Tail Lamp – readers’ letters
Tail Lamp in a year of lockdown has been rather busy and unsurprisingly Eric Stuart’s ‘Trains that went backwards’ article in the March 2021 issue of ‘Steam Days’ is among features that enjoyed a good deal of feedback. Why are we unsurprised? Well, the nature of local operational quirks was very much at the heart of this story, and often they are well known by those living close at hand but not necessarily by enthusiasts from further afield. What follows is a representative collection of some of the incoming insights, with photographs where possible.
From the author Glyncorrwg, and Cowes
Sir: Re-reading your caption for the train at Glyncorrwg, I am pleased to have your confirmation that the miners’ train worked conventionally between there and Cymmer. That is to say, the locomotive was at the front to the south of Glyncorrwg and was always at the south end when working between there and North Pit/North Rhondda Halt. There has been a contradictory view, but mine is as yours. The fact that there was a cab at both ends of the train may have caused confusion. I can only think that cabs were provided in both end vehicles so that the brake coaches could be swapped around in emergency, although that would take a while, for the coach/es to be turned somewhere!
To come to the image on page 14 of the March issue: The platform is on the east side, so the locomotive is at the north end and cannot be about to propel the train up to the North and South pits. Two possibilities (well, three):
1 and 2 – the loco is just about to shunt the coaches into, or has just shunted them out of their siding, which is just behind the platform and accessed only from the north end of the station.
3 – The train has just arrived from
Cymmer and the loco has not yet run round, so as to be at the lower end of the train for the steep climb ahead.
I incline (excuse the pun) to option 1 or 2, as there don’t appear to be any passengers around, although one can’t be sure.
BTW1 – I first became aware of the Cowes shunt by seeing it reproduced on a ‘OO’ gauge model railway, many years ago. Possibly, that was the germ that developed into the article!
BTW2 – I appreciate your captions. Some magazines are cavalier about them and seem to leave caption writing to uninitiated folk, with erroneous results.
Eric Stuart (by email)
In subsequent correspondence with Eric, the subject of the spelling of the Castlefin(n) station nameboards came up, and what evidence existed in regard to the alternative spellings, this location being mentioned in regard to one of the unusual shunts. So here are a few thoughts.
I’m told (by an Irish railway expert) that the timetable and even the station nameboards were inconsistent, but the County Donegal Railway Restoration Ltd has a report, in which they state:
‘The two platforms gave Castlefinn the opportunity to have two nameboards and become well-known for having a different spelling of the name on each side, one being Castlefin.’
The Chester Model Railway Club – chestermodelrailwayclub.com – have clearly looked into this, and their website includes photographic evidence.
Eric Stuart
Eyemouth and others
Sir: I very much enjoyed Eric Stuart’s article entitled ‘Trains that went backwards’.
May I be permitted to add some extra observations and comments? Eric mentioned several examples of gravity shunting of carriages when run-round loops were not available or could not be used. One interesting branch terminus, in this respect, was Eyemouth at the end of the short steeply graded branch from Burnmouth in the Scottish border country.
When Eyemouth station was built in the last decade of the nineteenth century it was provided with a single passenger platform and a run round loop. However within a few years this loop was removed and gravity shunting had to be employed, of necessity, both for passenger and goods rolling stock. Now the branch was without fixed signals and was operated on the ‘one-engine-in-steam’ (or two engines couple together) principle, so a second shunting engine could not be used to ‘free’ the arriving train engine.
There were some difficulties linked with the site and operations at Eyemouth. Firstly, the rail approach to the station was curved and there was an overbridge restricting visibility. Secondly, the rails were invariably covered with ‘rime’ caused by the dripping of fishy liquids from the fish wagons that emanated from the port. Thirdly, it was the habit at Eyemouth for several of these fish vans to be parked at the buffers of the platform line, thus shortening the length available for the passenger trains. A guard using only his handbrake had, therefore, to be very vigilant and skilful in bringing his empty train to a stand in the right place!
Another oddity at Eyemouth occurred at least annually in the 1950s when excursion trains of up to about ten carriages arrived at the station. A pilot engine was attached at the front of the train to assist the train engine in braking on the descent of the branch. Of course the station at Eyemouth was far too short to accommodate a train of this length with two tender locos at its head, especially as photographs show that fish vans were occupying part of the platform! The arriving passengers had necessarily to walk through the carriages from the rear of the train to access the platform to leave the train! The empty stock of these trains then had to be propelled back up the steep and slippery grade towards Burnmouth to allow the locomotives to escape from the train! Communication between the train crews and the guard at the rear needed to be precise! For the return of the trains in the evenings it was necessary for the locomotives to visit the turntable at Tweedmouth shed before working light engine back to Eyemouth!
I have attached a photograph showing one of these double-headed trains in Eyemouth platform; note the fish vans against the buffer stops in the foreground. Please note: the attached photograph was used in my Oakwood Press book on the Eyemouth Branch by kind permission of the North British Railway Study Group.
Eric mentions that such gravity shunting techniques were normally used only for empty rolling stock. It was about 15 years ago when I
rode on a passenger train whose approach to a terminus was under the control of the guard using his handbrake only! The train concerned was running on Slovakia’s iernohronská Railway, a former forestry line which is now operated as a steam-hauled tourist line. It is located near ierny Balog in the centre of the country. I was surprised when our well-loaded train stopped in the middle of some woodland. Our guard screwed down his handbrake and uncoupled the carriages from the locomotive, which then ran on ahead. A minute or two later there was a ‘peep’ from the distant loco whistle. Our guard released the brake and we coasted down the gradient to the line’s valley terminus, passing the loco in a siding just outside the station. The handbrake was used to bring the train to a stand. I don’t know whether this interesting procedure is still followed.
Finally, there are still instances of where a train on our national network reverses whilst containing passengers. Two years ago I had cause to travel from Thurso to Inverness on the final train of the day, which, according to the timetable, was a through train to Elgin. It consisted of a two-coach class ‘158’ unit. On approaching Inverness we were signalled onto the through line, thus avoiding entry to the north-facing platforms. A few hundred metres further on we came to a stand and the driver walked back through the train to the second cab.
After a few moments the train changed its direction of travel and entered one of the south-facing platforms at Inverness station, where most passengers detrained. A few more joined the train for the onward journey to
Elgin. I note that this through train is one of the casualties of the current ‘coronavirus timetable’!
I hope this adds to the story!
Roger Jermy (by email)
More Scottish examples
Sir: An extremely interesting and informative article by Eric Stuart in the March 2021 issue of Steam Days. He has ‘tidied up’ the toing and froing at Craigendoran that was mulled over and given mention in the Craigendoran/Arrochar push-pull article of August 2020. He has also asked via your good selves if any other cases existed.
One notable Scottish example was at Killin whereby the service having arrived from Killin Junction had the locomotive propel its singlecoach back, detach and then place itself into the adjacent goods yard. The guard in the coach, using the hand brake, had it running by gravity from the platform. The loco then attached itself for the return journey. I once noted a captioned photo stating ‘unique in that it is normally the loco runs round its carriage but in this instance the carriage runs round the loco.’ This was the Scottish example I was aware of, not knowing what took place at Banff.
Kirriemuir had the branch line service and on arrival from Forfar the train propelled backwards towards the signal box, with the loco then running around its carriages to pushback into the platform line. Somewhat strangely, with photo evidence available, it was only in what would appear to have been final LMS days, or early BR days (on demise of the signal box?) that a crossover (obviously with hand points) was provided at the buffer end of the platform to simply have the loco run-around. With closure to passenger services in August 1952, this facility did not last long.
The operation of the Elliot JunctionCarmyllie light railway has intrigued me for some time. A five-mile branch opening in 1900 (to passengers) and closing in December 1929 that had a trailing northwards connection into the down main line at Elliot Junction that would ‘just’ have enabled any passengers to alight (or join!) at the platform thereat, assuming a single (?) coach operation. There were, according to Bradshaw in 1922, two through trains daily from Arbroath, a morning and afternoon service, with corresponding return workings. The services from Arbroath could have picked up any intending passengers on initially stopping at Elliot Junction, but must have performed a ‘backwards’ movement to gain access to the branch off the down line. That freight facilities existed on the branch until 1965 also has a puzzle or two to explain away over the years, considering it was opened as a mineral line in 1854.
It annoys me somewhat that I cannot answer this latter example, notwithstanding being born and bred in Arbroath with, in addition, my father telling of travelling on it! Even in my youth we walked the line (a nice country stroll) giving way, by a whistle or two, to a freight working. This latter observation ties in with the final sentence of the article on present day health and safety matters. I trust the foregoing may be of interest to Eric Stuart.
Kindest regards as ever,
John Macnab
Saffron Waldon
Sir: I much enjoyed Eric Stuart’s article in SD 379. The following incident may well be a ‘one-off’ but as I do not have access to timetables of the early 1950s I cannot ascertain this.
In the 1950s my maternal grandparents had a cottage about four miles north-west of
Saffron Walden and about the same distance from Audley End station. Travel to and from the latter was either by taxi or lifts from family friends. Family holidays were often spent ‘with Granny and Grandad’ – we lived on the Isle of Wight, so travel to the area was always Liverpool Street to Audley End.
At some point (probably 1953 or ‘54), I can recall going to Saffron Walden station to see my father off on his journey to home. Quite why he went from ‘Saffers’ I have no idea – we must have had a lift in and out of there – the only Premier Travel bus service being very sporadic and passed no nearer than one mile from The Cottage when it did run.
Dad duly joined the westbound train (for Audley End) at the single platform. Along with my mother and another family member (who I thought had been my brother) stayed on the platform to wave him off. When the train started it moved off in an easterly direction (towards Bartlow). Dad and others started to open doors and reach for their bags but were convinced by loud shouts from the station staff to stay put. The train duly halted outside the station and then reversed westbound on to the ‘passing loop’. Shortly after, an eastbound train appeared from the Audley End direction and halted at the platform whereupon ‘Dad’s train’ duly departed to deposit its passengers at the main line station.
My older brother (now 82) recalls the ‘railbus era’ on the Bartlow branch but not the incident I recall (he may have been away at boarding school). He had always assumed that the branch was operated on a ‘one engine in steam’ basis. So I have no way of identifying if this was a ‘regular occurrence’ or a ‘one-off’. Without a firm date, rationale for a one-off seems likely but for what reason has long since disappeared in the midst of time!
I think it was early afternoon, time wise – if my father was heading back to the Isle of
Wight, as I think, he would have had to take the train to Audley End, then an express to Liverpool Street, cross to Waterloo and the ‘fast’ Portsmouth electrics all took 1 hour and 40 minutes to Portsmouth Harbour, followed by the Ryde ferry, so he would have needed a fair bit of time to get home.
Finally, in 1954 my father’s job moved us all to Plymouth. My brother and I recall one train trip up to Princetown and back (probably after closure had been announced) and the gravity powered ECS movement at Yelverton still sticks in our respective memories!
Best regards - keep safe.
Mike Foinette,
Crowborough East Sussex
In response to the above:
Looking through some old timetables, I could see that if the train from Audley End was running late (possibly due to a late-running connection off the main line), the staff could try to get it through as quickly as possible by this manoeuvre, to avoid delaying the westbound any longer. I think that is a very likely possibility.
Eric Stuart
Last day at Peterhead
We are grateful to Graham Maxtone who has added another Scottish example into the mix, and provided four photographs of gravity shunting at Peterhead. The date is 5 September 1970 but clearly this is traditional practice, and the photographer is Mike Stephen, the images being part of the GNSRA archive. There are four pictures in the sequence, though sadly not room for all here:
1 – The last train arriving at Peterhead behind BRC&W ‘Type 2’ No D5307.
2 – The ‘Type 2’ propelling the two coaches back out towards the single line.
3 – The engine has drawn back into the yard and the coaches are rolling back to the platform.
4 – The coaches at the buffer end and the engine shoving back to couple up and then depart.
Being on the very last day before closure, Graham observed that the photographer recorded gravity shunting at Peterhead in the nick of time!
Shipley
Sir: Triangular junctions between busy passenger routes present all sorts of dilemmas for the operating and timetabling departments. At Shipley the line from Bradford (Forster Square) joins the Leeds to Carlisle main line and platforms were provided on both sides of the triangle on the branch but not on the main line. Bradford connectivity was generally maintained by running a direct service to Leeds that was independent of main line trains, and another west to Skipton where a passenger exchange, or in some cases through coaches, were added to main line services.
However, there is also a history of westbound trains reversing at Bingley Junction, Shipley to pick-up through coaches from Bradford in the platform. The summer 1957 timetable, for example, shows train 369, the 8.40am (Saturdays excepted) from Leeds City North to Morecambe Promenade arriving at Shipley at 9.01am, where two minutes were allowed to reverse and another three minutes to attach the carriages from the 8.50am from Bradford (Forster Square) in the station before departure at 9.06am. These arrangements proved satisfactory and lasted for years until a platform was finally added on the main line in May 1979.
R N Smith
Cambrian shunts
Sir: The article in the March 2021 edition of Steam Days on ‘Trains that went backwards’ reminds me of trains passing at Penrhyndeudraeth on the Cambrian Coast, as I mentioned in my email to you on 24 January – see Tail Lamp in the April 2021 issue (Editor) – It was similar to the up ‘Cambrian Coast Express’ at Dovey Junction.
The Pwllheli portion would arrive at Dovey and the loco uncouple. The Aberystwyth portion, with a ‘mini buffet’ coupled next to the loco, would arrive at Dovey. This portion then pulled forward and then backed on to the Pwllheli coaches. The mini buffet had to be kept next to the loco as they were both detached at Shrewsbury.
On a separate note, in your ‘Trains of Thought’ you mention 100 A1 Lloyds, for many years, all three plates were on display in the ‘Boston Collection’ at the Cadeby Light Railway until it closed in 2005.
Brian Gillespie
Crossing at single platform Cambrian stations
Sir: Brian Gillespie experienced this at Penrhyndeudraeth – mentioned in the April 2021 Tail Lamp section, as did I in 1965, when the opposite procedure was used. Our southbound DMU called at the platform, then set back up the hill towards Minffordd for the ‘Cambrian Coast Express’ from London to enter the platform. I don’t recall whether we drew forward into the loop first. The other similar location on the Cambrian Coast was Llanbedr & Pensarn (today’s Pensarn, since Talwrn Bach Halt to the south became Llanbedr). Booked crossings in summer 1965 were as shown in the table above.
In 1952 there were daily booked crossings at both these stations between stopping passenger trains.
Roger M Whitehouse
And finally, push-pull
Sir: Push pull services from way back when. Good to see the current issue of Steam Days with item on push-pull services etc. Much enjoyed it but pity that the push-pull services of my early youth (MR services between Barnsley Court House and Cudworth) was not featured. In the ‘50s and early ‘60s this was my magical access (often on the footplate) to the MR and main line named locomotives – just four miles away. It was worked by a MR, and occasionally (latterly) by an Ivatt 2-6-2T, from time to time. I wasn’t very active with a camera in those days – couldn’t afford it – but I do have one or two pix in my collection. One attached, possibly of interest.
Les Nixon
Opinions expressed in letters are not those of Redgauntlet Publications Ltd or Mortons Media Group Ltd.
Please send any letters to Tail Lamp, Steam Days Magazine, Redgauntlet Publications, 64 Littledown Drive, Bournemouth, BH7 7AH Email: steamdaysmagazine@gmail.com