Recommended Posts

Yes, but only 15 minutes faster than in 1962. Some progress!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 547
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

A junior boy’s memory. In the late 40s, one Saturday morning, this young lad and his brother would be squeezed into a taxi along with baby brother’s pram and all the luggage plus mam and dad and

A P.Bucket test? or a rail photo with a difference. It was so difficult to do I didn't have the heart to break it up so I framed it!

As i recall in the mid 60s the "Master Cutler" was scheduled to leave Marylebone at 6.18 pm and arrive in Nottingham Vic at 9.1 pm (2 hours 43 mins) and Sheffield at 10.00 pm.Often with a "A3" in charge. Bulwell Common 9.10 .

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting photo Manversboy. Alas, I do not know the answer but would be delighted to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RGR and Jim..........................who's memory is playing tricks............i'm sure i used to go to see the ;Master Cutler' go thru Bulwell Common at 10pm in the 50s.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must be me RGR................BLEDDY OLD AGE.....INIT.....................

Link to post
Share on other sites

recycling cutting material to build embankments, island platforms to enhance fast through traffic,

I think it was always standard practice in railway construction to balance out the earth excavated for cuttings with that required for embankments - not just what the Great Central did.

I understood the main reason for the island platforms was to allow for future quadrupling of the track. This would have enabled the extra lines to be laid on the outside rather than calling for expensive rebuilding of side platforms.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

About 7 . 30 pm ex St Pancras.. 45742 Repulse I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore the above number, I believe it was 45739 Ulster or 45725 Repulse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1 hour 30 min journey from St Pancras to Nottingham that my daughter travelled on was unusually quick. There must have been a very clear track ahead and maybe a station was missed out. The normal journey time is around 1 hour 40/45 minutes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GC was really the forerunner of HS2. Almost dead straight, nearly level, recycling cutting material to build embankments, island platforms to enhance fast through traffic, no level crossing south of Beighton, built to the Continental loading gauge.

It was the Midlandisation that really screwed it. Different management, good engines replaced with clapped out crap, good cross country services re routed to vastly inferior lines, petty jealousies, total indifference to the workforce and the general public. An over eagerness by BR and various councils to rip it up as fast as possible, with no foresight whatsoever. Absolutely disgusting.

GCR...... Gods chosen railway!

Ironic then that the people planning HS2 rejected the idea of using the old GC formation for HS2!

The GCR London extension was built much later than most railways. It was able to use mechanical equipment etc. which made the previously herculean task of making cuttings and embankments much easier. Older railways tended to follow the contours to save the effort and cost. One reason it was relatively straight was because it ran through sparsely populated countryside south of Leicester. Other railways meandered to serve centres of population. Of course, once it reached Annesley, the journey north on the GC meandered far more. The journey to Sheffield Victoria was hardly a straight line.

There was no continental loading gauge when the GCR was built. I think that only came after the First World War when Continental railway administrations finally got their act together. Many railway lines abroad had to be adapted to fit. The generous GC loading gauge was surely made with the benefit of 75 or more years of hindsight, not particularly to match any foreign dimensions. In any case, there probably would still not have been room for overhead wires under all the bridges and through the tunnels without extensive work.

Were it not for the extensive coal traffic to London, the GC really would have been a complete red herring. The Midland route may be a bit roundabout but it does serve many centres of population. The best fast route from Nottingham to London is out to Grantham and down the East Coast main line. Such a service is not allowed by the rail regulator in order to protect the Midlands franchise.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1 hour 30 min journey from St Pancras to Nottingham that my daughter travelled on was unusually quick. There must have been a very clear track ahead and maybe a station was missed out. The normal journey time is around 1 hour 40/45 minutes.

I see what appears to be the current fastest is one train that's scheduled to take 1 hour 34 minutes - the 2015 from St Pancras, arrives Nottingham at 2149 with stops at Market Harborough, Leicester and East Midlands Parkway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Re. recycling of 'cutting/tunnel material' etc. to build embankments, does anyone know if there is a height limit on embankments? I'm thinking of Harringworth Viaduct, 82 arches & 60 ft. high 2015%20No8012_zpsnlw7p7uu.jpg

A fantastic piece of Victorian building but a few miles away is both Manton & Corby tunnels, where did the spoil go?

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

can't answer your question Albert,.....but its certainly impressive,drove along side it this very morning,passing the old Seaton Station,used to live just a few miles from it...............

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do know that when the Great Central Railway was built in the late 1890s there were regulations(board of trade) in place on the angle of the sides of cuttings/embankments

But as to the height/depth I haven't a clue

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GC tried wherever possible to have very gentle slopes at the sides of embankments as it prevented landslides. In theory anyway.

They also were innovative in that they recycled waste from excavations for infill further along the route.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All railway construction from the early days used excavated material from cuttings etc for building embankments where neaded. The contractors who built the early railways needed to calculate how much "fill" they required and did their section produce enough from excavations needed if they got it wrong they went bankrupt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...