|
|
Post by rebeltc130 on Jul 27, 2022 23:15:35 GMT
The recent opening of Barking Riverside and previous ideas for the Overground and DLR to reach Thamesmead has got me thinking. After the temporary Becontree Estate Railway was dismantled in 1934, has it ever been established if there was an unstated intention by subsequent planners to eventually establish an indirect north-south successor route of sorts to further improve rail connectivity in the area?
For example there was the early Route J proposal from Plumstead to Dagenham in the 1949 report, more recent was the 2007 consultation on the DLR extension to Dagenham Docks via Barking Riverside from Gallions Reach where it was noted the route could eventually be extended further towards Dagenham Heathway, although am uncertain if there were any similar schemes between that time or pre-war soon after the Becontree Estate Railway was dismantled.
Taken together as a whole rather than looking at each scheme in isolation (and leaving aside the short-lived East London Monorail idea from a few years back), one can almost see at least on Rail Map online and Carto Metro what amounts to a basic outline of a potential orbital route linking Goodmayes / Chadwell Heath to Gallions Reach / Thamesmead via Dagenham Docks.
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jul 28, 2022 7:04:32 GMT
It was very common before the days of derv-powered equipment to build temporary railways to enable huge civil engineering projects. I doubt whether many of them were engineered other than on a cheap and dirty basis, so I don't think any would have been laid out with any kind of permanent use in mind. Some did persist as supply routes (like the Surrey asylums railway Wikipedia: Horton Light Railway) but most were simply taken up and reused.
Another Essex example was the Claybury railway, which left the GE Loughton and Epping branch at Woodford. Arguably, if had been more strongly engineered, it might have been a better bet than the Fairlop Loop 10 years later....
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 28, 2022 10:35:47 GMT
It was very common before the days of derv-powered equipment to build temporary railways to enable huge civil engineering projects. Hence the use of the term "permanent way" to mean a railway line (as distict from the temporary tracks laid by the contractors building the thing). Of course, even "permanent way" are anything but, as they need renewal or changes in layout from time to time (not to mention Beeching and the like) |
|
|
|
Post by rebeltc130 on Jul 28, 2022 18:46:37 GMT
It was very common before the days of derv-powered equipment to build temporary railways to enable huge civil engineering projects. I doubt whether many of them were engineered other than on a cheap and dirty basis, so I don't think any would have been laid out with any kind of permanent use in mind. Some did persist as supply routes (like the Surrey asylums railway Wikipedia: Horton Light Railway) but most were simply taken up and reused. Another Essex example was the Claybury railway, which left the GE Loughton and Epping branch at Woodford. Arguably, if had been more strongly engineered, it might have been a better bet than the Fairlop Loop 10 years later.... What stands out even with the temporary railways like Becontree Estate and others would be how it unintentionally influences later planners investigating railway schemes, at least in terms of nearby location (if nothing else) the Claybury railway example brings to mind yet another stillborn (albeit high-speed) rail scheme running through south of Claybury Park in parallel to the unbuilt M12. The limited information available on the Claybury railway has it as a tramline running from Woodford roughly along Snakes Lane and Manor Road to present day Repton Park near the former Claybury hospital. Can see what you mean on a strongly engineered form of the Claybury railway being a better alternative to the later Fairlop loop for aiding commuters in the Claybury Park area (recall it being briefly touched upon in a Londonist article a few years back IIRC). |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jul 29, 2022 10:35:51 GMT
Of course, the Central Line Leytonstone- Newbury Park section part of the Loop was built ***under** Eastern Avenue in the late 30s...a rail and road scheme rarely depending on each other. Had the line of the Claybury railway/tramway been followed in 1893, the development of NE London would have been radically different...
BTW, does anyone know how the Claybury line crossed the Roding? I seem to recall before Woodford bridge was replaced c1970 a line of stumps in the river bed...but am not sure
|
|
|
|
Post by rebeltc130 on Jul 29, 2022 19:21:35 GMT
Of course, the Central Line Leytonstone- Newbury Park section part of the Loop was built ***under** Eastern Avenue in the late 30s...a rail and road scheme rarely depending on each other. Had the line of the Claybury railway/tramway been followed in 1893, the development of NE London would have been radically different... BTW, does anyone know how the Claybury line crossed the Roding? I seem to recall before Woodford bridge was replaced c1970 a line of stumps in the river bed...but am not sure Speaking of the Eastern Avenue and lack of coordination between rail and road schemes, it is interesting to read the Ringways M12 article at roads.org.uk how the Central Line's Leytonstone to Newbury Park section would unwittingly end up creating a particular sticking point in the Ministry of Transport's later post-war plans to improve the A12. |
|
