roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 24, 2011 9:44:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Feb 24, 2011 10:18:22 GMT
The only thing I can think of is that they were to accommodate the GWR broad gauge despite the fact that only the original Metropolitan lines were broad/dual lines. Ironically perhaps the report is dated 1892, the last year of the broad gauge.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 24, 2011 20:32:11 GMT
I've just had a quick scan through the BoT report linked to that thread and that makes interesting reading. The train concerned was a LCDR set from Victoria to Muswell Hill, 4 wheelers, Westinghouse fitted. the report mentions the "island platform" at Kings Cross.
Surely the island platform at KX was between the Widened and Met lines, so I don't see how this train could have hit that platform, or was the layout changed dramatically?
The thlot pickens..
When I get time, I'll read through the whole accident report.
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Feb 24, 2011 21:58:00 GMT
The only thing I can think of is that they were to accommodate the GWR broad gauge despite the fact that only the original Metropolitan lines were broad/dual lines. Ironically perhaps the report is dated 1892, the last year of the broad gauge. Just a thought, and I could be a bit off the mark here, but didn't GWR use wider rolling stock in the first place needing a broader gauge, and then something like a standard gauge but the rolling stock remained. Another one of these history things that'll puzzle me, and I can probably find the answer in my Dad's book rack. (Given that my parents are no more than a 10 minute walk away, I really ought to make the effort to see them more often, and raid my Dad's book collection!) |
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 24, 2011 23:35:48 GMT
Correct SE13; but, me having a blonde moment, forgetting the island platform would have been the n/b Widened Lines and the "outer" rail of the Circle, so the collision with the island platform was perfectly possible!
Mind you, the platforms must have been extremely narrow.
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Feb 25, 2011 9:36:21 GMT
Narrow quite probably, almost every picture I've seen of the island platforms show them as frighteningly narrow. I spotted a couple of Angel the other day, I'll have a quick hunt round the forum and have a look for them again. And of course, one of the reasons A stock is limited to where it can go is due to the wider body. There's bound to be a comparison picture somewhere on the internet of GWR rolling stock vs (for instance) LNER.... I'll do a bit of research next week when the children are back at school - As in pay my Dad a visit ;D EDITThis picture is of Angel from the collection of David H: www.flickr.com/photos/dh73/2159756806/in/set-72157603632860085/ |
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Feb 25, 2011 10:08:27 GMT
The GWR was of a larger structure gauge than the other railway companies due to the initial use of the broad 7 foot gauge. The GWR also operated the Metropolitan when it first opened with broad gauge stock hence the generous clearances on the Metropolitan lines. The LNER included the Great Central which had the largest structure gauge of any other standard gauge line however both railways were limited by the clearances of other lines that they absorbed at the time of the grouping in 1923.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Mar 13, 2011 20:50:49 GMT
Problem solved, the OP on the Templot forum made a mistake in his own earlier notes!! Thanks for all the useful comments anyway.
|
|
