been a sloppy boiler washout. This locomotive had received a Heavy General repair at Swindon a year earlier, and a Light Casual the previous February. Hopefully its appearance was improved at the next Light Casual, which was conducted a month after the date of this image.

The identity of its next express passenger duty is unknown as despite carrying a TRN bracket, number plates have yet to be inserted.

Ogmore Castle was a nomadic label, previously associated with Nos. 5006 (allocated but not carried)/ 5056/ 5080/ 7007.

(RCR 6602).

Below: Saturday 12 October 1957 saw a much more presentable No. 5029 Nunney Castle at Old Oak Common East, on route from its home shed to Paddington station. The route indicator below the shunt signal confirms passage via the Overbridge line. (RCR 11318).

25

WESTERN TIMES Left: It is Saturday 10 September 1955 and judging by TRN 505 still adorning its smokebox front, No. 6022 King Edward III (then recently transferred to OOC from Laira) was reversing homeward having worked the 8.00am Saturdays only Kingswear - Paddington express.

Behind the King, empty stock is being moved into the terminus.

To the left of the tender is a bowended Diagram E128 Collett Brake Composite and then a flat-ended Diagram C67 All Third while to the right, a Hawksworth vehicle is just visible. Roof boards appear to read ‘PADDINGTON BIRMINGHAM AND WOLVERHAMPTON’.

(RCR 6672).

Below: Laira’s No. 6029 King Edward VIII was caught in profile at Old Oak Common East, reversing towards the depot, its duties having been completed on Saturday 7 September 1957. This locomotive had received a four-row superheater and the more modern form of outside steam pipe (fitted to the class from 1953 onward), but still retained its single chimney which was displaced in favour of the double variety the following December. This was one of four whose mechanical lubricator was initially fitted behind the outside steam pipe where it impeded access to the motion.

It was later relocated forward of the steam pipe. Presumably the right hand nameplate was restored during the next scheduled works visit.

(RCR 11202).

26

ISSUE 12

Above: With Kensal Green gasworks in the background, 2-6-2T No. 6141 (OOC) is about to cross the overbridge with empty stock bound for Paddington. Concurrently, No. 5037 Monmouth Castle (a Worcester-allocated engine) was approaching Old Oak Common East with the stock of an earlier Up service. The date is Saturday 19 October 1957 and the composition of the Up train reflects the growing encroachment of the BR Mark 1 passenger coach. However, the third vehicle is a Collett Diagram H40 Third Diner of which ten examples were built 1931/ 2 (on magnification this example appears to be No. 9627). This series was originally paired with a like number of Diagram H39 First Diners which included kitchen facilities. Here, it is paired with a Mark 1 First Restaurant Car with similar facilities to the erstwhile H39. These handsome Collett vehicles were taken out of service in 1961/ 2.

A Collett Bow-ended Brake Third is immediately behind the Castle’s smokebox. Although, a distinctive and familiar coaching style, there was significant variety among the bow-enders. Brake Thirds with vestibules (of all generations) usually had their corridors set on the left-hand side, looking forward from the van end but a few had right-side corridors, as in this case. The angle makes it hard to be certain but it appears to be a Diagram D104 [body 58’ 4.5” x 9’ 0”; four compartments; one toilet; grab and commode handles inset into the body sides]. The guard’s door is flush with the body whereas the 3’ longer Diagram D107 had flush doors except those for the guard were recessed.

The character of the remaining coaches is definitely eclectic with two ex-LMS Period III coaches, a Collett flat-ended Brake Composite, three more ex-LMS coaches, what seems to be an ex-GWR large-window brake coach. This rake was probably engaged in services to Birmingham or further north which reflected the variety of profiles and waists so typical of the 1950s, in contrast with standardised later 20th Century conformity.

(RCR 11354).

Below: In murky conditions on 1 December 1957, No. 5974 Wallsworth Hall (Westbury) trailed the empty stock of what appears to have been an Up semi-fast service at Old Oak Common East. Although not specifically identified in the accompanying note, the ensemble was led by an 0-6-0PT Class 94xx which was a favourite for such duties.

(RCR 11419).

27

WESTERN TIMES

THE PANNIER STORY PART 4 - PRE-GROUPING SWINDON BUILT LOCOMOTIVES onstruction of the larger 0-6-0STs stretched through gauge conversion as indeed became necessary from C thirty-one years commencing in 1870 and 546 1876 onward. The first major stage in conversion to examples were delivered in what evolved into five distinct narrow gauge had been completed by 1869 and 7’ ¼” classes. Two were fitted with double frames, the first of which was firmly within contemporary Swindon design policy while the second derived from an experimental initiative that explored the potential for standardisation across different wheel arrangements. The remaining three classes defined the basic format for 0-6-0T design that lasted until cessation of steam construction in 1956.

gauge rails had been reduced to the London-Bristol route to facilitate West Country traffic plus three branch lines.

Then in 1876, the network was expanded at a stroke by 287 miles of pure broad gauge plus 127 miles of mixed gauge through the Associated Companies Agreement whereby the GWR absorbed the Bristol & Exeter and South Devon railways. The prevailing uncertainty over the date by which the broad gauge could be totally eliminated thus influenced Swindon’s motive power planning.

Ostensibly, Swindon lagged behind Wolverhampton in retention of outside frames. Class 1016 built 1867-71 had been the last 0-6-0T type with this feature to emerge from Stafford Road whereas the main works continued to produce this form during the years 1870-81 (Class 1076), and then 1886/ 7 (Class 1661).

The building programme resulted on average in numerically larger classes than had been the practice at Wolverhampton but there remained variety in boiler types, cabs, bunkers plus buffers, chimneys, injectors, toolboxes etc. The incursion of the pannier tank into the ranks of 0-6-0STs was extensive but in the tradition of those times, its adoption was only total in one case:

The earlier Swindon type was in part driven by uncertainty concerning how long the Broad Gauge network would remain. Provision of double frames would facilitate

Pannier Tanks: Number in Class Number Fitted Years Fitted

Class

Built

1076 §

1870-81

266

253

1813

1882-4

40

39

Withdrawn: First

Last

Career Averages (Years)

1911 > 1928

1903

1946

54

1903 > 1927

1928

1949

52

1661

1886/7

40

31

1911 > 1926

1911

1934

40

1854

1890-5

120

119

1905 > 1932

1928

1951

52

2721

1897-1901

80

80

1904 > 1933

1945

1950

48

§ Combination of Class 1076 (introduced 1870), Class 727 (introduced 1872) and Class 1134 (introduced 1874).

28

ISSUE 12 Wolverhampton’s production of 0-6-0ST/PTs accounted for 549 locomotives of which 40% were the ‘large’ type, 57% were the ‘small’, and 3% were rebuilt 0-6-0s that size-wise equated the ‘large’ variety. All of Swindon’s pre-Grouping production had driving wheels of 4’ 6” diameter or greater and they tended to be more widely distributed across the whole network.

within its peer group in maintaining a fleet where tender locomotives were in the minority:

The significance of the 0-6-0ST/PT type for the Great Western is illustrated by comparison with other preGrouping companies whose fleets contained a majority of tank locomotives. This was typical where shorter distance passenger services predominated as with the London Brighton & South Coast and London Tilbury & Southend railways, or where large mineral tonnages were worked over comparatively short distances e.g.

South Wales. During the 30 years from the ending of the Broad Gauge, the GWR continued to be unique

Date

31-Dec-92

31-Dec-21

Tender

848

1405

Tank (except 0-6-0T)

359

644

0-6-0T

842

1099

Total

2049

3148

0-6-0T as % total

41

35

It followed that compared with other systems, a greater proportion of medium/ longer distance goods and passenger services were handled by locomotives described in this instalment plus the larger 0-6-0Ts built at Wolverhampton.

Class 1076 ‘Buffalos’ The first narrow gauge 0-6-0Ts built at Swindon initially took three different forms and were individually classified: Introduced Lot No.

Class

Running Nos. Distinguishing Features

May 1870

22

1076

1076-81 §

Side tanks; frame length 5’ 2” behind trailing axle

Oct 1872

30

727

727-56

Short saddle tank; smokebox exposed; frame length at rear 6’ 0”

May 1874

37

727

947-66

As for Lot No. 30

Nov 1874

39

1134

1134-53

Saddle tank full length; frame length at rear 6’ 9”

§ Numbered 1172-7 when ordered but re-designated during year of construction.

The chronological sequence of these Lots and the design alternatives exhibited by each were significant. William Dean had moved from Wolverhampton to Swindon in 1868 (when aged 28 years) to become Chief Assistant to Joseph Armstrong. Although the degree of latitude extended to him by over-worked Joseph is unclear, it was quite usual for design initiatives to emanate from trusted senior assistants and it is speculated that these differing formats were early manifestations of Dean’s innovative and exploratory endeavours.

springs were substituted on the centre and trailing axles apparently in a style similar to that employed later on other types, including 0-6-0ST Class 1661. Evidently little urgency was attached to rebuilding this small group; the revised spring arrangements might have been applied mostly around 1886-94 while No. 1077 was the last to be converted to a saddle tank in 1902.

All three variants shared the frame design that had been proven with the ‘Armstrong’ or ‘Standard’ 0-6-0 Goods and in that respect resembled Wolverhampton’s Class 1016, except for a slight change in the profile ahead of the cab footsteps. The springs were carried in characteristic fashion above the running plate and with the six locomotives of the 1076 series, those for the centre and trailing axles were housed within enclosed recesses in the tank sides. This exemplified the perennial competition for space with the side tank configuration and the attraction of mounting facilities for water storage over or on, rather than beside, the boiler. At a later stage (precise date unverified), underslung outside

Above: No. 1232 of Lot 43 was built with an S3 boiler in November 1876 and acquired an S2 type at its first change of boiler type in September 1890, as shown here. Coal capacity has been augmented by installation of bunker coal rails but otherwise the condition seems to be as built.

Opposite Page Left: This line drawing of No. 1076, the first locomotive of a group that eventually formed part of the 266-strong ‘Buffalo’ family, demonstrates the access problems imposed by side tanks. The leading leaf springs and splashers were significant obstacles to accessibility while the leaf springs for the other two axles were inconveniently encased in compartments within the tanks.

29

WESTERN TIMES

Above: Built in December 1878, No. 1565 ran the gamut of boiler changes (S3 as built; S4-April 1902; S2/3-July 1905; S4-October 1908) before acquiring a B4 Belpaire boiler and pannier tanks during a workshop visit between November 1920 and January 1921.

It has also received a modern-style bunker but the half-cab remains and probably did so until withdrawal in December 1938. No details are recorded but the ‘busby’ spark arrester strongly suggests that the location is Didcot – note the Class 2021 (left) and what appears to be an unnamed Bulldog (right) in the background, plus the lighting-up kindling in the foreground. Didcot shed had a penchant for veterans in its allocation.

Nos. 727-56 of Lot No. 30 were built with saddle tanks assembled in five sections but with the leading face in line with the rear of the smokebox, extending back to the spectacle plate. Nos. 947-66 were identical except for a slight deepening of the frames the better to accommodate the spring hanger brackets, a feature that became standard. Despite the work that these engines would typically undertake, the water capacity was quite modest. Sources vary but the median appears to have been 860 gallons. Coal capacity was naturally constrained by the shorter frames at the rear end on the 727 series and the preceding side tank version. Both variants later officially formed part of Class 1134 but retained their rear-end frame dimensions. The shorter saddle tanks stayed for some time before replacement with the full length version at unrecorded dates.

although there appears to be no clear confirmation that this type, which also included a variety of internal dimensions, was actually used. The first round of boiler renewals around 15-20 years later saw utilisation of the customary variety of styles drawn from the pool.

Summary of the lots and running numbers for the complete Buffalo family: Running Nos. Works Nos.

Fifty-six locomotives were therefore in service when deliveries commenced of Class 1134. Engines of this batch were specifically nicknamed ‘Buffalos’ after the name carried by the first locomotive until 1914. This series featured full-length saddle tanks from new.

Despite the early examples taking three different forms regarding frames and tanks, the complete contingent of 266 locomotives reputedly entered service with Type S3 boilers (three-ring barrel, flush-topped firebox), and embracing the inevitable internal dimensional variations between batches. However, it is possible that some of the earliest boilers were constructed from 1872 onward at Wolverhampton, thus designated W3, 30

Lot Nos.

Built

1076-1081

245-250

22

1870

727-756

402-431

30

1872-3

947-956

523-542

37

1874

1134-1153

563-582

39

1874-5

1166-1185

603-622

40

1875

1228-1247

663-682

43

1876-7

1248-1267

683-702

44

1877

1268-1297

703-732

45

1877-8

1561-1580

754-773

48

1878-9

1581-1600

774-793

49

1879

1601-1620

794-813

50

1879-80

1621-1640

824-843

52

1880

1641-1660

846-865

55

1880-1

ISSUE 12 As the initial 56 locomotives progressively came into line with the remainder, the whole was considered a single type known Class 1076 after the first example, and generically as the ‘Buffalos’. Their significance can be measured by the pause in 0-6-0 tender locomotive construction during this period. Delivery of the closely related Standard or Armstrong Goods ceased in late 1876 and in the interval until introduction of the Dean Goods in 1883, no further 0-6-0s were built. During that window, the Buffalos were thus employed as an important main line freight engine. The intricacies of their use on these and other duties will be considered in a fleet-wide review in a later instalment but the particular history of fifty require description at this stage.

and the exercise was completed in March 1893. The process was relatively straightforward but the elapsed time involved, even with a flexible and popular design, demonstrates the complexity of gauge conversion and its immediate aftermath. The convertible interlude in summary: – Nos. 1228-37 were built in broad gauge form in October-December 1876, and Nos. 1561-5 in November/ December 1878; conversion to narrow gauge was accomplished between April 1892 and March 1893.

– Nos. 1238-57 were converted to broad gauge between February 1877 and October 1888; they reverted to narrow gauge between September 1891 and February 1893.

– Nos. 1566-80 were converted to broad gauge between May and December 1884; they reverted to narrow gauge between May 1892 and March 1893.

Convertible Programme The Buffalos enjoyed a wide measure of utility, expanded by the use of some on the Broad Gauge during the ‘convertible’ period. Fifteen were built new to 7’ ¼” gauge in 1876/ 8 and 35 that had seen narrow gauge service were converted between March 1884 and October 1888. Conversion/ reversion to narrow gauge commenced in September 1891 with No. 1241

Boiler Diversity Lot No. 39 led by No. 1134 saw settlement of the question of frame design, complemented by installation of fulllength saddle tanks. Universal installation of S3 boilers promised a high degree of standardisation with the 210

Above: An early Dick Riley view of Buffalo No. 1620 employed as a works shunter at Swindon on 6 March 1938. Built in April 1880, this locomotive had a less varied boiler history, acquiring an S4 Type in March 1903 followed by B4 and pannier tanks in November 1917. A modern bunker has been fitted plus a fully enclosed cab which must have been welcome on duties that included standing around in all weathers. The personnel are noteworthy – the shunter and his mate aboard the ‘gig’, the youthful fireman and above all the driver who judging by his bushy white moustache was a man of long experience. This locomotive was officially withdrawn from normal service four months before the date of this photograph. Engine and driver were gainfully working out their careers.

R C Riley (RCR 233).

31

WESTERN TIMES locomotives that followed thereby promising the usual associated advantages. However, this discipline broke down with re-cycling of boilers from within the pool.

On average, the S3 type was carried by this group of 210 locomotives for 18.5 years before diversity was imposed through boiler rotation: Boiler Type

Description

S3 (as built)

Swindon centre dome, flush firebox

S2

Swindon front dome, flush firebox

S2/ 3

Swindon centre dome, flush firebox

S4

Swindon back dome, flush firebox

R3 W3

Installation of pannier tanks commenced in 1911 and by end-1914 the programme was well under way. In the table set out below, where no Belpaire date appears the change in firebox form coincided with first installation of pannier tanks. However, in nineteen cases, pannier tanks preceded Belpaire fireboxes by a significant interval and in one case *(No. 1290), a round-topped boiler remained in situ until withdrawal despite pannier tanks having been installed nearly 20 years earlier. The pace of pannier tank installation had thus overtaken that of round-topped firebox redundancy.

Loco Number

Panniers Fitted

Belpaire Fitted

Loco Number

Panniers Fitted

Wolverhampton centre dome, raised firebox

736

Dec-12

Mar-17

1567

Dec-14

Wolverhampton centre dome, flush firebox

740

Oct-14

1570

Nov-12

Nov-25

749

Sep-12

1572

Apr-14

Dec-20

752

Dec-14

Apr-22

1573

May-13

Nov-17

756

Aug-12

Apr-17

1575

Aug-11

950

Dec-12

1576

Oct-11

965

Jan-14

1584

Aug-12

1587

Dec-14

1592

Jun-11

Aug-15

1595

Oct-11

Feb-21

Installation of Pannier Tanks Detailing boiler and tank changes with such a numerically large class would generate a morass of numbers and dates but identification of some trends is probably more informative. All but the following class members eventually acquired pannier tanks:

1079

Sep-13

1134

May-14

1135

Oct-14

Feb-21

Belpaire Fitted

Loco Number

Built

Withdrawn

1137

Feb-14

729

Nov-72

Nov-10

1139

Feb-13

742

Feb-73

Mar-19

1140

Aug-11

1606

Oct-11

Dec-17

Aug-11

1621

Jan-11

Jul-19

1623

Jun-13

Feb-24

1626

Jun-12

Jul-16

1627

Mar-13

1628

Apr-14

1631

Dec-13

1632

Nov-13

1635

Aug-11

747

Mar-73

Mar-11

1142

754

Apr-73

Jul-11

1143

Mar-14

948

May-74

Mar-15

1144

Dec-14

1150

Feb-75

Oct-28

1167

Jan-13

1184

Dec-75

Oct-03

1173

Oct-14

1277

Oct-77

Jun-11

1581

Apr-79

Jul-29

1591

Jul-79

Aug-22

1594

Aug-79

Jun-30

1612

Oct-97

Dec-28

1618

Apr-80

May-29

The argument in favour of pannier tanks was largely based on the marriage of inconvenience between the angular profile of the Belpaire boiler and the inner face of the saddle tank. The pooling of roundtopped boilers must have extended workshop times when, following a change in type, there was difficulty in locating a suitable saddle tank compatible with a differently located dome. Later adoption of pannier tanks enhanced practicality i.e. the same tanks could be fitted regardless of the dome’s location, and also of the firebox profile.

32

May-27

Feb-25

1602

Feb-14

1605

May-14

1175

Sep-11

1180

May-11

1189

May-11

1230

Aug-14

1636

Oct-14

1242

Apr-13

1637

Aug-13

1243

Feb-13

1639

Jun-14

1247

Mar-14

1641

Mar-13

1252

Apr-11

1643

Feb-14

Aug-15 Jun-20

Apr-24

1253

Jun-13

1647

Mar-14

1268

Feb-14

1648

Nov-13

1279

Nov-13

1651

Dec-11

1281

Mar-13

1655

May-13

1290

Apr-13

1656

Jun-14

1297

Feb-14

1658

Dec-14

1566

Feb-13

1660

Oct-14

*

Jan-22

ISSUE 12 Below: The appearance of No. 1600 closely resembles the engine in the previous image on page 31, but differs in having rectangular front spectacle plates. This locomotive was fitted with a B4 boiler and pannier tanks in August-October 1924, and was withdrawn in December 1936. Regarding the front spectacle plates (those to the rear were the conventional round type), this is an example of a detail variation among the fleet for which there appears to be no formal record beyond photographic evidence. No. 738 was another class member that definitely acquired this unusual cab style.

There was a poignant postscript to the Buffalos in British Railways days, ironically at a time when exGWR management recognised obligations towards heritage by ensuring that ‘Dean Goods’ 0-6-0 No. 2516 and Churchward 4-6-0 No. 4003 Lode Star were saved for preservation, in addition to the restoration of 4-4-0 No. 3440 City of Truro to operating condition.

These efforts formed the keystone of the fleet that has survived for the benefit of future generations. Pleas on behalf of two other icons sadly fell on deaf ears.

The gap left by the scrapping of No. 2920 Saint David was gloriously remedied many years later, while that in respect of the ‘Buffalos’ remains unresolved.

Class 1076 withdrawals commenced in October 1903 and in April 1946, Nos. 1287, 1585 and 1624 were taken out of normal service as the last survivors.

However, No. 1287 worked on as a stationary boiler at Newbury and Leamington before scrapping in October 1953 – a service life of over 75 years. Calls for its preservation went unheeded, notwithstanding its importance as the last surviving ex-GWR outsideframed 0-6-0 tender or tank type. Its significance was enhanced by the scarcity of surviving outside-framed six-coupled locomotives anywhere. Perhaps one day a pre-pannier version of this important Swindon design will be replicated!

Above: This diagram displays the combination of smaller shallow pannier tanks, B4 boiler and half cab. The superimposed dotted line traces the side profile of cab and bunker on No. 1287, the last surviving ‘Buffalo’ class member.

33

WESTERN TIMES Class 1813 Introduction of this class in 1882 marked a significant change in Swindon’s construction policy. Having succeeded Joseph Armstrong four years earlier, Dean had been reportedly in two minds about the advantages and continued viability of double frames before construction of this class commenced. It seems likely that several factors influenced his choice of the simpler single inside frame structure. Dean’s experience was arguably the most widely-based of all the GWR’s Locomotive Superintendents/CMEs suggesting significant interdisciplinary appreciation of relevant factors beyond the traditional parameters of workshop practice.

boiler was replaced in March 1904 by the first Type B4 Belpaire type to be fitted to the class which this engine retained until withdrawal in October 1932.

The broad pattern of boiler evolution was S0 > S4 > B4 although there were cases of intervening reversion to Type S2. Also, the comparatively rare Type B2 (front dome, Belpaire firebox) was carried by Nos. 1816 (May06 to Aug-15) and 1843 (Nov-20 to Sep-25). However, the trend was towards standard use of the B4 Type and with No. 1831 in April 1927, 39 had been so fitted. The customary exception was No. 1829 which received an S4 boiler in November 1899 that remained in situ until withdrawal in December 1928, still as a saddle tank.

Soon after moving to Swindon, he arranged the transfer of close friend W S Stanier from Wolverhampton to take up the role of Chief Clerk at the main works. The pair shared an abiding interest in the chemical composition of metals, and before a fully equipped laboratory was established at the works, many experiments were conducted in a room sequestered for the purpose in the Stanier home. (Mrs Stanier was obviously a tolerant lady and perhaps these activities aroused the interest of one of her off-spring).

This was an exciting period for such work with improvements in steel quality and reduced production costs made possible through the Bessemer process, patented in 1856. Dean would have been well aware of this progress and of its potential for improved building techniques. Further, one of the positions he had held at Wolverhampton was now occupied by Stanier at Swindon. Although management accounting was then in its infancy, their combined experiences probably ensured mutual appreciation of comparative costs.

Presumably the decision to adopt the inside frame structure was supported by more scientific and financial evidence than had attended, for example, introduction of Class 645 at Wolverhampton in 1872.

Above: Class 1813 prototype Holmwood is regarded as the direct ancestor of the strain of large 0-6-0PT classes 1854/ 2721/ 57xx/ 94xx. Built in September 1882 as an 0-6-0T with S0 boiler, it was sold in May 1883 to the Pembroke & Tenby Railway where the nameplate was affixed to the tank sides. It returned to the GWR in July 1896, was converted to an 0-6-0ST in February 1897, became the first general service pannier tank (with short tanks) in July 1903, and acquired full-length tanks in November 1911. The nameplates were retained through all these tank changes and survived in situ until withdrawal in July 1928. A B4 boiler was installed in December 1918.

Class 1813 construction programme:

Below: Class 1813 0-6-0PT No. 1853 with half cab. W H Whitworth.

Loco Nos.

Works Nos.

Lot Nos.

Built

1813-22

906-25

59

1882/ 3

1823-59

926-45

60

1883/ 4

NB: The number 1833 was carried by an experimental 0-6-0T built November 1882 [Lot No. 58], equipped with Joy’s valve gear. Unsuccessful in this form, it was rebuilt as an 0-6-0 in October 1884.

The entire class was built with S0 type boilers (domeless, flush round-topped firebox). Type replacement commenced with the fitting of an S2 boiler (front dome, flush round-topped firebox) to No. 1822 in August 1894 and another was fitted to No. 1838 in December 1902.

However, 37 received S4 boilers (back dome, flush round-topped firebox) starting with No. 1830 in March 1896 and concluding with No. 1838 in December 1902. The remaining example was No. 1817 whose S0

Tank History While the pattern of boiler changes was relatively straightforward, exploration of alternative methods for water storage was a decidedly more complex issue.

34

ISSUE 12 Despite apparent earlier satisfaction with the Buffalo’s saddle tanks, Dean seemed to doubt their suitability for this class. All were built with side tanks which stretched from the cab forward to about one foot short of the rear of the smokebox with a capacity of 1250 gallons (later officially reduced to 1180 gallons).

The revised chassis layout permitted removal of the leaf springs from the running plate to be underslung below the inside frames which was a more familiar position to 20th Century eyes. This change avoided the awkward side-tank enclosures for leaf springs that had been encountered with Lot 22 Nos. 1076-81 in their initial form (later part of the ‘Buffalo’ class).

the second half of 1900 as the last batch of 0-6-0ST Class 2721 (Nos. 2796-2800) were so fitted when built in February/ March 1901. However, although five sets of experimental pannier tanks may have been intended for this batch, by the time they were ready, the related locomotives had been completed and were already in service. Accordingly, the tanks were diverted to Class 1813 and fitted to Nos. 1813/ 4/ 6/ 7/ 23 between July 1903 and November 1905 within the overhaul schedules of locomotives that had been in service since 1882. Introduction of the new type of tank was apparently unaccompanied by an official announcement and their unprecedented appearance caused confusion among observers.

Despite the implied efficiency of rotation through pooled boilers, the alternative locations of the dome and raised/ flush round-topped firebox profiles repeated the impediments encountered with the Buffalos. The decision that Type B4 Belpaire boilers should ultimately be used extensively, if not universally, with larger 0-6-0Ts seems to have been taken during Tank Type

Loco No.

Side

Saddle

Pannier

1813

Sep-82

Feb-97

1814

Sep-82

1815

The situation may also have been confusing for workshop personnel, in view of the sequence of changes. Delays during workshop visits must have caused through want of compatible components. The table below charts Class 1813’s progression in tank type: Tank Type

Withdrawn

Loco No.

Side

Saddle

Pannier

Jul-03 §

Jul-28

1834

Mar-83

Jun-96

Jun-20

Aug-29

Jul-99

Nov-05 §

Sep-37

1835

Mar-83

Nov-95

Feb-20

Jan-49

Sep-82

Jun-96

Jul-15

Dec-36

1836

Mar-83

Sep-97

May-19

Mar-39

1816

Oct-82

Apr-01

May-06

Nov-35

1837

Mar-83

Jun-97

Jun-25 §

Aug-34

1817

Oct-82

-

Dec-04

Oct-32

1838

Apr-83

Oct-06

Oct-23

May-47

1818

Oct-82

Jan-99

Feb-19

Aug-34

1839

Apr-83

Sep-97

Feb-20

Sep-38

1819

Nov-82

Sep-98

May-24

Jan-38

1840

Apr-83

Apr-99

Oct-18

May-37

1820

Nov-82

Mar-00

Feb-26 §

Apr-37

1841

Apr-83

Oct-06

Jan-20

Dec-34

1821

Nov-82

May-00

Aug-12 §

May-33

1842

May-83

Oct-96

Mar-25

May-28

1822

Nov-82

Aug-94

Jan-22

Mar-30

1843

May-83

Jan-98

Oct-25

Jul-29

1823

Nov-82

Jan-01

Nov-05

Aug-44

1844

May-83

Oct-02

Dec-18

Dec-35

1824

Dec-82

Apr-01

May-12

Jun-38

1845

Jun-83

Aug-97

Nov-16

Aug-30

1825

Dec-82

Jun-96

Oct-23 §

Sep-28

1846

Sep-83

Aug-97

May-20

Jul-46

1826

Dec-82

Jan-97

Apr-14 §

Oct-36

1847

Oct-83

Dec-96

May-19

May-47

1827

Dec-82

May-99

Sep-14

Dec-34

1848

Oct-83

Oct-98

Nov-19

Jun-35

1828

Jan-83

Dec-97

Feb-21

Dec-34

1849

Nov-83

Mar-97

Jan-26

Aug-34

1829

Jan-83

Nov-99

-

§

Dec-28

1850

Nov-83

Nov-95

May-10 §

Sep-38

1830

Jan-83

Mar-96

Oct-11

Oct-33

1851

Dec-83

Apr-09

May-16

Sep-31

1831

Feb-83

Nov-96

Apr-27

May-45

1852

Dec-83

Sep-97

Feb-22

Apr-29

1832

Feb-83

Aug-97

Jul-19

Apr-31

1853

Jan-84

-

Jan-12 §

Dec-34

Withdrawn

Concurrence of dates indicates that B4 Belpaire boilers and pannier tanks were fitted during the same workshop visit except where the pannier tank fitting date is annotated §. Specific details relating to these ten locomotives is listed in the table overleaf.

35

WESTERN TIMES No.

Having evolved by way of side and then saddle tank, this class is regarded as the direct ancestor of 20th Century classes 57xx and 94xx in the large pannier tradition. No. 1813 gained distinction through its sale to the Pembroke and Tenby Railway in May 1883 where it was numbered 7 and named Holmwood after the country home near Tunbridge Wells of the PTR’s chairman. This name was retained on return to the GWR in July 1896 and through later changes to saddle and pannier tanks. Apart from the 0-6-4PT crane tanks and No. 1134, this was the only pannier tank to be adorned with an official name. (Sales/ transfer of class members will be discussed in a fleet-wide survey of sales and wanderings in a later instalment of the Pannier Story).

Tank / Boiler History

1813

Short panniers from Jul-03 until Nov-11

1814

Believed short panniers Nov-05 to Jan-19

1820

B4 boiler from Oct-11; pannier tanks from Feb-26

1821

Pannier tanks from Aug-12; B4 boiler from Aug-16

1825

Pannier tanks from Oct-23; always RT boiler

1826

Pannier tanks from Nov-11; B4 boiler from Apr-14

1829

ST from Nov-99 until withdrawal; always RT boiler

1837

B4 boiler from Aug-20; pannier tanks from Jun-25

1850

Reverted to side tanks Nov-95; pannier tanks from May-10; B4 boiler from Sep-19

1853

Pannier tanks from Jan-12; B4 boiler from Dec-17

Class 1661 The early history of 2-4-0T Class 3501 as a tank version of Class 3201 was more complex. Nos. 3501-10 were built as broad gauge 2-4-0Ts between March and May 1885 of which five were converted to broad gauge 2-4-0s:- May 1890 – Nos. 3502/ 5/ 8; November 1890 – 3501; May 1891 – May 1891. All ten were converted to narrow gauge 2-4-0s between March and September 1892. Class 3501 Nos 3511-20 were built as narrow gauge 2-4-0Ts between May and September 1885, and converted to 2-4-0s between January 1894 and November 1895.

This class was anomalous within the development pattern of the 0-6-0ST/ PT fleet and appeared to represent a reversal in the policy vis-à-vis insideframes initiated with No. 1813. Sometimes regarded as the fourth element of a putative standardisation policy started in 1884, the chronological sequence indicates that inclusion of double-framed 0-6-0STs in that programme was incidental rather than planned. During an era when designs tended toward individualism, three double-framed classes of the 2-4-0/2-4-0T/ 0-6-0 wheel arrangements were introduced 1884-6 which shared key features. Choice of frame structure contemplated possible convertible needs during the broad gauge’s closing years while commonality in key dimensions and design conventions reflected futuristic objectives.

The return of No. 3201 from the P&TR saw formation of a class of 25 virtually identical 2-4-0s numbered 3201-5/ 3501-20 but only for a short period. In 1897, a bewildering plethora of boiler changes commenced.

It was a saga reminiscent of the multi-facetted story of Nos. 3521-60 (see Western Times Issue Nos. 8 & 9).

Introduced in 1884, Class 3201 as built comprised five 2-4-0s later nicknamed ‘Stellas’. This stemmed from the name bestowed on the prototype consequent upon its purchase by the Pembroke & Tenby Railway in as new condition. Following return to the GWR in 1896, it retained this name until about 1902.

Dean had intended that the narrow/ broad gauge variations of the passenger 2-4-0s/ 2-4-0Ts should be accompanied by 60 double-framed 0-6-0 tender locomotives as their goods locomotive equivalent.

Above: 2-4-0 Class 3501 No. 3504 depicted in 1896 following a works visit. This locomotive started life as a broad gauge 2-40T in 1885 with wheels mounted outside the frames as part of Dean’s short term ‘convertible’ programme, and as part of his standardisation exercise that originally embraced the 2-4-0, 2-4-0T and 0-6-0 wheel arrangements.

36

ISSUE 12

Above: 0-6-0 Class 2361 was effectively the six-coupled goods version of Class 3501. Originally fitted with types S2b and S4 boilers, this view shows No. 2362 with the B4 type which it acquired in December 1904.

Determination of motive power needs in the closing stages of the broad gauge epoch must have presented some short/ medium term planning headaches.

Provision of 85 locomotives comprising three different wheel arrangements whose frame structure facilitated gauge conversion was probably viewed as a wise contingency measure, should the long overdue elimination of the broad gauge suffer unexpected delay.

Aberdare. Accordingly, only 20 double-framed 0-6-0s were built and numbered 2361-80 within the 2301-2580 series. Class 2361 is sometimes erroneously termed ‘double-frame Dean Goods’ although essentially a separate design, evidenced by the differing wheelbase (Dean Goods: 7’ 3” + 8’ 3”/ Class 2361: 7’ 9” + 8’ 0”).

The forty spare frame sets were therefore diverted to construction of 0-6-0ST Class 1661.

The sixty frame sets thus acquired were intended for 0-6-0s deployed on heavy freight duties but this plan was revised following the proven competence of 0-6-0ST Class 1076 (the Buffalos) on coal traffic from

This commitment to standardisation was notable as all four strains were built with S2 boilers and used the same outside frame style. The profile was neat and suspension was by means of outside underslung leaf

This drawing of Class 2361 demonstrates the limited amount of rear end room which so inhibited the 0-6-0ST version created by using forty surplus 0-6-0 frame sets.

37

WESTERN TIMES springs whereas hitherto on double-framed six-coupled narrow gauge engines these had been mounted on the running plate. It seems that the purpose behind this change was to improve access to the inside motion.

The extent to which features and dimensions were common to these types was remarkable by contemporary standards of heterogeneity:

Class

3201

3501

2361

1661

Wheel Arrangement

2-4-0

2-4-0T

0-6-0

0-6-0ST

Built

1884/ 5

1885

1885/ 6

1886/ 7

S2

S2

S2

S2

10’ 3” X 4’ 5”

10' 3" X 4' 5"

10' 6" x 4' 5"

10' 6" x 4' 5"

17" x 26"

17" x 26"

17" x 26"

17" x 26"

- tubes

1106

1106

1095

1054

- firebox

103

103

103

103

Grate [sq ft]

15.2

15.2

15.2

15.2

Boiler Type Boiler Dimensions Cylinders Heating Surfaces [sq ft]

Boiler Pressure [lb/sq in]

140

140

140

140

Driving Wheel Diameter

5' 1"

5' 1"

5' 0"

5' 0"

9' 3" + 7' 9"

9' 3" + 7' 9"

7' 9" + 8' 0"

7' 9" + 8' 0"

14,660

14,660

14,900

14,900

Wheelbase Tractive Effort [lb]

However, by virtue of their progeny, the 0-6-0STs suffered a significant drawback. The early six-coupled tank classes had restricted rear end space which was most pronounced with Class 1661: Class

Buffalo §

1854

2721

2361

1661

Buffer beam > leading axle

4' 10"

4' 9"

4' 9"

4' 6"

4' 7"

Leading > centre axle

7' 4"

7' 3"

7' 3"

7' 9"

7' 9"

Centre > trailing axle

8' 4"

8' 3"

8' 3"

8' 0"

8' 0"

Trailing axle > buffer beam

6' 9"

6' 6"

6' 6"

4' 6"

4' 6"

Total (front > rear buffer beam)

27' 3"

26' 9"

26' 9"

24' 9"

24' 10"

Principal Dimensions

§ No. 1134 onward.

The Class 1661 design was unpopular as, to quote the RCTS work, it was ‘short at the back’ which made for cramped footplate conditions. This was later alleviated by rear extensions to most or all of the class which according to the drawing was achieved by insertion of a transverse member attached to the frame ends thereby adding about 1’ 3” to the length. The wheel diameter at 5’ 0” (as built) was considered too large for freight work although with their initial use alongside Buffalos on South Wales mineral traffic, this view may have derived from direct comparison with the proven performance of the earlier 0-6-0STs. Strangely, this dimension failed to inhibit the effectiveness of the Armstrong and Dean Goods 0-6-0s. Brake power was also considered deficient which possibly resulted from space limitations (braking is another generic topic for later consideration).

class’s prime candidacy for sale to other systems.

Eight in saddle tank form were passed on to South Wales companies, returning to the fold at the Grouping.

Above: 0-6-0ST Class 1661 No. 1695 as built in April 1887 with Type S2 boiler. This locomotive was fitted with Type B4 boiler and pannier tanks in January-February 1922 and was withdrawn in October 1927.

Stephenson Locomotive Society (LPC2737).

However, justified the reasons, absence of popularity led to frequent moves between depots, and to the 38

ISSUE 12 Their average working lives of about eight years shorter than any other Swindon-built pre-Grouping 0-6-0T type, reflected operators’ views.

All forty were built between June 1886 and June 1887 with the Type S2 boiler (two rings, front dome, flush firebox). These boilers were part of a batch of sixty (confusingly referred to as ‘2301 type’) with the other 20 fitted to 0-6-0 Nos. 2361-80. Replacement started in July 1897 with new Type S4/ S4a boilers (two rings, back dome, flush round-topped firebox – latter variants had 2” longer barrels) fitted to Nos 1661/ 3-7/ 9-71/ 3-7/9/ 80/ 2/ 3/ 5/ 7/8/ 9/ 90/ 1/ 3-6/ 8/ 9. However, Nos. 1681/ 4/ 7/ 1700 received what appear to have been earlier vintage, refurbished Type S2 boilers.

Above: Class 1661 No. 1673 acquired a Type S4 boiler in August 1903, followed by a B4 in September 1917 which was preceded by pannier tanks installed November 1910. This engine was withdrawn in November 1928.

Installation of Belpaire boilers and pannier tanks followed the customary pattern between 1897 and 1926 except for:

Below: At Oxford on 9 April 1927, No. 1693 has benefitted from more extensive modernisation than its colleague above.

It acquired a B4 boiler and pannier tanks in the period JuneAugust 1924, and perhaps concurrently the more robust crank bosses and the fully enclosed cab plus larger Collett-era bunker.

The truncated life of this class meant that only five survived in service beyond 1930; four departed in 1931 and following the one-off custom, No. 1685 lasted until October 1934.

– Nos. 1670/ 1/ 4/ 6/ 7/ 9 remained as round-top boiler saddle tanks throughout their careers.

– Nos. 1668/ 72/ 92 acquired Belpaire (B4) boilers in 1901 yet retained their saddle tanks until withdrawal.

– Nos. 1673/ 91 acquired pannier tanks well before receiving Belpaire boilers (Oct-11 > Sep 17) for the former; (Feb-11 > Dec-18) for the latter.

– No. 1689 acquired a B4 boiler in November 1901 and pannier tanks in March 1926, just over five years before withdrawal.

With pre-Grouping vintage 0-6-0Ts there was a haphazard element in modernisation of boiler and tank types, a characteristic accentuated with these engines. It seems possible that their reputation might have adversely affected workshop prioritisation.

Diagram of 0-6-0PT Class 1661 with Type B4 boiler but retaining half cab. Comparison with the earlier drawing of 0-6-0 Class 2361 shows how rear end accommodation has been improved.

39

WESTERN TIMES Class 1854 The inside-frame construction programme resumed at Swindon with this class: Loco Nos.

Works Nos.

Lot Nos.

Built

1854-73

1159-78

79

1890

1874-93

1201-20

83

1890-1

1701-20

1241-60

85

1891

1721-40

1301-20

88

1892-3

1751-70

1321-40

89

1893-3

905-7

1433-5

98

1895

1791-1800

1436-45

98

1895

1894-1900

1446-52

98

1895

Above: 0-6-0ST Class 1854 No. 1874 in all its polished brass early finery, at what appears to be Exeter St. Davids.

Locomotives of Lot Nos. 79/ 83/ 5/ 8/ 9 were built with Type S2 boilers (front dome/ ‘2301’ type) while Lot 98 carried the Type S4 (rear dome) from new. The most significant advance over Class 1813 was provision of longer frames at the rear (6’ 6” rear axle to buffer beam) and improved bunkers; later examples were introduced with coal rails in place. With the start of boiler pooling in the early 1900s, which sometimes involved use of boilers with extended smokeboxes and longer tanks, it became increasingly difficult to distinguish this class from preceding Class 1813, and Class 2721 which was the final Swindon-built pre-grouping saddle tank design. There was also a close resemblance with Wolverhampton-built classes 645/ 655/ 1501 (refer Pannier Story Part: 2, in Western Times Issue 10) except for the differing running plate valance profile.

Installation of Belpaire boilers commenced after about a decade of service and the small cadre below had been so modified prior to the outbreak of World War 1:

Above: Diagram of 0-6-0PT Class 1854.

40

Loco Nos.

B4 Boiler Fitted

Loco Nos.

B4 Boiler Fitted

1864

Aug-01

1894

Dec-09

1857

Sep-01

1888

Aug-11

1868

May-05

1889

Aug-11

1738

May-08

1732

Jun-14

1734

Jan-09

1764

Jun-14

ISSUE 12

In more muted livery, 0-6-0PT Class 1854 No. 1797 nonetheless looked very smart following a works visit. This engine acquired a B4 boiler and pannier tanks in November-December 1922 and probably the modern bunker at the same time but retains the half cab. This locomotive was withdrawn in July 1946.

R C Riley (RCR 245).

No. 1751 was in the same stage of development as its classmate above. However, its external condition was markedly different when captured alongside Swindon Works on 29 May 1946, having been withdrawn in November 1945.

R C Riley (RCR 709).

WESTERN TIMES These fitments were significant as the locomotives concerned carried B4 boilers until withdrawal which marked consolidation of the B4 type as the standard for 0-6-0Ts. However, B4 construction apparently had yet to gather momentum as B2 boilers (Type S2 refurbished with Belpaire firebox, retaining dome on front ring) were fitted to Nos. 1861/ 75/ 9/ 80/ 4/ 1703/ 20/ 27/ 33 at different times. Apart from the need to fashion the inner face of the saddle tank to accommodate the firebox form, additional modification was needed to accommodate the different location of the dome.

Ninety-four locomotives became pannier tanks in this manner whereas the sequence differed for 25 (excluding odd-ball No. 1879 mentioned above). For eleven class members there was an interval of several years between acquisition of Belpaire boilers and later fitting of pannier tanks (Nos. 1857/ 61/ 90/ 1880/ 82/ 1716/ 27/ 33/ 34/ 38/ 56). Conversely, there were fourteen cases where panniers were fitted to round-top boilers years in advance of acquisition of Belpaire boilers (Nos. 1869/ 70/ 73/ 76/ 87/ 1706/ 11/ 12/ 28/ 64/ 66/ 906/ 907/ 1896).

By way of example, No. 1876 was equipped with pannier tanks over ten years before receiving a Belpaire boiler.

There was considerable rotation of S2/ S4/ B2 boilers over ensuing years but at withdrawal, only No. 1879 remained as a saddle tank with round-topped boiler.

Following the odd-man out custom, this locomotive’s boiler history was: built with S2 in March 1890, followed

by B2 from March 1902, S2 from August 1907, S4 from August 1914 until withdrawal in September 1928.

As with all 19th and early 20th Century records, this data may be subject to error but the broad pattern suggests that the relative factors (availability of suitable boilers, manufacture of new pannier vessels and the need to return repaired locomotives to traffic) could result in the programme becoming ‘out of sync’. Nevertheless, in addition to the other advantages, a pair of pannier tanks offered a more versatile form of water storage.

Water capacities had shown slight variations as built: Lot Nos. 79/ 83 – 1080 gallons; Nos. 85/ 88 – 1100 gallons; Nos. 89/ 98 – 1200 gallons. With introduction of Belpaire boilers (B4 and some B2) from August 1901, the necessary re-shaping of saddle tank form reduced water capacity to about 950 gallons. Fitting of pannier tanks raised capacity by about 25% to 1200 gallons, an important benefit given the practice of using larger 0-6-0Ts on longer distance duties.

Withdrawals Four were taken out of service in 1928 and by 1939 a total of 36 had been withdrawn. Ten were placed in store during the latter year (Nos. 1705/9/22/40/56/95/ 1866/ 75/ 89/91) and all were back in service by December 1940.

Following bomb damage at Castle Cary, No. 1729 was withdrawn in September 1942. Twenty-three survived to become British Railways property and the last in service were Nos. 907 & 1861, both withdrawn 1951.

Study of related dates indicates that there was greater co-ordination in substitution of Belpaire boiler and fitting of pannier tanks during the same workshops visit.

Class 1854 No. 907 was built in May 1895, acquired pannier tanks in March 1911, and a B4 boiler in June 1916, but the date it received an enclosed cab is unknown. Withdrawn in March 1951 as the penultimate survivor, followed by No. 1861 in November of the same year.

42

ISSUE 12 Class 2721 This was Swindon’s final pre-Grouping 0-6-0T design, delivered in four Lots: Loco Nos.

Works Nos.

Lot Nos.

Built

2172-40

1662-81

112

1897-8

2741-60

1703-22

115

1899

2761-80

1776-95

122

1900

2781-2800

1887-96

129

1901

top/ Belpaire merry-go-round. In contrast, No. 2796 carried short pannier tanks March 1904 to May 1909, and thereafter the full-length version. This engine was the only pre-Grouping 0-6-0T to carry a B4 boiler from construction until withdrawal (in November 1945).

The design was similar to Class 1854 except for coil springs mounted above the leading and centre axle boxes in addition to those on the trailing boxes. (Class 1854 had been fitted with leaf springs below the leading and centre axleboxes). These were the first large 0-6-0STs with 4’ 7½” wheels from new and a minor change was provision of fluted coupling rods.

There were three distinct threads to these locomotives as built: – – –

Top: No. 2772 in profile, date and location unrecorded. This engine moved straight from Type S4 boiler to Type B4 and concurrently acquired pannier tanks in June/July 1912. It was to remain in service until November 1949.

W H Whitworth.

Nos. 2721-78: S4 boiler/ 17” x 24” cylinders.

Nos. 2779-95: S4 boiler/ 17½“ x 24” cylinders/ extended smokebox/ longer saddle tank.

Nos. 2796-2800: B4 boiler/ 17½” x 24” cylinders/ piston valves.

The pattern of boiler changes was less bewildering than with earlier classes. Between November 1909 (No. 2793) and February 1937 (No. 2755), thirtynine underwent the only change of boiler type in their careers (S4 > B4). For the remainder, boiler changes were fewer although No. 2743 went through a cycle of S4 > S2 > S4 > S2 before acquiring a B4 in March 1917 and pannier tanks as late as June 1933. The changes in round-top boiler types and hence dome location probably added to workshop interludes. In the majority of instances, installation of B4 boiler and pannier tanks coincided. However, as with Class 1854, there were some cases of pannier tanks preceding B4 boilers by an interval of some years and vice versa but by June 1933, the transition process to pannier tank condition was complete. No. 2800 became 2700 in December 1912 to make way for the renumbering of No. 97, the prototype Churchward 2-8-0.

Above: Railway personnel often obscure essential details in early locomotive photographs but their presence can certainly add ‘character’. Eleven have managed to insert themselves into this view of 0-6-0ST Class 2721 No. 2737 at St Blazey in 1899. Fortunately, points of livery detail remain unobscured.

Chimney, dome and safety valve bonnet are highly polished, and lining can be discerned on the cab and bunker sides. There is no evidence of a company insignia and so far as can be determined, the saddle tanks of pre-grouping locomotives were never so decorated.

R T Coxton.

In later years, boiler and other changes blurred the differences among Nos. 2721-95. However, Swindon tended to regard Nos. 2796-2800 as a separate class on account of the Belpaire boiler and different valve type both of which were indicators of impending change in design practice. Less than five years after introduction in March 1901, boiler rotation saw No. 2799 acquire an S2 and by August 1909, Nos. 2797/ 8/ 2800 were fitted with S4 boilers in repetition of the familiar round-

Bottom: Although the location is recorded as Par, St Blazey MPD yard looks to be more accurate. No. 2776 carried three round-top boilers before acquiring a B4 and pannier tanks in April-May 1915. This was another survivor into BR days being withdrawn in April 1948.

W H Whitworth.

43

WESTERN TIMES

Above: With overall Collett-style cab and modern bunker, No. 2756 could be easily mistaken for a Class 57xx of 1929 vintage, but for the different profile in the running plate valences. The locomotive was constructed in August 1899 (to Lot No. 115) and was converted to pannier tank form in October 1911. It was withdrawn from Gloucester Horton Road shed in May 1949, which is probably just before this photo was captured. The location is alongside the De-Tubing House at Swindon Works, also colloquially referred to as ‘The Barn’.

Nevertheless, homogeneity in outward appearance remained elusive as there was the usual variety in half or enclosed cab, conversion to top feed, and varying chimney/ bunker styles and sizes. Their mainline deployment was evident in the fitting of ATC on all but three examples by 1936. The entire class was withdrawn between 1945 and 1950.

Completion of No. 2800 marked the end of an era at Swindon, although small 0-6-0ST construction continued at Wolverhampton until 1905. The piston valve experiments were probably initiated under the aegis of William Dean; they certainly accorded with his penchant for innovation and possibly were the last experiments he sponsored. In this writer’s opinion, Dean has been grossly under-rated for his technical competence and commercial acuity. He had:

On introduction, perhaps the most interesting feature was the equipping of Nos. 2796-2800 with 6½” diameter piston valves. These were installed one above the other on a centre line between the cylinders.

The upper valve fed the right-hand cylinder while its companion was fed by the lower valve. Because of restricted space between the frames, the valves were positioned well clear of the cylinder centre lines.

Various types of piston head were tried in what was an experimental exercise. The valve rods were located precisely between the cylinders as if they actuated slide valves and fitted with arms to connect them with the valve spindles. Semi-plug piston valves were finally selected about 1909, and the 2796 series plus Nos. 2779/ 81/2/ 4-6/ 9/ 90/ 2/4 were recorded with this arrangement between 1909 and 1920. However, excessive groaning noises emanated when in motion, attributed to the off-set drive and all reverted to slide valves in the 1920s.

– – – – – –

Held three senior positions at Wolverhampton concurrently.

Undergone a baptism of fire at Swindon following Joseph Armstrong’s untimely passing.

Managed the awkward relationship with George Armstrong in his northern redoubt.

Managed three motive power genres (broad, narrow and convertible) concurrently.

Initiated numerous experiments which yielded priceless empirical data for his successor.

Had also encountered personal tragedies.

With his health in decline towards the close of his career, it seems appropriate that he should still be engaged in pushing the boundaries of knowledge with Class 2721.

44

ISSUE 12

Dimensional Comparison The five pre-Grouping Swindon-built classes in their final pannier tank form: Class Boiler Type Boiler Dimensions

1076

1813

1661

1854

2721

B4

B4

B4

B4

B4

11' x 4' 3"

10' 3" x 4' 5"

10' 3" x 4' 5"

10' 3" x 4' 5"

10' 3" x 4' 5"

Boiler Pitch

6' 7"

7'

7' 3"

7'

7'

Cylinders

17" x 24"

17" x 24"

17" x 26"

17" X 24"

17” x 24” (17.5” x 24”)

- tubes

1059

1200

1091

1091

1091

- firebox

99

108

106

106

106

Grate [sq ft]

15.57

17.33

15.45

15.45

15.45

Boiler Pressure [lb/sq in]

165

150

180

180 (165)

180

Heating Surfaces [sq ft]

Driving Wheel Diameter

4' 7.5"

4' 7.5"

5' 2"

4' 7.5"

4' 7.5"

7' 4" + 8' 4"

7' 3" + 8' 3"

7' 9" + 8' 0"

7' 3" + 8' 3"

7' 8" + 8' 3"

15.35

14.6

15.55

16.3

16.1 (16.5)

- centre

15.4

14.9

15.65

16.3

16.1 (16.6)

- trailing

13.15

15.1

14.7

13

12.45 (12.9)

Coupled Wheelbase Axle Weight [tons] - leading

- total

43.9

44.6

45.9

45.6

45.65 (46)

Tractive Effort [lb]

17,525

15,935

18,545

19,120 (17,525)

19,120 (20,260)

Water Capacity [gallons]

1000

1050-70

966

1200

1120

The size and condition of the 0-6-0ST/ PT fleet at the start of the new Century meant that twenty-eight years would elapse before delivery of Swindon-designed 0-6-0PTs resumed. This allowed Churchward to focus attention on other motive power needs in a situation that ironically heralded what was arguably his biggest miscalculation during his tenure in charge at Swindon.

This factor will be considered once the individual class

reviews are complete, allowing analysis then to be directed toward generic pros and cons of the Pannier saga.

Thus far the ‘Pannier Story’ has encompassed three wheel arrangements (4-4-0T, 0-6-4T and 0-6-0T) and the next phase, reviewed in the fifth instalment, witnessed the injection of three more (0-6-0, 0-4-0T, 0-6-2T).

Diagram of 0-6-0PT Class 2721.

45

WESTERN TIMES

THE DISPOSAL OF NAME & NUMBER PLATES inding new information about the past is invariably Sale of Locomotive Number Plates.’ The text is brief F an interesting experience, especially with new light but concise, ‘In connection with the condemnations thrown and fresh explanations provided on previously of locomotives 1426 and 4366 at present being held unknown topics. One example is a sheaf of paperwork from Swindon in the early 1960s and initially dealing with the removal / storage / sale of name of numberplates from withdrawn engines.

at Cheltenham and Laira and which will be sold for demolition from site, will you kindly note that application has been received from intending purchasers for both cab side number plates from these locomotives. Will you please arrange for these number plates to be removed from the locomotives and advise when this has been done and the stores at which they will be held. Will you also please let me know whether they are made of brass or cast iron.’

Those reading this and who like the writer are of ‘a certain age’, will no doubt recall seeing grimy engines having not much longer for this world running around often minus name and number plates. Similarly, engines were sometimes seen at scrapyards still carrying what today are regarded as prized and valuable items. What follows are some examples of correspondence dealing with the sale, and sometimes loss of these pieces; auction houses please take note! (We would immediately add, items that change hands nowadays are no doubt dealt with in good faith although we should also add the famed Latin phrase ‘Caveat Emptor’ – buyer beware.)

From subsequent exchanges it appears the same office at Paddington dealt with many similar enquires, as another from 31 May referred to plates from: • • •

The first document we will look at is dated 24 May 1962 and comes from the desk of Mr L W Ibbottson at the WR Traffic Headquarters at Paddington to Messrs R C Hilton at Birmingham and D C Hart at Bristol. Under the heading ‘Locomotive on Condemnation Programme-

No. 5913 Rushton Hall at Exeter – both nameplates and one numberplate earmarked.

Nos. 5720 and 3712 at Duffryn Yard – one cabside plate from each.

No. 7736 at Ebbw Vale - one cabside plate.

In all cases we cannot be certain if the intended sales went through and there is no mention of the actual price, although clearly establishing whether brass of cast metal was involved would affect the final sale price.

Above: ‘King’ Class 4-6-0 No. 6008 King James II, awaits its inevitable fate amongst the lines of withdrawn locomotives in the ‘Conyard’ at Swindon Works. Note that both the nameplate and cabside numberplate remain affixed in this November 1962 view.

46

ISSUE 12 Another memorandum of 17 July 1962 directed as before this time referred to a longer list. Nos: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

numbers of engines within 20 years. As an aside, does this go to explain why engines from other railways were sometimes photographed at scrap yards with a smokebox numberplate attached? Certainly, around this time the other regions at least did seem to start removing smokebox plates as a matter of course.

4973 Sweeney Hall, Cardiff - two nameplates.

4968 Shotton Hall, St Phillips Marsh - two nameplates.

5067 St Fagans Castle, Reading - two nameplates and one brass cabside numberplate.

5946 Marwell Hall, Goodwick - two nameplates.

5053 Earl Cairns, Cardiff - two nameplates and one brass cabside numberplate.

4931 Hanbury Hall, Cardiff - two nameplates.

5989 Cransley Hall, Neath - two nameplates.

5965 Woollas Hall, Tyseley - two nameplates.

5916 Trinity Hall, Oxley - two nameplates.

5909 Newton Hall, Cardiff - two nameplates.

7313, Cross Newydd - one cabside numberplate.

4588, Laira - two cabside numberplates.

7729, St Phillips Marsh - one cabside numberplate.

5541, Laira - two cabside numberplates.

A few weeks later a note of 25 September appears to indicate the WR were also starting to sell smokebox plates as a request is sent to Swindon for smokebox plates to be removed from Nos. 2200, 3408, 4037, 5077, 5600, 6001 and 6010. An additional request was for the Kerr Stuart makers plate to be salvaged from No 7713. (There is no note on file to show how with all plates now removed, the engines referred to might be identified. Of course, if these particular machines met their end at Swindon that might not have been such an issue but in a scrapyard it is not quite so certain a merchant would know the exact type he had bought or what arrived - as indeed would turn out to be the case soon after.)

The file then includes notes from various depot managers confirming the respective plates’ removal and storage.

On 9 October 1962 the first of what would turn out to be several less positive memos arrived with Mr Ibbottson at Paddington. Sent from the Divisional Manager at Snow Hill copies were also sent to the Chief of the BTC Police and also the local BTC Police Inspector at Birmingham. It stated;

This is followed by a note of 17 August 1962 from the CME’s office at Swindon signed on behalf of R A Smeddle, to L Ibbotson at Paddington – copy to the Works Manager, Swindon. It states, ‘Sale of Nameplates and Condemned Locomotives.

Numberplates

‘I have to report that the smokebox numberplates from the following engines have been stolen whilst standing at Stafford Road Motive Power depot between 28 September and 2 October; Nos. 6001, 6002, 6007, 6012, 6014, 6015, 6017, 6022, and 5919. The few staff now employed at Stafford Road have been questioned but have no knowledge of the plates being removed. ….. You will find trespassing is very prevalent in the shed area and Dunstall Park at the present time. I would mention nameplates and cab number plates have been removed from these engines and are being held by my Stafford Road Shedmaster.’

from

‘With reference to the above and confirmation telephone conversation between our representatives, will you please arrange for all nameplates and cabside numberplates from locomotives which are to be sold for demolition from site to be removed and sent to the Locomotive Works Manager, Machinery Stores, Swindon.

‘It is appreciated that some form of identification will be required on locomotives awaiting sale, and in this connection I agree that the smokebox door numberplate should remain on the locomotive. There have been one or two reservations made for this type of plate, and I will write to you specially if a particular smokebox plate is required for sale, when perhaps arrangements could then be made for the plate to be removed and sent to Swindon.

Attempting to tie down the actual time a plate (or plates) went missing was not easy, but Worcester shed managed to get down to a two-day window in the case of a missing nameplate from No. 7013 Bristol Castle.

‘An advice of each despatch should be sent to the Locomotive Works Manager, Swindon, and I shall be glad if you will please arrange accordingly.’

Sixty plus years late we may smile slightly at the innocence and similarly the questions raised. The memo apparently implies that plates were then simply left on engines, and it was expected that smokebox plates would remain untouched. This could have been avoided had the GWR painted identification on the buffer beam had been retained post 1947.

However at that time I doubt if anyone considered the position that would arise with the scrapping of large

Above: Today the brass cabside number and nameplates from a prestige locomotive such as ‘Castle’ Class No. 4037 are highly prized collectors items. One nameplate from this engine sold at Bonhams in September 2010 for a staggering £40,800, whilst the other for a more modest £15,000 in July 2024.

47

In this case it was found to be missing by a fitter on 4 October but the Worcester driver who worked the engine to shed on 2 October was adamant it was present then. Six weeks later it was reported the police had made no progress with the theft.

A request for a specific nameplate came from the Superintendent Registrar at Caxton Hall in London, who wrote to the Chairman of BR at Marylebone Road on 13 October 1963 asking to ‘..lay a claim…’ for the nameplates from that particular engine upon the engines, ‘…demolition…’.

During this period, it almost appears that at times the railway was not following their stated standard practice as regards removal of plates. It would be fair to say some were indeed dishonestly taken but in the case of No. 6004 King George III neither Stafford Road nor Swindon could confirm if one of the nameplates had been officially removed or not!

Another not dissimilar request came from the Divisional Manager at Cardiff to the General Manager Mr Raymond on 31 August 1963. This was for a nameplate from No. 4076 Carmarthen Castle to be presented to the town; the current mayor Alderman E J Powell was also a driver at Carmarthen. Like much of the correspondence from this period we only have one side of the conversation and no information as to if the request was acceded to.

Mr Raymond as GM not known for his respect for GW traditions whilst at Paddington which could mean the request might well have been taken either way.

Further thefts were identified later; on 14 November such as when the arrival of No. 6004 King George III at Swindon one of the nameplates (not specified which) was missing. Two days later No. 7013 at Worcester was found to have lost its Bristol Castle nameplate from the right hand side.

Mentioned earlier was the problem with potential identification of locos where a smokebox plate had been removed and this came to the surface on 19 November 1963 concerning the sale of pannier tanks Nos. 5767, 8761 and 8719, Messrs John Cashmore insistent that the three engines had not yet been delivered to their sidings. The same firm were insistent that a single locomotive delivered to them on 10 October was not No 8761. Not surprisingly there followed much correspondence in an attempt to locate the missing engines with details given of their despatch from their respective home depots; No. 5767 at 5.00am from Reading to Swindon on 8 December, and No. 8761 from Old Oak as part of the 10.55am Acton to Margam freight on 26 September.

Two weeks later on 28 November it was the loss of one nameplate and one numberplate from No. 1018 County of Leicester that was being reported, the correspondence reporting the items, ‘…have been mislaid in transit.’

An interesting aside within the file is a note from Major D H de T Reade of the Institute of Civil Engineers to the CME at Swindon asking to purchase (another) name and numberplate set from a ‘Castle’ – previous purchases are not referred to, but adding that he is pleased to see No. 6000 is to be preserved ‘…as I had decided to buy this locomotive and make arrangements for a committee to plan its future.’

The plot thickened when the Divisional Manager’s Office at Cardiff wrote to Paddington stating simply that the three engines, ‘…were not in hand at any of the Motive Power Depots in my Division.’ The note stated it was not practice to obtain a signature upon delivery of engines as these were simply placed in the firm’s private siding. The engine received without a number on 10 October may well have been No. 8761 as this did not have a smokebox plate attached.

A number of other notes refer to requests for purchase of specific plates by members of the public. Whilst engines numbers are given the prospective purchasers details are not, similarly we have no information as to whether these sales actually preceded. (One pleading letter does appear on the file with a titled gentleman writing in on behalf of a third party literally pleading for said third party to be able to buy a nameplate for £5 – the amount stated as all the latter could afford.)

Another query arose concerning No. 8719 ex St Austell and for the first time now a figure of £102, 13s 4d is mentioned; if this were correct and relates to the aforesaid pannier tank, Messrs Cashmore certainly got a bargain.

Memoranda on missing plates continued in 1963. On 25 March a note refers to the theft of both numberplates from No. 7017. The nameplates from the engine were reported as having been despatched per EnParts van from Old Oak on 11 March whilst the pair of numberplates appeared to have disappeared before that time.

The last item in this particular file is dated 9 December 1963 with a note stating that engines Nos. 1500, 1503, 1504, 1506 and 1507 were at Old Oak and available to the National Coal Board. Six weeks later though on 21 January 1964 it was noted that the deal had fallen through and they were instead to be sold for scrap.

On 25 June it was reported that the left hand nameplate from No. 5975 Winslow Hall that was found to be missing when the engine arrived at Worcester for shopping on 29 April. The situation with No. 4949 Packwood Hall at the same location was even worse, both nameplates and the right hand cabside adrift on 6 June. Interestingly in connection with the last named, the question was asked as to whether replacements should be provided?

There was no response but in view of the rapid decline of steam this was perhaps unlikely.

Nothing further is mentioned concerning Nos. 5767, 8719 and 8761 so we may assume they were indeed located and sent on, or perhaps delivery to the scrap merchant was eventually confirmed. If not the alternative is they were spirited away - unlikely of course - but if you are ever offered an engine for sale….!

48

BOOK REVIEW

ISSUE 12

THE STAINES BRANCH CHRIS TURNER & STANLEY JENKINS C Turner / Elgar Books (ISBN 978 139999 2749) Hardback, 246 Pages, 273mm x 215mm £37.50 This book I know has been in preparation for some years, decades in fact. Chris Turner will be a name known to many and whose contributions to a number of other books and journals (including the late GWRJ), will also be familiar. Chris is one of those most diligent researchers and who admits his own interest in Staines was often put aside so he might help others.

At last though his own book has been released, privately published but very much in the style of the former Wild Swan at a time when that company was run from Didcot – indeed the design is the work of Paul Karau.

As such you know what you are going to get even before turning the first page. A comprehensively researched work – Paul would reject or ask for amendments to manuscripts he considered to be sub-standard, with a well-crafted history interspersed with detail on traffic working and of course plenty of images and anecdotes from staff who worked the line.

Considering the passenger service from Staines West ceased over half a century ago it is remarkable the authors have uncovered so much in the way of snippets that could only have come from someone ‘in the know’. I say ‘authors’, as Chris had a co-author, another well respected historian Stanley Jenkins. Sadly, Stanley died before the book was published but Chris is gracious in his praise to his co-contributor early in the work.

We were kindly passed a copy of the work for review although to be fair I would have purchased one anyway. It adds to the growing list of detailed published works covering branch and other lines, which if it were not for the likes of Chris and Stanley would undoubtably be lost and as such is highly recommended, not least because it also very readable.

I do have comment, not I hasten to add criticism. Firstly, it is a pity there is perhaps no colour imagery. Colour can be difficult to procure from years ago, but it is something readers have come to look for in recent times.

What follows next is said with obvious caution. Let us start by stating the perfect book has never been written nor indeed produced – the present writer knows this only too well. A pity then that there is an occasion where the reference to a page elsewhere in the book has been left blank, also where a caption text box has slipped so we lose a few letters on both lines. I suspect paste-up was the design process used.

That said minor omissions such as this are nothing compared to the tremendous effort the writers and designer have put into making this book what it is. Publishing it privately is also a big financial gamble. Chris is to be commended for taking the chance with a book of this type, I for one wish him well, it deserves to succeed.

KJR. 49

WESTERN TIMES

BANBURY IN 1950 ost reading this piece will recall their own local Seventy years ago Banbury was the local station M station from years ago. Perhaps it was on a to John Batts, a youth whose interest in trains and branch line, perhaps on a main line but one where, particularly the Great Western (British Railways (when permitted by ‘higher authority’) we might while away the hours watching the comings and goings.

Some were also fortunate enough to befriend the staff and local engine crews culminating perhaps in visits to inner-sanctums, offices, signal boxes and even an illicit footplate trip on a shunting engine. Pity then the enthusiast who lived on an electrified suburban line where the rush of trains might preclude this otherwise innocent behaviour. Pity too the enthusiast of today, who runs the risk of banishment or even arrest when attempting to pursue his hobby in the 21st century.

Western Region), would lead to a career in the WR Signalling Department at Reading. From piecing together snippets of information this would appear to have started around 1950, concurrent with when the accompanying images were recorded. John’s photography skills may at times have been variable, but we have picked out what are the best and the most interesting to present a selection of what might be seen at Banbury (WR) station together with the trains and engines seen both on a regular basis and those that could be described as one-offs.

Above: In 1950, Banbury (MP 86) was a significant railway crossroads on the GWR’s Paddington-Birmingham route where five other lines converged. To the south, the GWR mainline from Paddington via Princes Risborough was joined by the route from Didcot and Oxford at Aynho Junction (MP 80¼), and then at King’s Sutton (MP 82½) by the cross-country secondary line from Cheltenham via Kingham. From the north, a spur south-westerly off the Great Central’s London Extension at Culworth Junction joined the GWR north of the town at Banbury Junction (MP 87¼) thereby providing a useful north to south/ west inter-company connection.

Finally, to the east, the LNWR’s secondary line from Bletchley via Verney Junction terminated at Merton Street, Banbury’s other station. Under BR auspices, the GWR station was renamed Banbury General to differentiate it from the ‘lesser’ presence. Apart from passenger connections, Banbury was an important freight interchange point, served mainly by the hump marshalling yard to the east of the mainline between Banbury Junction and the GWR station.

The exact date of this view is unrecorded but the year is definitely 1950 when No. 4950 Patshull Hall (Oxley) was standing at the main down platform with a stopping train. In the background at the far platform was locally allocated No. 6839 Hewell Grange. The volume and diversity of rail-borne freight traffic is evident in the crowded sidings.

50

ISSUE 12 Top: An example of the unusual at Banbury, in fact the very unusual. What we are seeing is the LNER Dynamometer car No. E902502 returning north to its more usual home territory behind A3 No. 60054 Prince of Wales (fitted with a coal rail tender). The date is 10 August 1950 the test car and crew having for the moment finished their work at Eastleigh where they were involved in the trials with Bulleid’s ‘Leader’ prototype, No 36001. This was very much a fortunate meeting between photographer and the unusual and as far as we know was not recorded on film anywhere else during its north/south/north ER – SR journeys. (There would be a further visit south for more trials involving No 36001 a few weeks later.)

Middle: Watched by some junior enthusiasts, No. 5001 Llandovery Castle (Canton depot) awaits its turn to head north. The driver appears to be the epitome of a senior Great Western driver aged 55 to 65 years, possibly a grandfather tending towards portliness.

Under BR auspices, this locomotive would be one of the few 4073 sub-series of Castles to undergo significant change.

In January 1960 it acquired a three-row superheater and then in July 1961, a fourrow type plus double chimney. These modifications were comparatively cheap and made good engines even better but sadly to little benefit in the case of No. 5001 as it was withdrawn in February 1963.

Here, the engine displays the BR form of lining and has acquired a speedometer but still retains the original, less curvaceous style of outside steam pipe.

Bottom: Grimy No. 6869 Resolven Grange was captured at Banbury but unfortunately details of the working are absent and the date is recorded as 1949/50. Uncertainty concerning the date complicates provision of specific information about this locomotive. Records indicate that it was based at Old Oak Common from March 1943 until August 1949 when it moved to Southall followed by transfer to Penzance in December 1949 where it remained allocated for almost seven years. It ran with tender No. 1837 from February 1947, then No. 2254 from February 1949 and No. 2263 from April 1950 until June 1951. The first was of Churchward vintage (Lot A83), probably retaining the short side fenders whereas the other two were from Lot A118 with flush bottoms and Collett-style full wrap-around fenders. All three had 3500-gallon water capacity. Even under magnification, there is no evidence of the tender side bearing either GWR or BR insignia which was quite common at that time.

51

WESTERN TIMES

Above: Banbury was also the location of an important engine shed on the WR system and whilst from the negatives available John’s visits here were limited and often not of best quality, he did take this view on 30 May 1950. The engine is No. 5634, believed at the time to be based at Tyseley and clearly in trouble with axlebox issues. It was repaired and returned to traffic. After varied travels to Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, back to Shrewsbury, and various sheds in south Wales it finally ceased work in July 1964.

Below: Auto train working was a feature of the services that used Banbury, these trains heading north towards Leamington and also west on the line to Cheltenham. This is probably a local service to Leamington seen behind No. 1426 on 13 May 1950 and according to John’s notes with ‘Driver Gardner’. Whether Driver Gardner is the man seen is questionable for if this is an auto heading north then the driver would be expected to have been at the front of the auto coach.

52

ISSUE 12

Above: Representing the interchange of traffic that occurred at Banbury, we have a foreign interloper in the form of SNCF van, No. 7515445. As an important freight location Banbury had a hump yard and an exchange yard, the vehicle seen here, if empty, waiting to be returned to Dover and the train ferry back to France.

Below: The Banbury breakdown train was held on stand-by in the shed yard. It was kept in light steam on a continuous basis ready for any emergency, crewed as necessary by fitters and other artisans employed at the shed. The legend on the side of the crane’s cab is too distant to be deciphered. That on the side of the departmental ‘Toad’ is partly obscured by grime but the words ‘STEAM CRANE BRAKE VAN BANBURY’ can just be discerned.

53

WESTERN TIMES

Banbury station approach. The original configuration had an overall roof with the station scheduled for rebuilding before WW2.

Funds under the Government Loan Scheme were available from 1937, but the work was delayed owing to WW2, the whole structure becoming ever dingier and more decrepit as time progressed. (Didcot fireman Harold Gasson in his reminiscences books refers to blasting through Banbury on a steam engine in WW2 and taking a bit of the roof with them.) Progress to reconstruct the station had eventually started by the time this and the following images were taken, the work involved being the removal of the overall roof and its replacement with conventional platform canopies. The revised station was perhaps only intended to be a temporary affair as a modern concrete and glass facility was provided by British Railways in 1957.

55

WESTERN TIMES

Above: This and the next four views depict the station during its initial rebuilding. Here is the northern partition on the down platform in early September 1950. Note the lack of division between the ongoing works area and the passenger spaces.

Below: Within the rafters looking south from the footbridge – no health and safety in 1950. There are several similar views, this the most interesting. The work was taking place around the centenary of the opening of the station which took place on 2 September 1950.

56

ISSUE 12 Top: Later in September 1950 we have a good view looking north from the south end of the main platforms – note the ‘General’ addition to the name. (The BR(W) seemed to like this suffix as it was also applied at Leamington and of course already existed at Reading.)

The state of the overall roof needs little comment.

Leamington also had an overall roof but this was removed in the early years of the 20th century.

Leamington was also successfully rebuilt in the 1930s.

Middle: Around the same time, demolition was taking place from the station’s north end. The various items of paraphernalia do little to enhance the scene while it will be noted that a start has been made on erection of the new platform canopy.

Bottom: This final view is from mid-October 1950. The train which consists of Maunsell stock is a through working to the Southern Region, either via Reading and on to the South Eastern section, or via Basingstoke to the south coast.

Meanwhile work continues on installation of the new canopy.

57

WESTERN TIMES

WELSH SIGNAL BOXES IN COLOUR s a continuation of the English signal box portraits lines in the principality of Wales. All are believed to be A that appeared in the last issue, here we present photographs that have not appeared in print before, and a further selection from across the Great Western show the diversity of these ubiquitous structures.

Right: By the time of this 1969 photograph (looking north) the infrastructure and signal box at Aberdare North was beginning to display an air of desolation. Situated just to the north of Aberdare Low Level station on the former Taff Vale line from Cardiff, the 49-lever cabin controlled junctions to the Dare Valley Branch to Nantmelyn (left) and a connection to the adjacent Vale of Neath line (right), as well as a series of sidings and the level crossing. Passenger services on the branches had ceased in 1964, but following the evident track rationalisation to a single running line, the route was retained to serve several collieries along the valley. The line finally closed in 1973, with freight services diverted via the Vale of Neath route, and the site was cleared for road improvements and a bus station.

Bernard Mills.

Left: The GWR designed Type 5 Neath & Brecon Junction Box is recorded on Saturday 13 October 1962. Built in 1892, the 14-lever signal box had originally been christened Cadoxton Junction and was sited adjacent to Neath Riverside station on the Vale of Neath line. Opened as Neath Low Level the station became Bridge Street for a short period between 192426, then Neath Riverside.

The Great Western South Wales main line can be seen crossing above to the right.

‘8750’ Class 0-6-0PT No. 9796 of Pontypool Road shed (86G) is working one of the final ‘special’ services to Brecon, with the line officially closing to passengers two days later.

In more recent times the line has been periodically used for mineral traffic to the washing plant at Onllwyn and as such the signal box has remained in existence.

Douglas Twibell.

58

ISSUE 12

Above: The imposing bulk of Pontypool Road Station South Signal Box, with its unusual pair of bay windows. The box was sited between the station platforms and the complex triangular junctions, yards and engine shed to the south. The rail-served Pilkinton’s Glass Works (now part of British Glass) is to the rear.

Gerald Daniels.

Below: A ‘Blue Pullman’ in revised livery passes the substantial Swansea High Street Signal Box on 28 March 1972. The 120-lever structure was opened in 1915 to a GWR Type 7D design. Originally North Dock Junction, it was renamed in 1926.

Bernard Mills.

59

The stunning vista looking north from the platform ends at Talybont-on-Usk include the wonderfully proportioned signal box. Built in 1892, the McKenzie & Holland Type 3 box contained a 14-lever frame and was closed in September 1963.

Gerald Daniels.

ISSUE 12

Above: The somewhat austere design signal box at Uskmouth on the East Usk Branch near Newport. 19 June 1971. Bernard Mills.

Below: The original 43-lever Whitland West Box on 20 August 1972, about to be replaced by a BR(W) Type 37 structure. Bernard Mills.

61

WESTERN TIMES

THE WELLINGTON TO SHREWSBURY JOINT LINE LESLIE PRICE Times Issue 10, I was very interested to Shropshire’s railways is very complex. The railway line IthenreadWestern the Article written by Freddie Huxtable regarding between Wolverhampton, Shrewsbury and Chester Paddington to Birkenhead line (the GWR’s was instigated by three separate railway companies, Northern Main Line). Working in London during the 1960’s I regularly travelled this route to my boyhood home in Shrewsbury. The nearer I got the happier I became. ‘A Shropshire Lad’ was forever a Shropshire Lad.

the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway (SBR) the Shropshire Union Railway and Canal Company (SUR&CC) and the Shrewsbury and Chester (SCR).

During the 1840’s these three were at the heart of the frontier between what was to become the Great Western and London and North Western Railway Companies.

On reaching Wellington I was always fascinated by the signal boxes. Hitherto on the journey signal box nameplates always described where they were situated. However running into Wellington the first box encountered wasn’t called Stafford Junction, as one might have expected, but was designated Wellington No.1.

The first two independent companies were authorised on 3 August 1846. The SUR&CC was principally a Canal Company and became one of the first in the country to venture into railway construction with an original intention to convert a number of its canals into railways. Their Act enabled construction of a line between Shrewsbury and Stafford and that of the SBR, between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton. At much the same time the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway had also been authorised by Act of Parliament on 27 July 1846.

And so it continued, the box at the east end of the station was Wellington No.2; that at the west end No.3 and finally Market Drayton Junction was No.4.

Thereafter normality was resumed with the next box between Wellington No.4 and Walcot being named Allscott Sugar Works and then Upton Magna before we arrived at Shrewsbury. A similar situation applied at Chester where Signal Boxes were enumerated Nos. 1 to 6 rather than described by location. The question is, of course, ’how did that come about’?

Working in harmony the SUR&CC and SBR formed the ‘Shrewsbury and Wellington Joint Line Committee’ holding their first meeting on 17 November, 1846. It was resolved that the SUR&CC would take responsibility for construction of the line of the route and the SBR that of the major structures i.e. buildings and bridges.

In company with many other counties the history of

The 1854 arrangement between the Shrewsbury and Birmingham, Shropshire Union and Shrewsbury and Chester Railways.

62

ISSUE 12

Above: A view of Wellington shed from the Up island platform on Thursday 22 August 1963. The Ivatt Class 2MT 2-6-2T No. 41241 has just arrived on shed. By this time the Ivatts had the monopoly of the Wellington-Crewe service. No. 41241 was based here at (84H) between October 1959 and January 1964. It would probably have started its day working the 7.30am service Down to Crewe before returning with the 9.30am due Wellington at 10.43am. In front of this engine is a Collet 57xx 0-6-0PT No. 9774, which was a long standing Wellington based locomotive having been posted there in early autumn 1955 and remaining until August 1964 when it was sent to Tyseley for its final two years. Together with Nos. 4646 and 4696 it was one of the last three ‘Pannier Tanks’ withdrawn from service in early November 1966. They had been the last examples of ex-GWR running stock to survive. As a result of the Regional Boundary Changes effective from 1 January 1963, Wellington was transferred from the Western Region to the London Midland Region on 1 September 1963, a week after this photograph was taken, becoming shed code (2M). It closed on 31 July 1964.

However, in 1847 the London and North Western Railway (LNWR) sensed an opportunity to extend its sphere of influence and took out a lease on the SUR&CC effectively taking over the building of the joint line extending it to Stafford to connect with their developing North West main line. It opened on1st June 1849. It was this action that caused all the signal boxes at Wellington to be enumerated in the LNWR style. By this time the SBR had completed its line only as far as Oakengates not reaching Wolverhampton until 12 November in the same year.

Dudley Railway (BW&DR) had also been authorised

by Parliament in 1846 and merged with the GWR in 1847. In January 1851 a traffic agreement was agreed between the two companies and the GWR giving the S&BR access to Wolverhampton (Low Level). This was achieved by building the three-quarters of a mile long Wolverhampton Junction Railway connecting the S&BR at Stafford Road Junction into the BW&DR, at Cannock Road Junction. It was wholly owned by the Great Western Railway and engineered by I. K. Brunel opening on 14 November 1854, at the same time as the BW&DR. The S&B merged with the GWR at the same time.

Despite the LNWR’s best efforts to deter it the SBR eventually opened its line from Shrewsbury to a terminus in Wolverhampton in 1849. The SBR was also experiencing difficulties at the other end of its route between Birmingham and Wolverhampton. It had a share in the Stour Valley line as did the LNWR which held a greater share and treated the SBR with animosity using underhand tactics frustrating it completing their route. Further north-west the S&C was suffering similar treatment at the hands of the LNWR in the Chester area.

At the northern end of the route the final piece in the jigsaw fell into place when the Shrewsbury and Chester (Birkenhead Station) Act 1851 gave the S&CR running powers to Birkenhead. The LNWR, once again, were hostile partners this time at Chester putting a variety of difficulties in their way. In 1854 the matter went to arbitration which found in favour of the S&CR, giving them running powers not only to Birkenhead but Manchester and Liverpool also. In September 1854 the S&CR and GWR amalgamated giving the latter running powers to Birkenhead. The Paddington to Birkenhead route was complete.

Their treatment drove the S&B and the S&C to look to the GWR. The Birmingham, Wolverhampton and 63

WESTERN TIMES

Above: A ‘Class 4’ fully fitted freight runs through Wellington on the ‘Up’ main line on the morning of 22 August 1963 headed by ‘Grange’ No. 6851 Hurst Grange. Having probably originated from Coton Hill, Shrewsbury or Crewe via Market Drayton it is likely headed to Oxley for sorting and onward dispatch. An interesting feature of the photograph is a glimpse of Wellington No.3 Signal Box on the left at the end of the Down platform. Hurst Grange is still displaying an 84B (Oxley) shed plate even though the depot had been transferred from the Western Region to the London Midland on the 1 January that year. It was subsequently reallocated to Tyseley (by then 2A) on 19 June 1965 and was condemned there just two months later on 14 August 1965.

Below: Photographed from a Paddington bound train at Market Drayton Junction on 20 June 1965, ‘5101’ 2-6-2T No. 4148 displays a ‘Class 9’ headlamp code signifying it is working an engineer’s train. It stands on the Wellington ‘Up’ line. The Wellington to Nantwich and Crewe line was to lose its passenger service on 9th September 1963 but remained open for through freight trains as a valuable alternative route between the urban West Midlands and Crewe. This lasted until 1967 when the line closed completely and the track was lifted in 1970. No. 4148 had been reallocated to Oxley in June 1963 from Newton Abbot and remained there until being withdrawn in September 1965.

64

ISSUE 12 Moving back to the construction of the line between Wellington and Shrewsbury; at a meeting of the Shrewsbury and Wellington Joint Line Committee in February 1847 William Baker, Resident Engineer of the S&BR, was appointed Chief Engineer of the Joint line. In this capacity he was responsible for the design of all the main structures and stations.

But then came the one significant obstacle. This was the River Severn at Belvedere about two miles east of Shrewsbury. This handsome structure erected to span the wide river course was built in 1848 by contractors Hammond and Murray. The contract for its construction was valued at £80,000 and opened with the rest of the line in 1849. Its two spans, each of 101ft, standing on skewed stone abutments was made from cast iron by the Coalbrookdale Company, in the nearby industrial heartland of the Ironbridge Gorge. The legend ‘Cast at Coalbrookdale’ (see page 69) still graces one of the arches. Tragically during its construction two men fell into the river and drowned.

The importance of the bridge’s status was formally recognised in 1985, when it attained Grade II listing.

Between Wellington and Shrewsbury the joint companies opened three stations. The first was the little used Admaston which had been reduced to the status of an unstaffed halt on 30 June 1952. Next was the equally little used Walcot before we arrived at Upton Magna, the one station that was within walking distance of the village it purported to serve.

Above: This is how to get your photograph spoiled! A truculent Porter strides up the platform in front of the camera at Walcot on 19 April 1963 masking ‘Castle’ No. 7019 Fowey Castle as it runs in with the 5.10pm Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton (Low Level) stopping train due here at 5.57pm. This was the last remaining steam operated passenger train between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton in the Winter Timetable 1962/63. Note the Porter is carrying a small bag in his left hand that is likely the station cash bag, with its meagre takings for the day, which the Guard will take to Wellington the nearest accounting point for paying in. On the left are the platform lamp-posts for Tilley oil lamps used for lighting during the dark hours; in this context little had changed since the station opened. At the time of the photograph Fowey Castle was based at Stafford Road (84A) until its closure on 9 September 1963. Walcot, along with the other intermediate stations on the line, was closed on 9 September 1964.

65

WESTERN TIMES

Above: Photographed from Platform 7 on the cold morning of Thursday 10 November 1966, BR Standard Class 2 2-6-0 No. 78017 shunts an ex-GWR ‘Beetle’ van into the tunnel leading to Howard Street Goods Depot adjacent to the station. Of a design dating back to 1909 this type of van was intended for the conveyance of prize cattle and other livestock accompanied by a handler who travelled in the middle compartment. The term ‘Beetle’ was the GWR telegraph code for such a vehicle.The skewed alignment of this short tunnel accounts for the darkness beyond the van since the other end is out of sight around a curve. No. 78017 had only been transferred to Shrewsbury fom Stoke a month earlier and its stay was short lived being withdrawn from service a month later.

And so we come to Shrewsbury. The S&BR opened the terminus of their railway at Abbey Foregate. The S&CR was the first Company to open its station in the town at Coton Hill in October 1846. The first part of the S&HR line was opened as a single line from Shrewsbury to Ludlow on 20 April 1852, hence their interest in a more permanent station in Shrewsbury.

Perhaps the LNWR who were now in control of the SUR&CC had its eye on a greater territorial prize.

involved digging out the front courtyard and inserting a basement beneath the original station building. At the same time the bridge over the River Severn was widened and the platforms extended.

Each of the original companies opened its own goods yard. The SUR&CC (LNWR) built theirs at Abbey Foregate; the S&HR at Coleham and the S&CR at Coton Hill. But by 1857 the LNWR depot was operating to capacity so on 30th November that year submitted plans to open a railway yard at their Canal Basin in Shrewsbury.

At a meeting of the ‘Shrewsbury and Wellington Joint Line Committee’ held on 22 February 1847 it was resolved that a further joint committee be formed; this time it was the ‘Shrewsbury Joint Station Joint Committee’. Its members were representatives from the SUR&CC, S&BR, Shrewsbury and Chester Railway (S&CR) and Shrewsbury and Hereford Railway (S&HR), holding their first meeting on 16 April 1847.

In 1853 a LNWR route from Crewe had been authorised but objections by the GWR through the House of Lords meant they did not gain access to the joint station until 1 September 1858. They then opened a yard at Crewe Bank. Access to both of the LNWR yards was from Castle Foregate. The Coton Hill Yard adjacent to it became the main GWR Yard in Shrewsbury.

The graceful station, built in the Tudor style, was opened in 1848 and it was originally named Shrewsbury General. Subsequent upon the opening of other lines from Crewe in 1858, and Welshpool in January 1862, the station became very congested and enlargement was required. This eventually led to a complete restructuring between 1889 and 1903. It

At Nationalisation of British Railways in 1948 Shrewsbury and the area south of it was ceded to the Western Region. But the locomotive depot, despite being allocated an 84G shed code, remained distinctly divided into two sections; i.e. the ex-Great Western 66

ISSUE 12 and the London Midland. It also remained the place where North and West express trains for Bristol and beyond changed locomotives; the LMR locomotive being relieved by a Western Region one. For some trains having portions for both Cardiff and Bristol this occurred at Pontypool Road.

design. The first of these was the Dana. It is seen as far back as an 1857 plan of the station as a footbridge spanning the entire width of the station from Castle Foregate, adjacent to the station forecourt, north to Castlefields on Howard Street. This public right of way clearly pre-existed the coming of the railways.

The station was actually built on the site of the Castle motte; an area of rising ground immediately in front of the castle. This path was known as the Dana because a walkway around the Castle motte had been laid out in the 18th century by the Rev. Edmund Dana and became a public right of way.

Prior to WWII, on Platform 10 of the 1932 plan (now Platform 3), there was an additional station exit through the platform wall secured by a pair of full height iron gates opening directly onto the Dana, only used on special occasions like the Shrewsbury Flower Show when as many as 15,000 extra passengers could be expected to arrive at the station.

Shrewsbury had always been a strategic crossroads for all the important routes along the Welsh Marches and was unquestionably the gateway to Mid-Wales.

The Welsh name for Shrewsbury is ‘Amwythig’ which translates as ‘fortified place’. Since the station sits twixt Prison and Castle it seems quite an appropriate name in relation to the station’s location.

Perhaps what is not so generally well known is that Shrewsbury station had three quite possibly unique features. A 1932 Plan of the station shows its configuration after the turn of the 19th Century rePlan of the Shropshire Union Goods Yard in 1857.

Plan of Shrewsbury Station in 1932.

67

WESTERN TIMES Secondly, was a Curtain wall which separated the ‘Up’ through line from what is now Platform 7 (Platform 1/2 on the 1932 Plan), the main ‘Up’ Platform. In 1950 the numbering of the Platforms was transposed. Platform 1/2 extended to become Platform 7 and No.9 Bay became No.1 Bay; those in between were changed accordingly. During my youthful years at home this Curtain did not seem to serve any useful purpose other than displaying posters and shielding the ‘Up’ through line from the Platform.

Third and perhaps the most intriguing was hidden from view, awkwardly located immediately adjacent to the station opposite the present Platform 7, with access directly off the ‘Up’ through line. It was officially known as Howard Street Goods Depot, about which little seems to have been written.

By 1797 the Shrewsbury Canal had been completed and opened its terminus basin adjacent to Shrewsbury Prison. By 1835 the canal had been linked to the national network by a junction with the Shropshire Union Canal at Norbury in Staffordshire. In the same year a substantial Butter and Cheese Market was built at the terminus of the Canal Basin adjacent to Howard Street, to cater for the flow of fresh produce, and other goods brought into Shrewsbury by barge. The basin was extended up to its doors. There was also an extensive coal wharf. After the opening of the General Market in the town centre in 1869 its use changed to storing grain; a purpose it served for many years.

Beyond that was a dock which the 1932 plan describes as a ‘Horse and Carriage Dock’. It was accessible from Howard Street that, according to Pearson in 1932 was ‘where 2,500 horses are dealt with’ (a year?). It was also said to have been used for the transporting of prisoners to and from Shrewsbury Prison in the late 19th and early 20th century but there appears to be no evidence to support this. But could this be a reason for the Curtain wall?

The poet A. E. Houseman encapsulates the proximity of the gaol to the station in one of the poems in his collections, A Shropshire Lad:

As mentioned earlier, by the early 1850’s the growth of freight traffic at its SUR&CC Goods Depot at Abbey Foregate meant that it was operating to capacity. By then the LNWR had become owners of the canal.

On 30 November 1857 they submitted plans for the conversion of the Victoria Basin, as it was then known, into a railway Goods Depot. In the same year they acquired the Butter Market.

They hang us now in Shrewsbury Gaol The whistles blow forlorn And trains groan all night on the rail To men that die at morn

Shropshire Union Railway & Canal Company Goods Yard, Shrewsbury 1882.

Howard Street Goods Yard as shown on this First Edition Ordnance Survey Map published in 1882 with the West to the top and the North on the right. The Shrewsbury Canal enters from the bottom right. On the left towards the top of the plan a portion of Howard Street Warehouse is shown with two sidings butting up to it. The site of the Perseverance Iron Works subsequently became Morris of Shrewsbury Oil Works. The open space below the railway lines is occupied by Shrewsbury Prison. The railway entered this Yard through a skewed tunnel beneath Howard Street between these two points on the left of the plan.

68

This photograph, taken at Shrewsbury on Monday 15 April 1968, shows the curtain wall referred to in the text together with the Dana footbridge crossing the station above the DMU and sloping down onto Howard Street. Beyond the train, in the Horse and Carriage Dock, a four wheeled van, with sliding door open, is lodged against the buffer stops. The two-car DMU sitting in Platform 7 is forming the 12.20pm stopping service to Crewe. One of the platform staff and possibly the Guard engage the driver in conversation whilst waiting departure time. The platform looks remarkably deserted.

A freight train rumbles over Belvedere Bridge during the early afternoon on Saturday 27 September 1969. At its head is a Brush Type 4 Co-Co No. 1740 with a rake of empty mineral wagons in tow. They appear to be side-opening steel coal wagons probably en-route from the West Midlands to the North Wales coalfield around Wrexham that finally ceased production in 1986. The headcode 6L62 tells us it is a Class 6 (Express freight train partly fitted with the automatic brake operative on not fewer than 20 per cent of the vehicles) though looking at the wagons this could be disputed so the headcode could be a ‘false flag’. At the time No. 1740 was allocated to the Stoke Division (D05). From its appearance it looks as though it has recently been repainted with BR Blue bodywork and full yellow cab which had first been introduced in 1965.

WESTERN TIMES The Victoria Basin soon became superseded by the coming of the railways. In 1859 the LNWR set about constructing a short tunnel beneath Howard Street into the basin quickly developing it into a Goods Yard which included a Travelling Crane; a brick built Goods Shed and abutting a Corn Mill. They then laid lines extending into sidings across the former canal wharf. Coal could now be brought in by rail instead of canal.

Alas little now remains of Howard Street Goods Depot; large storage tanks for Morris’s Oil Works occupy some of the area but well over a bi-centenary after its inception in 1757 and closure on 5 April 1971, in local railwayman’s parlance Howard Street Goods Depot was still always colloquially known as the ‘SU Yard.’

My grateful thanks are due to my brother-in-law, Peter Causer, who provided much of the information pertaining to the SU Yard including a copy of the 1882 Ordnance Survey Map that had been recovered from destruction by his brother Michael when Shrewsbury Borough Council were disposing of it some 50 years ago.

Inevitably this led the use of the canal into decline.

By 1922 even traffic at the remaining Coal Wharf had ceased and this led the LM&SR, who due to the grouping of the railways had now become the owners to abandon the canal. However, during the first half of the 20th century the rail depot continued to handle a variety of commodities being brought into the town, the principal perhaps being coal.

References: A Regional History of the Railways of Great Britain; Volume 7: The West Midlands, Rex Christiansen.

David & Charles, 1973.

In 1929 a local firm, Morris & Co, bought the Perseverance Iron Works (as seen on the 1882 plan) and converted it into an Oil Works. Rakes of oil tankers numbering up to eight at a time were then handled, the oil being piped from each tank directly into the Works.

By the 1950’s another local company, McGowan’s Fruit and Vegetable Wholesalers had a warehouse here where a Fyffes Bananas fruit van could often be seen.

And as can be seen in Image 5, even by 1963 livestock could still occasionally pass through the yard or was a ‘Beetle’ van, by then, being put to a different use?

‘Shrewsbury as a Railway Centre’, Railway Magazine article 1932, H. M. Pearson.

The Shropshire Union Railway, Bob Yate. The Oakwood Press, 2003.

The Industrial Archaeology of Shropshire, Barrie Trinder. Phillimore & Co. Ltd, 1996.

But by the 1950s railway freight services had fallen into a steepening decline particularly with wagon loads.

The Beeching Report in 1963 predicated the end of this traffic which ultimately led to the closure of the depot. But the name ‘Shropshire Union’ never died.

Beyond the Bridges (The suburbs of Shrewsbury 17601960) - Barrie Trinder – Phillimore & Co. Ltd. 2006.

Shrewsbury to Crewe, Vic Mitchell and Keith Smith.

Middleton Press, 2013.

Above: Rush-hour at Upton Magna! This picture is possibly unique in the sense that it is a perfect illustration of the joint nature of the line. The time is 5.20pm on 3 August 1964, just prior to the closure of local services. Standing in the ‘Down’ platform is BR Standard Class 4 No. 73070 (out of sight beyond the bridge) that had arrived at 5.18pm with the 4.4pm ex-Stafford to Shrewsbury.

Moments later ex-GWR ‘Hall’ No. 5927 Guild Hall, with steam oozing from its piston valves, makes a determined effort leaving with the 5.10pm ex- Shrewsbury to Wolverhampton (Low Level) stopping train. Upton Magna closed on the 7 September 1964 on the withdrawal of the Stafford-Shrewsbury service. The former Station Master’s house on the right is the only evidence surviving today.

70

ISSUE 12

TRIP TO THE BEACH f all the beautiful and picturesque locations where Popular locations such as Teignmouth, Dawlish and O our railway network rubs shoulders with natural Barmouth feature prominently in the lexicon of the topographical features, the spectacular coastline of ‘Western Aficionado’ and due to this prominence were the British Isles must surely rate as amongst the most iconic. The Great Western Railway was fortunate to operate trains at many of these locations, and as such, the heady mix of sea, sand and steam (diesel fumes) has left an indelible mark on the memories of many enthusiasts. Who can forget holidays to Devon and Cornwall, or to the many coastal destinations in south and west Wales, where the joys of a family vacation could be combined with watching the trains go by.

photographed countless times over the decades.

In this short photographic essay, we have delved into the archive to exhibit a selection of images from some of the less well known places where rail meets sand.

Despite the aesthetic charm this combination provides, one also has to wonder at the operational challenges that faced footplate and permanent way staff alike, in keeping the ‘show on the road’ under these conditions.

Above: It was the unearthing of the transparency recording this spectacular scene, that was to be the catalyst for this short photographic feature. Here Standard Class 3 2-6-2T No. 82006 has quite literally made a trip onto the beach on 21 September 1962.

This seldom photographed location (especially with a train present) is Aberdovey Harbour at the mouth of the River Dyfi on the Cambrian Coast.

The location was the site of the original Aberdovey station opened by the Aberystwyth and Welsh Coast Railway on 24 October 1863. This closed to passenger services on 14 August 1867 when the original plan to cross the estuary on a bridge was abandoned in favour of the present inland route to Dovey Junction. This resulted in a 0m 37c spur which became referred to as the Aberdovey Harbour Branch and continued to serve as a public goods station until 4 May 1964. Like many of these type of goods stations however, active services had often finished earlier.

The 1952 Swindon-built locomotive was a resident of nearby Machynlleth shed (89C) at this time, having previously been at Tyseley, Barry, Newton Abbot, Wellington and Bristol Bath Road. It was withdrawn from Nine Elms in September 1966.

Ian Hemphill.

71

WESTERN TIMES

Above: Can there be a more ionic beachside location on the Great Western than that at Dawlish? Newton Abbot stalwart No.4098 Kidwelly Castle threads a Swansea to Penzance express between the sea and Marine Parade in the high summer of 1960.

Below: The beach adjacent to St Ives station appears rather sparsely patronised for such a beautiful afternoon, as No. 4570 approaches the terminus with the 5.55pm from St Erth on 17 July 1960. Perhaps the crowds have already headed back to their hotels for dinner!

72

ISSUE 12

Above: Swansea Bay station was opened adjacent to the beach by the Llanelly Railway & Dock Company on 14 December 1867. Passing into ownership of the LNWR, the nearby Swansea Victoria formed the southern terminus of their Central Wales line. Following 1958 regional boundary changes the BR(W) assumed control, as witnessed by 0-6-2T No. 5623 approaching with a local stopping service.

Below: The same train is seen heading west later in the day, consisting of a solitary Collett D125 Brake Third. The station and line were closed in June 1964 as a result of the Beeching Report cuts, and the course of the railway now forms part of the A4067 between Swansea and the Mumbles. Just visible are grey traction poles from the Swansea & Mumbles tramway, which closed in January 1960.

73

Another remarkable scene is recorded to the west of Swansea Bay station, as a local service navigates through a considerable quantity of sand blown onto the line from the adjacent beach. Despite being a former LMS route, Great Western designed infrastructure is clearly evident in the signals and spear top fencing, as well as the rolling stock. ‘8750’ Class 0-6-0PT No. 9675 was a Swansea East Dock (87D) locomotive between April-June 1964, before moving to Neath. The coach appears to be a Hawksworth designed D131 Gangwayed Brake Third of 1947 vintage. Swansea West Pier and the docks dominate the middle distance, with the hills above Port Talbot on the horizon.

Gerald Daniels.

ISSUE 12

75

WESTERN TIMES

ACV / BUT RAILCARS ON THE WESTERN REGION very so often photographs are unearthed which have been given to the build and not surprisingly they E throw up more questions than answers. Such is quickly gained the nickname of ‘Flying Bricks’. The first the case with the two of the accompanying images, three vehicles were (as depicted here) painted re-discovered when delving deep into a box in the archives of one of the editorial team.

two-tone grey with red lining. Later sets were slightly different in that no skirts were provided.

What we know for certain is that they both depict one of the four sets of Associated Commercial Vehicles / British United Traction lightweight railcars introduced in 1952 and which operated as either two or three car units as an early experiment at economy and potentially replacing steam on lightly loaded branch lines.

Leaving further technicalities aside, the question raised is what was the set doing on the BR(W), and what other workings took place elsewhere on the region involving the set? We also do not know if it had operated as a passenger carrying service on this occasion or was it simply a test run. The lack of obvious passenger patronage was not uncommon on this section of line, so it is hard to be certain.

Unfortunately, no date is given for the photographs, but it is recorded the trial took place w/c 28 April 1952.

According to the excellent ‘Railcar.co.uk‘ website, the sets were trialled at varying locations around the country before settling down to more regular use on the London Midland Region, St Albans – Watford and Harrow-Belmont routes. We know that one set also reached Kent, again on trial.

Here though courtesy of the camera of the late David Abbott, we see one of the sets near Hermitage running south between Didcot and Newbury (below) and also stabled in the down loop just east of Newbury station (opposite page top).

Compared with today’s trains where much effort is made to reduce wind resistance and so save fuel, little in the way of aesthetic consideration appears to

The prototyle 3-car set running on the Didcot, Newbury and Southampton line near to Hermitage. It appears to be running empty.

76

ISSUE 12

In this photograph the unit is seen stabled east of Newbury station in the down goods loop, undoubtedly during the same trials.

The Didcot to Newbury line provided little in the way of passenger revenue although it was heavily used by freight to and from the Midlands and the south coast, almost until final closure in the mid 1960s. Indeed, so far as passenger revenue was concerned, the situation was aptly described in the 1982 Wild Swan book on the DNS, referring to the line in the 1950s decade as ‘BR’s Rural Crumb Catcher’.

Probably the same set was noted on the High Wycombe-Princes Risborough line in May 1952, and at Birmingham Snow Hill in August-September 1953 (see below). After a number of years in storage at Derby, they were finally withdrawn in late 1963.

We welcome reader’s comments on the images shown, and also additional information on any further ACV / BUT unit incursions onto the Western Region.

As passenger receipts fell away between Didcot and Newbury and even more so when through working to Southampton ceased with the closure of the line south of Newbury in 1960, so a diesel train, often just a single ‘bubble-car’ took over the workings between Didcot and Newbury. Going back in time, we know that in 1947 a GWR design diesel railcar also ran through to Winchester on a trial, no doubt an earlier consideration regarding economy, although in the event steam remained supreme south of Newbury until closure.

Right: This final view shows one of the 3-car prototype ACV lightweight sets at Birmingham Moor Street in 1953, whilst undertaking trials on local commuter services.

E A Wood.

77

WESTERN TIMES

THE GREAT WESTERN TRUST (GWT) - BULLETIN NO. 11 n my Bulletin for Western Times Issue No 6 in Spring members of the GWR Audit Department, probably Idining 2023 I explored the very senior staff and director’s around 1907 or earlier, but their first AGM was held club, namely ‘The Glover Club’ and said that I in the Clerks Dining Rooms, later in March 1921. We would return in future to material from other unofficial ‘staff clubs’ in the Great Western Trust Collection.

have three of probably originally four longhand Minute Books covering 1907-1964 (missing 1929-1948). They tell, of annual dinners and concerts, AGMs, recording young members who died in WW1, gifts to members serving overseas and on a lighter if more contentious note, I quote ‘excited discussion which caused a deal of merriment’ at the 3rd AGM in 1923 about whether or not to welcome ladies to their annual dinners! Their Rule Book specified members were from the male staff of the Accountant’s Office (Audit Section). That a Badge was to be purchased by each member in the form of a ‘Lamb’ and worn at each Annual Dinner, not wearing it warranted a one shilling fine. The Treasurer and Secretary had another distinctive badge! Neither of these badges came with these documents. Worthy of note is that the Lamb and Flag pub in Canon’s Town near Penzance derived its name from the Tin Stamp of the Bolitho family as a mark of purity on ingots of tin, and it was this device that also appeared on the badges. Now Robins Bolitho was a GWR Director, and he had a ‘Saint’ Class loco named after him. Was this why they adopted the ‘Audit Lambs’ title?

I have highlighted in previous articles that the staff section of the Trust Collection has a dominant content of officially sanctioned, organised and part funded, social activities for all bar the very highest ranks. So why then should the ‘middle ranks and below’ want to establish their very own clubs? I have two examples of such groups or clubs, and though guessing that the existence of others may emerge in due course, I think both can answer my question!

The first is that most wonderfully captured in its very own glossy publication in November 2013 with the splendid title The Ancient Brotherhood of Sparks: A History. ‘Sparks’ was once a recognised nickname for electricians, but this group couldn’t even explain from their own researches why that name had been first adopted! Be that as it may, their history goes way back to 1891, purely as a group of GWR Chief Goods Manager’s staff of middle rank men deciding to have a private dinner. Crucially and I quote, ‘one of the principal ideas was for its members to be practically of the same standing in the Office and not to invite chiefs nor the youngest members of the staff’.

So why were they formed? I believe that beyond the obvious social and probably key career investment attraction for the very senior rank ‘Glover Club’ members, the social cohesion and mutual relaxed enjoyment of companionship beyond the workplace, was immune to even a rank and class conscious Britain. That said, both still created membership rules such as an age based entrance to membership, which was undeniably discriminatory. Overall, we can say that despite their divergent level of staff rank, they created long lived organisations with remarkably similar administrative structures, even to those fines for failing to wear their badges!

By 1899, and with time having effected changes, a more formal constitution was needed, not least to adopt its title and to establish rules about new membership, so that the foresaid principals, i.e. not flooded with youngsters, was maintained. An annual Dinner was inaugurated, a Sparks Membership ‘Badge’ adopted with a financial penalty for failing to wear it at said Dinner etc! As with all such constitutions they had to evolve with changing social norms and the book covers many insights not least their creation of a Benevolent Fund, a Ladies Dinner Night and an annual outing.

I only became aware of this ‘Brotherhood’ through a generous bequest from the friend of the adopted daughter of a deceased long term member, one Edwin William Burr. He joined the GWR in the CGMO Dept in December 1912, and rose to higher rank in the BR(W) Chief Commercial Manager’s Dept, as Head of Private Sidings Agreements and died in 1986. Among many ‘Sparks’ items including its rule books, he was a member from 1934, once holding the rank of Chair at an Annual Dinner. I illustrate his Sparks Badge and the cover of the 91st Annual Dinner he attended in 1981.

Peter Rance - GWT Trustee & Collection Manager.

My second example arrived through an auction from a house clearance! It included Minute Books and other documents of ‘the GWR Audit Lambs’. In fact, this was also a ‘Brotherhood’ but this time created by the young 78

THE GUARD’S COMPARTMENT ISSUE 11

Another article that prompted healthy debate was the piece by Michael Sefi regarding operations at Savernake. Michael further commented ‘If you study the photo closely on Page 71 (enlarged below), there are what appears to be a woman carrying a suitcase walking in the 6-foot of the Marlborough branch, with somebody accompanying her appearing to be holding a carry bag walking in the adjacent 4-foot.

David Jenkins kindly wrote complementing the images of the Llanfyllin branch.

He rightly corrected your Editor that Llanfyllin is in fact a town and not a village, and as such has its own mayor. He added that the two newish 16T mineral wagons visible on the left-hand side of the photo on Page 7 are loaded with scrap metal gathered in the area by the Parkes family, local rag & bone men and scrap dealers. When their yard near the station was full, they would order a few wagons to take the scrap to Brymbo steelworks near Wrexham. Judging by the neatly loaded wagons, they are ‘ready to go’!

John Bradbeer contacted us to confirm the identity of the snow plough fitted 0-6-0PT on Page 46 as No. 3794, which he captured in the same spot a few weeks later. John also added that Bishops Nympton and Molland signal box on Page 65 dates from the GWR’s work on improving the Devon and Somerset line from Taunton to Barnstaple in the 1930s, involving more and/or longer passing loops and thus more complex signalling.

Regarding this curious incident, Michael speculates the following by means of an explanation: i) Even though there is no FPL from the Up Main onto the branch (as mentioned in the article and confirmed by the small photo at the top of page 73); the Trowbridge train had backed onto the branch with at least one passenger on board.

The Missing Signal article on Pages 57-59 prompted a number of readers messages (see also overleaf): Alan Williams comments ‘One of these devices was provided at Swansea and was located at Cockett East Signal Box on the original South Wales Railway main line to west Wales. Direct reference is made to this apparatus in the Swansea District No.9 Sectional Appendix (1914), as well as No.10 Sectional Appendix (Cardiff Valleys became No.9 District at Grouping), but not in No.9 Sectional Appendix (1905) nor No.10 Sectional Appendix (1938). Both Up and Down Avoiding Lines had been taken out of use in 1935, along with Cockett East Signal Box. The Up lines were on a 1 in 52 falling gradient at this point. No clue is given as to the mechanical working of the indicator, the only reference being ‘The signalman must be very careful in working the Indicator to correctly alter the number every time a train enters or leaves the Loop’.

The diagrams include the lettering ‘ “x” TRAINS IN LOOP ‘ on the face facing the driver of an Up train.

Alan can find no other reference to these indicators, but would be interesting to discover exactly how these devices worked.

ii) That passenger had meant to get off the Trowbridge at Savernake, failed to do so and presumably sought help from the guard of the Trowbridge - who assisted her down on to the Marlborough branch tracks to walk forward to the ramp up onto the Up platform. (Did guards’ areas on trains at that time have a ladder?) iii) Was the person accompanying the woman the guard or another member of staff? (The enlargement at least confirms that person is in uniform). iv) The need to go to the ramp up onto the Up platform would have taken the walkers perilously close to the Up Main - with the Up Taunton presumably due - (or possibly they missed it, in which case why get down onto the tracks as the Trowbridge would shortly pull into the Up platform). v) And not much time to do it all, unless the Taunton service was running late.

--- o O o--79

ACCURACY IN WESTERN TIMES

Compartment. As previously advised, reliance on social media for the circulation of alternative views offers limited benefit by depending reaching only those who rely heavily upon this medium. The practice of ‘trolling’ will continue to be deplored.

The article ‘THE MISSING SIGNAL’ (Issue 11, Pages 57-9) referred to a paper submitted by A T Blackall in 1910/11 to the Institution of Civil Engineers under title Modern Railway Signalling; Some Developments on the Great Western Railway. This was a lengthy, technical survey from which the author of the WT article extracted descriptive details of a rare and possibly unique form of signal that appears to have escaped mention in other contemporary and subsequent discourses on less common aspects of GWR signal practice.

Finally, the author of ‘The Missing Signal’ is a qualified signalman with a particular interest in the evolution of this complex subject.

--- o O o--It was with great sadness that just after Issue 11 of Western Times was published, we were informed of the sudden passing of Alan Postlethwaite. Alan was a regular contributor to these pages, with his articles on ‘Stroud’s Golden Valley’ (Issue 9) and ‘Discovering the Welsh Marches’ (Issue 11) being of particular note. He possessed an uncompromising eye for detail and was not backwards in offering design and layout suggestions for his work. We had been in discussion regarding these points right up to what proved his final days. He was also of particular value in that he supplied personal photographs to accompany his writing. Alan will be sorely missed by the Western Times team, and our deepest sympathy is extended to his family.

Directly quoted from the paper, Blackall stated ‘A goods-loop train-indicator is used for the purpose of warning the driver of the condition of a refuge-loop which he may be entering whether any, and, if so, how many trains are already in the loop. The Author (i.e.

Blackall) has designed the indicator shown which is to be fixed upon the post of the signal for entering the loop. The case upon the signal-post contains a circular ‘window’ in which numbers appear, corresponding with the number of trains admitted into the loop. Etc.’ This article evoked criticism on social media which opened with the condemnatory statement ‘an article with missing, and some incorrect, information’ which allegation the Editor refutes. Further, there followed a series of extraneous comments which were irrelevant to the point of the article. This was to provide a description of an unusual instrument, to speculate where it might have been located and how related operating instructions might have changed with evolving progress in signalling technology.

Important Notice. With ever rising costs it is with regret that we have to increase the cover price of all ‘Times Series’ books to £13.50 from 1 June 2025. For readers of Western Times, this will come into effect from Issue 13 (due for release in August). Back issues will not see any increase.

Following publication of this piece, the criticism was taken up directly with the social media author and he was invited to amplify and explain the rationale for his comments. In due course, the Editor received a lengthy email whose opening paragraph stated ‘I read with some interest the article about ‘The Missing Signal’. I know very little about the early history of the signals so have nothing to add but I was rather disappointed to find that subsequent history of GWR/WR Permissive Block working was not fully covered and that a number of errors crept into the article.’ It will be noted that this self-disqualification apparently undermines the authority with which the critical comments were levied, and it is further highlighted by the Editor that the article was never intended to detail the history of Permissive Block working!

--- o O o---

PREVIEW WESTERN TIMES ISSUE 13 Published August 2025

Many readers will be aware that Signalling and its evolution is a complicated technical subject with a language all of its own. It is too important an area to be treated superficially, and it is editorial policy progressively to explain key elements and how each inter-acts with others. This we strive to do accurately.

As with other topics, divergent views are welcome as adding to the collegiate fund of knowledge and they will continue to be treated with respect through Guard’s 80

OUT

OUT

NOW

NOW

WE S T E RN T IME S ISSUE No.12 - SPRING 2025

The history periodical for students of the GWR and BR(W) £12.95

ISSUE No.12 - SPRING 2025