|
Post by angelislington on Jan 11, 2009 18:08:42 GMT
Evening all! I see this pic of the old CCEHR (Charing Cross branch NB Northern) platform at Euston has a number 6 on the headwall, and '3,4&5' on a plaque. What do they mean? Where would 1 and 2 have been? Pic dates from approx 1907.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2009 18:10:48 GMT
I strongly think they are Car stopping marks, akin to National Rail [particluarly in the old Network South East area].
Not so sure if the CCE&HR ran two car trains...
this is indeed the northbound CCE&HR platform... also, notice now that the present staircase goes up; the stairs shown in this pic have been rafted over, from what I can gather access is still possible as it looks like the floor has removable sections...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2009 18:11:25 GMT
Surely they are the car stopping marks?
|
|
|
Post by angelislington on Jan 11, 2009 19:56:33 GMT
Aha! Well of course that would indeed make sense. Artery: yes, you're right, the current stairs do go up - see comparison pic here:
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jan 11, 2009 20:45:40 GMT
<ahem> I'm sure I've seen this picture captioned somewhere saying that the numbers were actually platform numbers. Can anyone confirm?
|
|
|
Post by suncloud on Jan 11, 2009 21:20:02 GMT
If so, isn't this from the time when there were only 4 platforms below ground?
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Jan 12, 2009 11:34:17 GMT
These are definitely stopping marks. The CCE&H ran trains between 3 and 5 cars long. I'm not sure they ran 6-car trains until after WW1 but they would doubtless have put up the signs anyway. The platforms were designed for them but after the Picc. debacle[1] they cut back rolling stock orders for the Hampstead.
[1] They ordered too many trains for the Picc. They were so short of stabling space at Lillie Bridge they had to store unused cars at Golders Green, Ealing Common and South Harrow.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jan 12, 2009 12:06:56 GMT
The platforms look about 1½' narrower in the modern pic. Is this the case?
|
|
|
Post by angelislington on Jan 12, 2009 23:27:14 GMT
Well, Benedict, I copied both the pics and enlarged and shrank them as appropriate till they were both the same scale, and no, in actual fact the platform width has not changed at all. Because you're right, it does look wider in one photo. I think it might be because you're nearer the headwall in the more modern one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2009 19:08:05 GMT
AI, I'm sure you're right that the platforms themselves haven't changed, but with the new wall panels installed 1987/8-ish I believe the width has effectively been reduced by 6 inches or so. I remember these going up, and the supporting framework and decorative panels do take quite a bit of space compared to the Yerkes-era tiling - the same happened at Embankment previously. You can make this out where panels have been removed for access or maintenance. From memory Holborn and Marble Arch subsequently had the same type of panelling, along with Angel itself
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2009 19:15:15 GMT
When did these stopping marks cease to be used/removed?
|
|