Prototype Tim Mills' Photos

[oldravendale]

Excellent sleuthing there, Mick, and well done for getting the confirmation, Dave.

Roger, Michael and Dave - yes indeed - that 2-10-0 is a 2-8-2. I'm grateful that someone can count - well, everyone can count better than me! Also, Dave, for that reference about German locos. And the location/route details, Dave.

Thanks for yours too, Paul. It's comments like yours that keep the enthusiasm going.

As for the buses, Dave - not three - more like 36.

Another on an unconfirmed date but probably March to May 1961 now confirmed as between May and August 1961. The view of the shed yard at Bescot with an 8F and Black 5 in evidence.



G2a 0-8-0 49078 in Bescot Shed Yard carrying a 21B Bescot shed plate on an unconfirmed date but in the series I've proposed as probably between March and May 1961 - but see below - now confirmed as between May and August 1961. There's a dispute between BR Database and SLS on this one as SLS reports it to have been transferred to Bescot from Nuneaton in May 1962 and that Bescot was its last shed. However, BR Database advises that the loco moved from Bletchley to Bescot in late April 1961 and back to Bletchley in January 1962 where it was withdrawn the following December. Rail UK agrees that Bletchley was the last shed and a withdrawal date of December. WHTS agrees with the withdrawal date. For me the confirmation that BR Database is probably correct is that my Locoshed Book for 1958 shows the loco allocated to Willesden (frustratingly I don't have one for 1961 to confirm the allocation at that time) with which BR Database agrees but the SLS record does not show any allocation to Willesden. WHTS and Rail UK advise it was scrapped at Loom Albert, Spondon (a new one on me which I've established is near Derby) by the end of November 1964.

The reason I've laboured this is that if the BR Database allocation date to Bescot is correct we can refine the date of these photos further, to being no earlier than May 1961. 41168 and 40692 in the posts #2889 and #2891 and in the same series of negatives left Monument Lane after storage for scrap in August which now puts this series of photos firmly in 1961 and probably between May and August.



Fortunately BR Database and SLS agree on this one although it gets us no nearer an accurate date. (Now confirmed as between May and August 1961). 2P 4-4-0 40694 in Bescot Yard with a 21B Bescot shed plate. It was allocated to Bescot in May 1960 and was withdrawn from there in November 1962 as the last of the class. It went to Crewe Works for disposal which was completed by the end of July 1963. I was hopeful that 40646 in the background may help with the dating but again BR Database and SLS broadly agree that the loco was transferred to Bescot in May 1960 and was withdrawn from there in May 1962, going to Cashmore's, Great Bridge where it was scrapped in September with which Rail UK and WHTS agree.



Now re-dating these photos to between May and August 1961 we have Midland 2F 0-6-0 58123 carrying a 21B Bescot shed plate with 58122 behind. 58123 arrived at Bescot on 1st April 1961 and was withdrawn from there in July 1962. (SLS and BR Database). It was scrapped at Derby Works at some time in 1962 (Rail UK and BR Database), although WHTS suggests it was scrapped at Cashmore's, Great Bridge with a query next to that data.

58122 arrived at Bescot in June 1958 and was withdrawn from there in September1961. (SLS). It was scrapped at Cashmore's Great Bridge in January 1962. (BR Database).



Just two from Germany today, still Rheine - Emden in March 1974 and now with oil burners 2-10-0 043 094-2 and Pacific 012 075-8 at an unidentified shed. More to come here so identification may ultimately be possible.

Edit:
The shed is Bw Rheine, home to most of the oil burners late in life.

The office building in the background is distinctive (with it's double window dormer), not unique I'm sure but the shed, turntable and sidings to the right all match BW Rheine.

I can confirm it is Bahnbetriebswerk (Bw) Rheine. The Ringlokschuppen is on the right behind the loco on the turntable.







Brian

 

[mickoo]

The shed is Bw Rheine, home to most of the oil burners late in life.

The office building in the background is distinctive (with it's double window dormer), not unique I'm sure but the shed, turntable and sidings to the right all match BW Rheine.

Besides that, we're now talking serious heavy weight DB muscle from the last years of steam, ticks all my boxes.

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

I can confirm it is Bahnbetriebswerk (Bw) Rheine. The Ringlokschuppen is on the right behind the loco on the turntable.

 

[mickoo]

The engines are actually BR44s pulling the famous "Erz-Zug" transporting iron ore from the port in Emden to the blast furnaces of the Ruhr valley. Having 4000 tons, they were the heaviest trains that were ever pulled on the German rail system. The line between Rheine and Emden was not yet electrified and the Diesel engines were not capable of pulling this heavy load.
Only two oil burner 44s (043 as mentioned) were capable to provide the necessary power. A fireman wouldn't be able to feed the necessary amount of coal into the firebox.

There is a very interesting book "Eisenzeit" from Wolfgang Staiger. Mr. Staiger was a student of photography at that time who worked as a fireman to earn money for his education. He was actually working the trains that are shown above. The book is famous for its phantastic pictures, but also very interesting because of the insight it provides. One of my all time favourite railway books.

Interesting side note: The southbound loaded trains were easier to pull than the empty northbounds, because they were a solid load rather than bouncing empty wagons.

I've always been wondering if the DB BR44 would be a match for the BR 9F. The ratings are not easily comparable, but I found that the tractive effort of the 9F was 177kN, where as the BR44 had a starting traction effort of 340kN. But then, is the 9F number "starting" or "continuous" traction effort?

Michael

edit: forgot to mention that two 44s had to pull these trains

The 9F figure is starting, that's the figure always given.

The Br44 is a monster of an engine, 3 cylinder powerhouse and far bigger than anything in the UK by a significant margin (excepting the Garratts maybe).

I think only with the advent of the E50 and E51 did modern motive power out pull a Br44.

 

[oldravendale]

Mick and Dave. Thanks for identifying the German shed location. I'm amazed but perhaps not surprised. There's more to come from the same location. As for the 9F vs the Br44 I'm in no position to comment but it seems that the evidence demonstrates the superior power of the German loco. More personal research required.

Another 2P 4-4-0 40678 in Monument Lane Yard between May and August 1961. This was a Bescot engine since November 1959 and was withdrawn on 8th July 1961. (SLS). It was scrapped in September at Cashmore's Great Bridge. (BR Database).



G2a 49411 in Bescot Yard between May and August 1961. It was based at Bescot since the end of October 1959 where it was withdrawn in October 1961. (SLS). It was scrapped at Cashmore's Newport at the end of January 1962. (Rail UK).



Another G2a, 49343 in Bescot Yard between May and August 1961. It was another Bescot allocation from June 1958 and was withdrawn in October 1961. (SLS). It was sent to Cashmore's Great Bridge where it was scrapped by the end of January 1962. (Rail UK).



Now back to Germany and Bahnbetriebswerk (Bw) Rheine in March 1974.

Coal fired 2-10-0 044 155-0



Bahnbetriebswerk (Bw) Rheine in March 1974 with oil fired 2-10-0 043 672-5 and 4-6-2 012 084-2.



Two of oil fired 2-8-2 042 105-7 entering the shed at .Bahnbetriebswerk (Bw) Rheine in March 1974. Note the coalburning 01.10 pacific in the background with open smokebox door and with the left piston valve slider removed.





Brian

 

[michael080]

The last picture with 042 105-7 shows a coalburning 01.10 pacific in the background with open smokebox door and with the left piston valve slider removed.

Michael

 

[hrmspaul]

G2a 49411 - what is that bridge? The walkway/drive way appears to end too near the buffer stops and it is very steep - too steep for a horse drawn vehicle or for most road vehicles - they weren't powerful like todays SUVs and lorries.

Paul

 

[oldravendale]

A good question, Paul. Although not on a canal it looks not dissimilar to the foot and horse bridges over canals which allowed the horses to cross the canal when the tow path moved to the opposite side. Could there have been a similar application at a loco shed? I believe Monument Lane opened in 1853 so horses would have been the main means of local transport.

Brian

 

[Rob R]

It looks like a path across the tunnel mouth leading to New Street, bottom right corner of here:-
Monument Lane

 

[simond]

Quite a bottleneck getting in and out. Was that typical?

 

[oldravendale]

That's very instructive, Paul. I'm now quite strongly of the opinion that the bridge over the railway was to allow horses to cross from one side of the main line to the other. As we know they were an important source of motive power within depots - not necessarily MPDs but certainly goods yards. The shed was rebuilt in 1939 so doubtless the layout was changed. Could it be that, prior to this date, there was a rail connection to the saw mill/builders yard which could have required shunting? There are certainly rail facilities, sidings and wagon turntables the other side of the man line.

As for the bottleneck I couldn't say whether it was typical, Simon. However, even some big sheds (Nine Elms comes to mind) used a head shunt and turntable to get locos inside the shed and the shed yard so probably a quite typical layout for the time.

Brian

 

[simond]

As Brian observes, the path is reminiscent of the horse bridges on canals, I’d certainly expect an unladen horse to be able to go up that, though it might be rather better cobbled..
Might the railway stables have been on the loco shed side before the shed was rebuilt? The Warwickshire Railways image suggests that took place in ‘39. Looking at the Warwickshire site, I can find no evidence to support the suggestion, other than the presence of a smithy in the loco shed. Horses need shoes, of course, but it seems extreme to suggest that they built a walkway over the tunnel for that alone.

Single headshunt = single point of failure. A minor derailment would have blocked the shed. I’m sure that they could deal with it quickly and effectively, and I’m equally sure it was a rare occurrence anyway, just surprised by it.

 

[oldravendale]

Agreed, Simon. Arguably not as bad as Nine Elms where (memory tells me, so probably wrong) the only entry to the shed was via the turntable.

I guess it's also quite possible that the "horse bridge" (if that's what it was) could have been cobbled or maybe still is under all that detritus. The alternative would be transverse raised brick strings - I've seen both.

 

[Martin Shaw]

I've found an OS map of 1890 (courtesy NLS Maps) which shows that the rebuilding of 1939 wasn't much beyond demolishing the shed adjacent to the main line and given the constraints of the site its difficult to see what else could be done. It seems possible that the bridge/tunnel mouth was to allow access from the canal towing path to both sides of what was a busy railway. I'm somewhat wary of differing heights here but it does seem the most likely explanation.

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

Monument Lane tunnel mouth - I think it's just the detritus and backfill behind the tunnel mouth retaining wall - The wall behind this would be supporting the canal embankment and Saw Mill as seen on the map. Here is a photo from RCTS to illustrate how close the rear wall swings into the tunnel mouth retaining wall.



Using the map above provided by Martin I've highlighted the towpath crossings. As for the canal being higher than the railway this is not unusual as we've seen it before in Tim's photos taken around Old Oak Common especially when the railways had to be built and shoe-horned in and around the existing infrastructure at the time - after all the canals came first. It is also quite easy to forget how hilly it can be in towns and cities.



Towpaths and bridge ramps would have generally been un-metalled apart from stone 'rungs' set in the centre of the ramp - otherwise a shod horse would not be able to grip the cobbled/compacted hardcore/muddy surface in wet weather. The ramp would be some thing like this, although this has been modernised brick paving (Watery Lane Junction bridge, source Wikimedia Commons). Given the multitude of canals around Brimingham the towpaths may have had a crude metalled surfaces.



Canal diversion over........... and apologies for apparently de-bunking the canal bridge/crossing point theory.

 

[dibateg]

Interesting to see 40646 in the background of post #2901. I made a model of it a while back, was it one of the last 2Ps to survive? It turned up at Nottingham Victoria at one time with 30925 on a special at one time - not sure of the date I'm afraid.

As always - fascinating pictures and aren't those DB engines magnificent!

Regards
Tony

 

[Dave Holt]

I agree with Yorkshire Dave. If you look closely at both maps, they show the canal wharf retaining wall and the tunnel retaining wall converging with no passage way between.
Dave.

 

[simond]

I agree re the maps, but I’ve never seen a doubled retaining wall before.

I’m still voting for there being a passage over the tunnel, separate from the saw mill.

My voting intentions may change, depending….

 

[Rob R]

From "Britain From Above" Image EPW058072 of 1938

I would say that the tunnel retaining wall was first(1830's?) and then a second was built later on the property boundary for the timber yard or it's predecessor.

 

[Rob R]

Don't bother with a field trip now.....