Talk:The Severn Valley Railway under GWR/BR ownership
- Ideally I think the page needs to be retitled ...Under GWRGreat Western Railway/BRBritish Rail or British Railways ownerhip... in line with the link that brings you here. GWRGreat Western Railway and BRBritish Rail or British Railways could then be sections within it. I haven't tried renaming a page yet - if anyone else can then please do or if not I'll have a play later.
--Robin (talk) 15:56, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
It's not possible to edit the title of a page, but it is possible for administrators to move a page, which amounts to pretty much the same thing.
I can move it to The Severn Valley Railway under GWR/BR ownership, or perhaps The Severn Valley Railway under GWRGreat Western Railway & BRBritish Rail or British Railways ownership if it's best kept on one page, or anyone could create a separate The Severn Valley Railway under BRBritish Rail or British Railways ownership page if they want to. I'll let someone else make the decision, I'll just do the moving if needed. --Graham Phillips 110 (talk) 23:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Given the new timetables section, it's probably worth noting that we have permission to use extracts from the scanned working timetables on Michael Clemens' website:
"[...] I was wondering whether it would it be possible to use some extracts from your scans of GWRGreat Western Railway/WR Working Timetables on the SVRSevern Valley Railway Wiki? You would, of course, be credited for having put in the effort to scan them. [...]"
"[...] I have no problem with what you suggest and would appreciate a credit plus link to my site. [...]"
It's worth noting that the line was awkwardly situated at the border of several GWRGreat Western Railway/WR districts, and moved several times. Initially, Hartlebury-Shrewsbury is in Section 15, and Kidderminster-Woofferton in Section 12; both then moved to Section K "Gloucester and Worcester Districts" by 59/60, and then from 1961 both were in Section H "Birmingham District".
- Thanks for that! I've added a few with credits as requested. Hopefully they are legible - seem to be OK on the desktop but not tried on the tablet yet.
- I was also debating re-typing a couple from scratch, particularly the opening day timetable which appears in several books including Nabarro's. Will see if I get a chance.
- --Robin (talk) 17:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Blimey, you got that done quickly! Months since I got the permission, and a day for you to upload them... I think they're legible enough, and the high-resolution scans are available on his website in case someone really wants to look into them.
- Note that apart from the 1959 WTT, they all include freight workings. It might be worth adding the freight portion of the 1960 WTT to complement the 1959 WTT, link. I'll also have a look and see if including the 1963 (Birmingham area) WTT is any use - it might show services being run down by that date and be useful as a comparison, but if not then maybe not worth including.
Under "Accidents" it states "Most locomotives of that time had either hand brakes only, or no brakes at all" This sounds unlikely to me. Can anyone confirm that locomotives were built with no brakes at all? Should it say that most trains had no through brakes and relied on the locomotive crew and guard applying their hand brakes? --Graham Phillips 110 (talk) 07:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- I paraphrased from Marshall's SVRSevern Valley Railway book, p121 (talking about when the line first opened). Marshall's actual wording is Trains had hand brakes only; tender engines had no brakes whatever and could be stopped either by a hand brake on the tender or, in an emergency, by throwing them into reverse. Some tank engines had hand brakes, others no brakes. And from p122, With the gradual introduction of continuous brakes on passenger trains, brakes on locomotives began to appear in 1876, largely to relieve the stress on drawbars when the train brakes were applied. I will try and tweak the wording accordingly. --Robin (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. It must have made manoeuvring within a loco shed or buffering up to a train a bit tricky.