Edward Thompson: Wartime C.M.E. Discussion

I agree. I'd almost be tempted to take the base point back to the end of the Long Depression in the 1880s because this would give you a good range of socio-economic, political and technological changes, plus you'd be able to see what were long run trends, ie increasing international competition for industry, declining agriculture etc, and what stemmed from short term shocks ie WW1, Great Depression, WW2, 8 hour day etc etc.

To take it back to your point and @35B's point - it is worth I think asking if the board was really up to the job of managing the railway. Whitelaw was landed gentry (I don't think the Highland would be your starting point for 'best run pre-grouping company'), Wedgewood seems like an escapee from Brideshead. The LNER doesn't seem to have someone with the business vision of Stamp to reform the organisation.

 

The V2 didn't have the route availability the 4-6-0s had, however. I would suggest the V2s, rather than being a Black Five for the LNER, are more like a more versatile A10 or A3. Built in larger numbers, they did take over a significant proportion of the express and fast freight turns.

 

But were there not improvements to track across the LNER in the East after 1939 due to the massive heavy traffic generated by the proliferation of bomber airfields? Prior to that many rural lines in East Anglia and up to around Thirsk could not accommodate larger, heavier locos.

 

In the inter war period, some closures did happen. Intermediate stops on the Scarborough line, and oddities like Brill, showed what could be done.

From my reading of Gourvish and others, I suspect that the biggest problem in this area was WWII followed by nationalisation. Patterns of analysis and change were disrupted, and the ability of transport companies to switch between modes with them. In a counter factual world without WWII, I suspect that the idea of pruning branches would have been much more established, along with their replacement by buses. We often look to things like the GWR’s bus operation here, but I also think that parallels extend to the likes of the Lough Swilley.

And, seeing as I’m heading well off topic, I’ll also suggest that without WWII, the S&D might have gone 20 years before it did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It seems to be generally accepted that the LNER was, from inception, the weakest financially of the Big Four and that this put significant constraints on new builds and replacement of pre grouping locos. What has always intrigued me was where did all the money suddenly come from to pay for these 410 B1s. Does anyone have an answer?

 

A Thompson B1 was significantly cheaper to build than the conjugated types and less complicated. Economies of scale in building the Thompson B1s and the associated bits spread out across lots of other classes actually saved the LNER money.

 

There was indeed, but the Thompson B1 had route availability well into Anglia in particular. You could argue reasonably it was the loco the GER section had needed badly for some years (a B12 replacement or supplement, effectively).

 

I was quite surprised to discover that in GWR terms the V2 had the same route availability as the Kings.

 

Did you mean the North British Railway rather than the Highland Railway? The Highland became a constituent part of the LMSR. Whitelaw was chairman of both concerns.

 

100 locomotives ordered NBL in august 45
50 locomotives ordered Vulcan jan 46
150 locomotives ordered NBL jan 46
40 locomotives ordered NBL sep48

Keynes .Public support?

 

Was some of the innovation in that period in the LNER not electric traction?

 

Yes, they're quite heavy beasts! But they effectively added to the Pacifics as almost a second line of defence in terms of covering the accelerations in schedules for traffic and length of said traffic.

 

With the benefit of hindsight, the chosen form of the BTC with buses separate entities from trains and BR not permitted to run buses was not helpful to the cause of transport integration.

 

A very small proportion of it.

 

Agreed, but BR was not always very good at integrating trains with trains in terms of branch/mainline connections, so a cynic might suggest that they may not have done too well with buses...

 

I think you will find that the Brill Tramway was part of the Metropolitan Railway, later closed under London Transport.

 

Indeed it was. But the LPTB, like the mainline companies, was starting to look more strategically at what it had, focus on what mattered and close down what did not.

 

https://twitter.com/MrTimDunn/status/1465829717932756995?s=20

 

Perhaps just a little harsh on Wedgewood given the various jobs which he apparently undertook successfully and the fact that his structural plans for the newly formed LNER were rejected by the Board.

 

Not to mention that Wedgwood came from the GNoSR, not Highland...