Weston-super-Mare S&D

[peterbkloss]

This thread is for my layout based on (!) a fictional location - Weston super Mare S&D. It complements my workbench thread elsewhere in the forum

I had a thread on RMweb called 'turning the clock back' that included the rationale for the layout, a feasible alternative railway history. The reason is more like 'I want to be able to run stock that reflects my interests: that is the GWR and S& DJR in several different time periods' so I needed to invent a location where they could be seen side by side, and legitimately mix. The only place in the real world this could happen was at Highbridge, but modelling that crossing seemed too difficult at the time and I certainly didn't have the space plus on the S&D side the services were always local. That was 40 years ago and somehow things get set in stone and I've never fallen out of love with the concept. Now, after two house moves I have the space and I'm rebuilding it (it was under construction all that time!!). Conceptually it hasn't changed much but the extra space has been useful in allowing me to take out previously made space saving features that actually were impractical.

I'll repeat the rationale here:

the chosen 'real' location for my layout, that is an imagined Somerset & Dorset Railway terminus at Weston Super Mare (henceforth abbreviated as WSM). To me it has several attractions, as firstly, historically it was something that really did almost happen, and secondly a very attractive variety of services both local and long distance could be legitimately run through it.

The historical context: Soon after the creation of the S&D, it was looking for a northern outlet. Before the Bath extension was planned its preferred option was to build north from Wells, (to which it had already built a branch), to Yatton. The Bristol and Exeter Railway, which had operated the Somerset Central, (the northern half of the original S&D) at first countered with a Wells - Bleadon line proposal (Bleadon being just south of WSM) and offered the Somerset Central / Dorset Central (S&D) (before the joint MR / LSWR takeover) running powers to Bristol. The B&E had already obtained running powers and demanded the construction of a curve at Bruton close to the join between the SC and the Dorset Central that would have allowed it to run from the Wilts and Dorset line towards Highbridge. In reality, the B&E took over the Wells- Yatton proposal and the S&D never did get running powers to Bristol and the Bruton curve never got built. But 'what if' if the B&E offer was accepted by the S&D, the line got built to Bleadon instead of Yatton and the S&D did build their own terminus at WSM to get an operational toe-hold nearer Bristol just before the MR / LSWR take over. The scenario could be like the Settle and Carlisle ... The B&E offer running powers, the S&D accept, the GWR over-rule and make the running powers unusable by the MR / LSWR (just like the LNWR treated the Midland when it tried to access Scotland via the 'little North Western'). Then the S&D says 'What the .... we will build to Bath anyway, and get taken over .... with WSM and running powers intact. Then, the MR years later exert some muscle in court and win practical rights to run some services Wells - WSM - Bristol, in revenge for the GWR getting running rights from Gloucester to Bristol over the MR line.

the advantage for the S&D would be much easier gradients for the services running this way, and a time saving that would more than compensate for the extra distance.

Then, I would conjecture that in return the GWR would demand, and get running powers from the S&D from Wells to Evercreech and really put in that junction with the Wilts and Dorset, but facing south towards Castle Cary, giving a shorter and quicker Bristol to Weymouth route.

A few curves built later at the junctions facing the 'other' way and you have some really useful routes and services that could be run on them, e.g.:

(MR / LMS / LMR) - Bristol - WSM - Wells - (new curve North to South to avoid reversing) - Glastonbury (new curve North to East to avoid reversing) - Evercreech - Bournemouth

(GWR / WR) - Bristol - WSM - Wells - Shepton Mallet (new curve West to south) - Evercreech - (new curve North to West at Bruton) - Castle Cary - Weymouth

Plus services that terminate or need a loco change at WSM would run via the S&D terminus, examples in the 60's would be the Merchant Venturer (terminating), the Cornishman and the Devonian, and at a pinch a diverted Pines and other S&D long distance trains, to save pressure at an overloaded Bristol Temple Meads. Gloucester locals could be started back from WSM to connect with S&D locals. The Bristol to Bournemouth semi-fasts could be run much faster via WSM and so on. In fact anything that could save on loco changes at Bristol would have been welcome as platform occupation of even the rebuilt station was always a problem through to the end of steam at least

Local services would be WR Bristol - WSM - Wells - Shepton Mallet - Frome; S&D WSM - Wells - Glastonbury (reverse) - Evercreech

I think I made my own case!!

For the purposes of the layout I have designed a four platform terminus based loosely on Bath Green Park, with four lines in between the platforms and bays on either side. The fictional physical location would be on land adjacent to the real WSM GWR loop line south but close to the 1884 built loop line station. I had considered a north (Bristol) facing site taking over the 1866 terminus site but thought better of it. The GWR had bought the land for the loop line in 1875, about the timeframe in which the Yatton-Wells line was built, so in my fictional scenario it would be entirely possible for the Wells-Bleadon alternative and an S&D terminus at WSM to be built in the 1870s on that land. The S&D terminus would face side on the GWR 1866 terminus rather like at Bristol Temple Meads, the 1884 loop line would join the two. But the S&D terminus would survive as so many trains for their services would reverse, plus the need for excursion train capacity!

So much for the setting ....

Some entries for the real layout will follow shortly

[Noel]

The B&E offer running powers, the S&D accept, the GWR over-rule and make the running powers unusable by the MR / LSWR (just like the LNWR treated the Midland when it tried to access Scotland via the 'little North Western').

The problem there was that the MR did not have running powers, and therefore had to hand over their scottish traffic at Ingleton to the Lancaster and Carlisle, which was effectively controlled by the LNWR as you state, and the MR and the LNWR were at the time bitterly hostile rivals. This is why, essentially, the Settle and Carlisle Bill was put forward, as a means of persuading [to put it politely] the LNWR to be more reasonable; once the bill was passed, the desired improvements were indeed forthcoming, and the Midland and the LNWR applied to abandon the S & C, but Parliament wouldn't agree, so it had to be built...

Running powers could be obtained by agreement and later formalised in a Parliamentary bill, or else unilaterally by a bill promoted by the company wanting the powers, to which the other company might be expected to raise serious objections in Parliament. Which ever way they were obtained, if they were, as Parliament was not necessarily willing to agree even if both companies did, the running costs involved had to be paid for by the company exercising the powers. There was also the gauge question, on which Parliament was rather sensitive after the mid-1840s - the B & E was broad, the S & D narrow, so running powers would have required a third rail, which the S & D would also have had to pay for, assuming that Parliament was willing to concede the point; it is reasonable to think that this Parliamentary battle might have been rather expensive as the B & E/GW would probably not have been very cooperative about allowing a competitor into the growing seaside resort [735 in 1822, 4033 in 1851, 8033 in 1861, all far smaller than contemporary Bath].

Speculating about "what ifs" is fun, I think, so I hope you don't mind me doing so - Rule 1 always applies, of course .

[peterbkloss]

Not at all - your comments appreciated there was so much infighting over rival schemes for lines and demands for running powers. At least mine allows a very broad application of rule no.1 !!

[John Palmer]

It's worth bearing in mind that the Somerset Central Railway was originally built to broad gauge and that mixed gauge persisted from Highbridge to Cole until about 1870. Moreover, the Bristol & Exeter exhibited a remarkably indulgent attitude towards the Somerset Central, even after the expiry in 1861 of its arrangement to work the SCR as a broad gauge line, by which time the SCR had clearly signalled its intention to change to standard gauge working – a course of action inevitably following from its close connection with the Dorset Central, which had from its inception been planned and built as a standard gauge line, no doubt as a consequence of its associations with the LSWR. So, co-operation with the B&E in the early days seems to me not too much of a stretch.

I am, however, having some difficulty in coming to grips with the civil engineering aspects of the hypothetical S&D route to WSM. The proposed siting of the S&D's Weston terminus seems to have similarities with that of the first Weston station, which involved a spur from the B&E main line to a terminus close to the now-vacant site on which WSM gasworks formerly stood. Such a siting seems to involve some form of S&D crossing of the B&E main line where the latter bypasses WSM to the east but is fairly easily attainable either via the Cheddar Valley line's route through the Mendip ridge at Shute Shelve, or via the Lox Yeo valley, which is the route by which the M5 now penetrates that ridge. As far as either of these valleys a railway from Wells is running along the southern edge of the Mendip escarpment, but if it is to reach Bleadon, which also lies on that escarpment but further to the west, it must continue its course along the southern edge of Mendip and find some other point at which to break through the ridge. Realistically, its only means for doing so are a fairly long and costly tunnel through the hills or a junction with the B&E at Uphill, where the ridge has become sufficiently low and narrow to permit passage of the railway through a deep cutting. But that, of course, would apparently involve an agreement permitting SCR use of B&E metals from Uphill onwards, presumably until an SCR station at WSM was reached, which doesn't seem to fit the scenario envisaged.

Originally a facing connection between the SCR's Glastonbury-Wells line and Tucker Street station was planned – and even made it into an edition of the Ordnance map – the unfulfilled purpose of which seems to have been to make possible the direct routing of Yatton-Glastonbury trains via Wells. But why would you want to do that when Yatton-Highbridge-Glastonbury offered a more straightforward path and would have obviated the need for the aforesaid connection and the north-to-east connection from Wells towards Evercreech if that were required to direct traffic to the the planned junction with the Wilts, Somerset and Weymouth line near Cole?

[Andrew Ullyott]

All very interesting, especially as an Uphill resident. I’ve always understood that the original plan for the B&E was to pass to the west of Uphill hill, cross the River Axe and proceed out towards Brent Knoll that way. The local residents of Uphill Grange ( the Payne family) objected and forced the B&E to construct the cutting and Devils Bridge (so named after ‘Devil’ Payne). With the failed Brean Down harbour scheme also in the mix, who knows whether the S&D would have managed to cross the B&E at Bleadon and skirt round the hill and up though what is now Weston golf course? The topography would allow a split level crossing if you contoured round, but then if you look at the Bridgwater railway’s crossing of the A38 on similar topography, it could have worked either way.
Definitely rule no 1!

[peterbkloss]

Interesting that I have unintentionally opened a historical thread, but I'm grateful for the information

I take John Palmer's information about the gauge issue and in particular the apparent lack of general usefulness to the Somerset Central of the B&E's offer of running powers to their planned Wells–Bleadon. I *think* that Wells-Bleadon was the B&E's first and easy option for a route to link the B&E main line to the East Somerset Railway (Whitham-Shepton Mallet-Wells) by simply running along the foot of the Mendip scarp line. They obviously later felt that the SCR's Wells-Yatton line was a more practical route (the detail politics are unknown to me here) and they got the powers to build it. I think I may be playing really fast and loose with history by suggesting that running powers were offered by the B&E from Wells at all and that rather they were offered Highbridge to Bristol to avoid the B&E having to build anything at all, and of course at the time they could themselves work traffic to Highbridge from Wells as they were operating the broad gauge service (assuming that Glastonbury - Wells was built BG??).

Of course, for me, for the purposes of my layout how the S&D got to Wells in detail is in the 'big world out there' off the layout so I've not been too concerned with that, though I have wondered about possible layouts for Axbridge South (a station at valley level south of the town on a line to Bleadon) and at Wells with a North to South curve and even a putative Glastonbury Junction at the Eastern end of the North to East curve that would be necessary to avoid reversal at Glastonbury itself. This could open up the possibilty of abandoning Glastonbury to Highbridge (at least to passengers). The 'Strawberry line' or its Bleadon alternative does have sources of traffic much more attractive than the moorland route of the SCR from Highbridge to Glastonbury, in the form of numerous quarries on the Mendip slopes, soft fruit traffic and tourist passengers from Bristol to Cheddar, Wells and Glastonbury (though in the 1860/1870s this would have been small). And getting across the B&E mainline at Bleadon and through the Mendip ridge there is an issue, this could be solved by one of (a) widening the B&E cutting at Bleadon, (b) continuing along the South edge of the ridge by the Axe Estuary until the ridge runs out at the south end of the beach at WSM, (Andrew's suggestion above with a harbour to boot), or (c) using the dip in the ridge now used by the M5.

However fast and loose my playing with history, even allowing for all of the above, the scenario allows me to run almost anything in the way of rolling stock from almost any railway company in the British mainland and at a pinch ER locos (B1s got to WSM in the 60s, and GCR Jersey Lilleys before WW1). In a way I'm making the opposite problem for myself of too much choice and needing to make too much stock to be representative!!

I will try, If I am able, to run a simplified timetable representative of three periods (in sequence, and at home with no time pressure for the changes)

- somewhere between 1927 and 1932
- somewhere between 1959 and 1962
- around 1971- 73

the earliest appeals because it is a rarely modelled period (I believe) and this period is about the earliest that ready made stock is available in quantity (a bit of a generalisation, but pre-grouping you have to work hard to use stuff you can buy ready made) and I have quite a bit of stock that is suitable and S&DJR prussian blue livery was still around, 1930-32 with 'LMS' painted over

the early 60s because that's what I've collected the most stock for, its early in the dieselisation period although the mass scrapping of steam had started (I'm trying to be pre Western diesel, pre yellow ends and pre 1st class yellow stripe and have a significant amount of pre nationalisation coaches to give variety to the inevitable Mk1s

the early 70s because as a late teen I gained some freedom of movement and was able to travel by rail quite a lot, so this reflects my memories from around then - this includes the 'return to steam' and early preservation so preserved steam is an option

in all of these periods there was massive change ...

and my priorities for loco building are for locos than ran in more than one of these periods so I can share loco bodies (of which I have many) amongst chassis (the expensive bits taking more time to build) .... that'll be in my workbench thread

[John Palmer]

I recall having a slight frisson of apprehension when, as a child, that high, wide arch was first identified to me as Devils Bridge, and I'm grateful to Andrew for explaining the origin of that name, which was previously unknown to me.

The postulate of an S&D 'main line' for long distance services via WSM evidently involves as its corollary the reduction of Bath Queens Square to a dead-end Midland twig, the non-construction of the S&D's Bath Extension and the resulting relinquishment to the North Somerset Railway of the whole of the Somerset Coalfield. So, no uphill slogging or headlong descents of mineral trains on Mendip banks, meaning there is no call for the haulage and braking capacity of the S&D's 2-8-0s; the design is presumably never seen in this parallel universe.

Instead we are looking at a line primarily reliant for its prosperity upon year-round quarry traffic supplemented by seasonal flows of fruit and holidaymakers/excursionists. Paucity of traffic induced the directors of the real Somerset & Dorset to promote the Bath Extension in order to tap the coalfield traffic, and it was this Extension and the S&D's shared use of Queens Square that supplied a rationale for Midland Railway interest in operating the line as a joint venture with the LSWR when the Extension's costs brought about the independent Somerset & Dorset Railway's insolvency. I can't see why the Midland would have any interest in a railway going from Wells to Weston rather than from Evercreech to Bath, so I suspect that in the fairly likely event of the route to Weston yielding an unattractive return to shareholders the GWR and the LSWR are the most likely white knights galloping to the line's rescue in a joint enterprise venture – and that's going to produce a Somerset & Dorset of a very different hue!

[Noel]

I suspect that in the fairly likely event of the route to Weston yielding an unattractive return to shareholders the GWR and the LSWR are the most likely white knights galloping to the line's rescue in a joint enterprise venture

S & D traffic to W-s-M from the south would probably have been very limited, as there would have been competition from Bournemouth at the southern end of the S & D, and very few people, relatively speaking, in between. Locking Road Station wasn't built until 1914, and faced north, as most visitors came from industrial areas via Bristol. My thought is that the GWR wouldn't want to rescue the S & D, which was an irritating competitor in this scenario, but no real threat, and possibly soon to be bankrupt, after which the GW could buy anything it really wanted [probably not much] cheaply, while the LSWR would see it as insufficiently remunerative and therefore unprofitable. In the absence of the S & D line to Bath the GWR line through Radstock might have been built a little earlier, and have been slightly more extensive, perhaps, thus blocking any ideas the LSWR might have had about reaching the north Somerset coalfield. Also, the GW and the LSW were direct competitors in a number of other areas, which the LSW and the Midland were not.

I *think* that Wells-Bleadon was the B&E's first and easy option for a route to link the B&E main line to the East Somerset Railway (Whitham-Shepton Mallet-Wells) by simply running along the foot of the Mendip scarp line. They obviously later felt that the SCR's Wells-Yatton line was a more practical route (the detail politics are unknown to me here)

It may not have been politics that was the problem. The East Somerset line ran part way up the scarp, before turning north, but a line to the south of Axbridge would be in an area full of rhynes, drains and canalised rivers, all built in an effort to drain land just above sea level, and still potentially subject to flooding. Not necessarily an insuperable problem, but not easy or cheap to deal with either.

[Paul Willis]

... so I suspect that in the fairly likely event of the route to Weston yielding an unattractive return to shareholders the GWR and the LSWR are the most likely white knights galloping to the line's rescue in a joint enterprise venture – and that's going to produce a Somerset & Dorset of a very different hue!

Something in shade between dark and grass green?

best,
Paul

[Tim V]

Other than the Somersetshire Coal Canal which arrived first in Radstock (itself converted to a plateway), the GW (BG from Frome) was the first full size railway into the town. The S&D was the last, a picture showing the building of the North Somerset railway at Radstock, with the plateway still extant exists!

[RAO]

You have to remember the the Somerset Central [Financed by the Bristol and Exeter (Broad Gauge) took the easy option of buying out the Glastonbury Canal and used the tow path the construct the first part of the railway from Highbridge to Glastonbury in Broad Gauge, a spur up to Wells was constructed a few years later. There is still a lot of debate as to whether the Somerset Central arrived at Wells as Broad Gauge which matched the other two railways that had arrived at Wells. Its amazing the Wells was served by three railway and yet today has none!

[John Palmer]

Although I believe the GWR obtained more of the coal traffic from the North Somerset Coalfield overall than the S&D, I'm not sure whether that's the case in the immediate area of Radstock. Before 1966, there was a barely used connection between the S&D and GWR through Ludlow's Colliery in Radstock, so in the event of the Bath Extension having never been built this might possibly have formed the route of a spur from the North Somerset line towards Writhlington, Foxcote and Braysdown in order to lift the coal traffic from the pits there. Or the plateways/narrow gauge systems might have remained in use for the same purpose.

Looking at Jem Harrison's articles in early issues of the S&D Trust's Bulletins, it seems fairly clear that the B&E worked trains between Highbridge and Wells even after its lease of the SCR expired, and that it played an active part in the specification of gradients on the Glastonbury-Wells line with an eye to the work its locomotives would be called upon to perform over the route. There is no suggestion that the B&E provided standard gauge locomotives for operation over the line to Wells, so I'm a bit suprised by Roger's assertion that there is a debate about whether the SCR arrived at Wells as a broad gauge line - the more so as it was actually the first railway to reach the city. Perhaps I've missed out on that debate (in which case I'd very much like to know where I can find it), but I can't immediately see any reason for doubting that the SCR initially reached Wells as a broad gauge line.

Jem also commented that the B&E never condemned standard gauge lines because it recognised a possibility of being obliged one day to lay standard gauge metals over its own routes - possibly it had premonitions of the gauge wars' outcome - and perhaps this accounts in part for its tolerance of the SCR's switch to standard gauge, a development likely to have been readily foreseeable from the close association between the SCR and the Dorset Central.

Although the SCR did indeed make use of the Glastonbury Canal, it is noteworthy that during its building the line's engineer Charles Gregory reported construction difficulties due to the "treacherous nature of the peat" over the four mile stretch of the route alongside the canal in the vicinity of Shapwick. These problems had to be overcome in a way reminiscent of Stephenson's Chat Moss solution by the "introduction of a large quantity of fagots", so proximity to the course of the canal may not have been of much assistance. As Noel says, the Cheddar Valley line between Wells and Axbridge is aligned on slightly higher ground than the adjacent levels through which flow the Rivers Axe and Brue, and a route to the south of Axbridge seems very likely to have encountered problems with flooding, waterlogged ground and a multiplicity of rhynes.

I'm conscious some of my comments may look like pouring cold water on Peter's plans, which is certainly not my intention as Rule #1 is always paramount. However, if the plan is to retain a complement of Midland Railway-based motive power then perhaps the back story needs a tweak that enhances the plausibility of Midland involvement.

[peterbkloss]

Thank you all who have contributed to this history discussion and the plausibility of my alternative history.

I am aware that a scenario that somehow results in the Bath extension not being built at all has very serious historical consequences and I'm trying to avoid that - no MR involvement and the Bath branch from Mangotsfield being a mere twig. No Pines (probably), no 7Fs infact no MR/LMS motive power on the 'S&D' whatever, no double heading, no 9Fs in the 60s and so on ... No, I want to keep the Bath extension in some form and have my WSM line more a twig off the system useful for diversions, heavy holiday traffic etc.

So is there a scenario in which the line to Bleadon got built instead of that to Yatton, with all its faults (being on a flood plain, many bridges, a longer, less direct route to Bristol) - possibly. If this happened while the B&E was still friendly towards the nascent S&D then it is a possibility that the S&D bought land off the WSM loop line for a depot near WSM (possibly the proposed harbour in the mouth of the river Axe) with the B&E's blessing. This could later have been developed when the line was under Midland and LSW ownership. Stretching it but possible, there are enough examples of railways having remote twigs far from their own lines and exercising running powers to reach them.

Alternatively (I have thought about this) I could site my terminus at Clevedon alongside the GWR branch line, Yatton-Wells built as it happened with S&D running powers on to Bristol or even have the MR take over the northern part of the WC&P with a severn bridge (railway kind) type crossing of the Avon near Avonmouth, but I'm not sure about that, but maybe the threat would have been good enough ...

My impression is that the B&E was always friendly towards the S&D, but the GWR not, wanting to keep the MR and LSWR out of its territory as much as possible, and playing as dirty as possible in the parliamentry process for scheme approval and for the granting of running powers. However, by the 20s and 30s things had eased a bit and a more cooperative atmosphere prevailed. The two world wars proved that interconnections between rival lines were essentail in times of crisis, so my proposed connections at Shepton Mallet, Bruton, Wells, Glastonbury and at the northern end would have been extremely useful ...

Yes rule no.1 applies, my imagination has been very fertile and I have to admit I'm enjoying it!

[Noel]

You are correct that relationships changed after the grouping; for example the GWR and LMSR came to a number of agreements for loco sheds to house small numbers of the other company's locos where their existing sheds were rather isolated. Also, there were various service rationalisations, such as the LMSR ceasing to work freight into Cardiff over the former Rhymney line, although these were mostly quite limited, especially when compared with BR's eventual rationalisations. Basically the grouped lines were all suffering from growing road competition, and the obligation put on them by Parliament years before to publicly list their rates, which meant that road hauliers [who didn't have to disclose rates and could vary them as they saw fit] could undercut rail rates for the railways' most profitable business. They were looking to reduce costs where they could; none of the four had capital to spare, or the inclination, for wild adventures. What improvements there were in the 1930s were largely funded by Government unemployment relief programmes.

I'm afraid that a threat to take over the WC&P would not have been taken seriously by anybody; It was penurious, had very light track, was run on a shoestring like other Col. Stephens lines, and barely made it to 1939. Turning it into what the 'big four' regarded as a 'proper railway', plus the bridge over the Avon, would have been very expensive for negligible return. The bridge would have been a particular problem because the the need for headroom for shipping as the City Docks in Bristol were still busy at that point; the M5 Avon bridge of 1974 is significantly higher than the land on either side, with approach gradients far too steep for a railway... One positive, though, is that the MR/LMSR had access to Avonmouth, as they were joint owners of the line from Ashley Hill Junction.

For the state of the S&D in 1876 see https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=7779. The full report makes interesting reading.