teuchter
je suis teuchter
West to Brixton and Victoria. See my post no.48 above. Just speculation though.
The mystery of the railway bridge abutment at Barrington Road, Brixton
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
West to Brixton and Victoria. See my post no.48 above. Just speculation though.
Balham
If it ain't in London then, well, it just ain't.
I had spent some time comparing the maps you had cited and it was an interesting idea.Though the line would have been built 1862 was it? Brixton was anyway. Then the section that curved towards Brixton Junction was built in 1864. Then a few years later they pull it all up . . . . . except for the bit that leads to the end of the line, Barrington Road? Hence the sidings?
By moving the tract a few metres south it would have decreased the severity of the curve (well, a tad).
Then I see something on street view which supports your theory but not to the point of being conclusive and yet I still thing that it might just be possible.
Contact the Archives and see what they say . . . or the Brixton Society, I found them pretty useful with Crownstone Court.
By moving the tract a few metres south it would have decreased the severity of the curve (well, a tad).
There are discrepancies in some details and in others it is difficult to make an accurate comparison as things have changed (old buildings, new buildings).
Then I see something on street view which supports your theory but not to the point of being conclusive and yet I still thing that it might just be possible.
Contact the Archives and see what they say . . . or the Brixton Society, I found them pretty useful with Crownstone Court.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
the answer may be found on a non-OS map at the archives
editor
hiraethified
That'll teach me not to pay attention.
But perhaps a little model railway ran along the top of the wall?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoo...FFFFFFFFFFFTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
EDIT: Slider at the top left can reveal current aerial imagery.
I remain convinced that this is not an abutment to a bridge, but just the end of a siding.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
There's my afternoon's productivity gone to pot...
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Check out the foundations of Brockwell Hall, visible as dried-out patches of grass near the Lido
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I wondered, though - there are large stone blocks (which probably have a special name) set into the top of the abutment, much like the pieces the bridge a little way across bears on. If they were just building a retaining wall, with no intention of throwing a bridge onto it, would they have bothered with those?
Puddy_Tat
santa paws, do you ever come to the ghetto?
I think I may be on to something.
At the risk of re-stating what's already known here - the tangle of railway lines in S London is the result of competition between, and occasional co-operation between the four railway companies (and some smaller companies that they absorbed either operationally or completely) that existed in the 19th century.
The bit of line between Cow Lane (now Consort Road) junction, Peckham and Barrington Road Junction, Brixton, was constructed by the London Brighton & South Coast Railway, but on the basis that the London Chatham & Dover would have use of the two northern-most lines. This was in return for the LBSC getting use of some tracks on the line built by the LCDR from Barrington Road to Wandsworth Road.
There is a reference in this discussion on 'London Reconnections' about this area to the LCDR wanting three tracks rather than two. Which I'm guessing the LCDR was then too skint to see through to completion.
Which suggests that this abutment was intended for a third track which never got built, and the available land to the north of the line then got built on.
Don't suppose anyone has the July 2013 issue of 'London Railway Record' which is referred to in the London Reconnections discussion?
At the risk of re-stating what's already known here - the tangle of railway lines in S London is the result of competition between, and occasional co-operation between the four railway companies (and some smaller companies that they absorbed either operationally or completely) that existed in the 19th century.
The bit of line between Cow Lane (now Consort Road) junction, Peckham and Barrington Road Junction, Brixton, was constructed by the London Brighton & South Coast Railway, but on the basis that the London Chatham & Dover would have use of the two northern-most lines. This was in return for the LBSC getting use of some tracks on the line built by the LCDR from Barrington Road to Wandsworth Road.
There is a reference in this discussion on 'London Reconnections' about this area to the LCDR wanting three tracks rather than two. Which I'm guessing the LCDR was then too skint to see through to completion.
Which suggests that this abutment was intended for a third track which never got built, and the available land to the north of the line then got built on.
Don't suppose anyone has the July 2013 issue of 'London Railway Record' which is referred to in the London Reconnections discussion?
editor
hiraethified
I'm liking the sound of this, but I have a suspicion that the alignment of the abutment suggests that the line might have been going somewhere different altogether. It looks like it's designed to curve off away from the main lines to my eyes.
Puddy_Tat
santa paws, do you ever come to the ghetto?
It is possible that the plan involved a second viaduct running parallel-ish to the first rather than a widening of the existing one.
It is also possible that there was a plan for a line to 'somewhere else' which never came to be.
I thought I was on to something a couple of weeks ago, Alan A Jackson's book London's Local Railways includes a reference to one or two lines that the LCDR planned and obtained powers to build, but never did (including a line linking Peckham Rye with Walworth - in the end the link to Blackfriars from the lines through Nunhead consisted of the eastern curve at Loughborough Junction.)
However, anything involving Barrington Road junction isn't one that's mentioned.
I have, as a result of last night's meanderings, decided to indulge in the history of the LCDR that's mentioned as I found a cheap copy available...
More to follow in due course.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Looked at it again on the historic map. The portion of viaduct that it's on is only 3 tracks wide for a short stretch. There's another "mystery abutment" facing in the opposite direction about 200m to the East. I suspect there was a siding facing in the other direction as well.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I recently asked a chap who's writing a book on cross-London railways about this.
His take is that it was probably built in anticipation of an extra running line to be added in the future to accommodate an increase in traffic that never happened. Sounds plausible to me.
He reckons there was definitely never a siding in that location.
His take is that it was probably built in anticipation of an extra running line to be added in the future to accommodate an increase in traffic that never happened. Sounds plausible to me.
He reckons there was definitely never a siding in that location.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I've recently acquired the book 'The London Chatham and Dover Railway' by Adrian Gray, and in reading that, I came across a few things that might help to provide a clue as to what was going on with this abutment.
Some of these have already been picked up by Puddy_Tat in his posts further up.
The history of the railways here is quite fiendishly complicated, so the first thing is to get clear what happened in what order. Here is my attempt, marked up on the earliest map I can find that shows the track layout in any detail, which is an OS map of 1875. The mystery abutment is visible.
1863: Only a single pair of lines is in operation between Loughborough Junction and Brixton: this being the line running around the curve from Loughborough Junction (marked in green on my map). No lines between Brixton and Denmark Hill yet in operation.
1865: Now services between Denmark Hill and Brixton start (although Denmark Hill station hadn't yet opened). These would be using the northern pair of lines (marked in red) which run over the high-level, 4-track viaduct that passes over the top of Loughborough Junction. As far as I can work out, this viaduct was built as a 4 track structure, so presumably the southern pair of lines (marked in dark blue) were also sitting there partially constructed, awaiting completion of the section towards Brixton.
1866: Now services on the southern pair of those lines (marked in dark blue) start, running to Loughborough Park (later east brixton) station only
1866: This is when the LCDR completes their 'triple track' to the west of Brixton. The book mentions tripling of the section between Brixton and Loughborough Junction as 'considered' but never implemented.
1867: Now the southern pair of lines between Loughborough Park and Brixton (marked in light blue) open, allowing services to be extended towards Victoria.
[Another post will follow shortly, with some thoughts on what might have led to the mystery abutment]
Some of these have already been picked up by Puddy_Tat in his posts further up.
The history of the railways here is quite fiendishly complicated, so the first thing is to get clear what happened in what order. Here is my attempt, marked up on the earliest map I can find that shows the track layout in any detail, which is an OS map of 1875. The mystery abutment is visible.
1863: Only a single pair of lines is in operation between Loughborough Junction and Brixton: this being the line running around the curve from Loughborough Junction (marked in green on my map). No lines between Brixton and Denmark Hill yet in operation.
1865: Now services between Denmark Hill and Brixton start (although Denmark Hill station hadn't yet opened). These would be using the northern pair of lines (marked in red) which run over the high-level, 4-track viaduct that passes over the top of Loughborough Junction. As far as I can work out, this viaduct was built as a 4 track structure, so presumably the southern pair of lines (marked in dark blue) were also sitting there partially constructed, awaiting completion of the section towards Brixton.
1866: Now services on the southern pair of those lines (marked in dark blue) start, running to Loughborough Park (later east brixton) station only
1866: This is when the LCDR completes their 'triple track' to the west of Brixton. The book mentions tripling of the section between Brixton and Loughborough Junction as 'considered' but never implemented.
1867: Now the southern pair of lines between Loughborough Park and Brixton (marked in light blue) open, allowing services to be extended towards Victoria.
[Another post will follow shortly, with some thoughts on what might have led to the mystery abutment]
teuchter
je suis teuchter
So, some theories:
1. The extra bit of viaduct carried a siding.
I don't think so. Any siding would have been very short, and I can't see any reason for one in this location. Crispy noted upthread that there appears to be a similar abutment a bit to the east (above where 'signal box' is written on the map) and suggested this could also have been for a siding, but again I don't think so. However, I do think that other abutment is significant.
2. It was to allow for a tripling of track between here and Brixton, as suggested by Puddy_Tat .
This proposed tripling was what also caught my eye reading the LCDR book. It's not clear exactly when this tripling was first discussed - would it already have been an idea when that first (green) section of track was constructed? It might have been, in which case it would make sense, when building that 2-track viaduct carrying the green lines, to provide for a widening from Barrington Rd eastwards. But the fact that the widening only starts at this point (that is, the curved viaduct round to Loughborough Junction was only built as 2 track) suggests that it was in anticipation of there being a junction, for what would become the red lines. Because the purpose of building an extra track would be to provide extra capacity on the part of the line used by both of those routes (red and green lines). Well, looking at what was built, that sort of makes sense, but the junction actually occurs somewhat to the west (it's known as Canterbury Rd junction). Why extend the extra track beyond this point, necessitating extra bridges over Gresham and Barrington Rds?
3. It was related to the fact that two different companies built the track east and west of Barrington Rd.
Reading the LCDR book the other thing that caught my eye was the agreement between the LCDR and the LBSCR that they build portions of track for each other (because they were both wanting to build a route between Brixton and Peckham). The agreement was that the LBSCR build the route to the east of Barrington Rd, and hand over one pair of tracks to the LCDR, and the LCDR would build tracks to the west of Barrington Rd. Initially I thought this was the answer - surely more than a coincidence that a seemingly mis-aligned bridge abutment was at the exact point where two railways' lines were to interface. Perhaps there was a disagreement, a change of plan on the part of one, something relating to land purchases each side of the boundary being carried out separately, which could result in this.
However - in fact, the interface between the two construction projects would only have concerned the four southernmost tracks where they cross Barrington Rd (the red and blue ones) because the LCDR had already built the 'green' route. In other words, on the section where the mystery abutment exists, the same company built the track on each side.
4. It was for some entirely new route diverging at this point
I've not come across anything that suggests a plan at any point in time for a line diverging to the north here.
5. It was built to allow for a junction that ended up in a different place.
This is what seems most likely to me. It's a kind of combination of theories 2 and 3. This is where the 'other' mystery abutment is significant, because it suggests there was a future section of track planned to head off to the west as well. Below I've drawn what I think they had in mind when they built that initial section of track in 1863 - they already had it in mind that there would be a junction here with a line heading off towards denmark hill, and they probably also had it in mind that the section towards Brixton would become 3 or even 4 track. Maybe this was before any kind of agreement with the LBSCR had been reached, and it's to do with that agreement, that the alignment of things ended up differently? Perhaps it was realised that if the tracks diverged here, the gradient rising to get the 'upper' viaduct over the Elephant-Herne Hill line would be too steep, and that's why the junction was eventually placed at Canterbury junction instead?
Perhaps it was to do with purchasing the necessary land to the west of Barrington Rd or perhaps it was a mixture of all of these things. When you read the history of how stuff was being developed at the time it's pretty clear that everything was constantly changing with deals being made and broken at quite a pace.
Below I've drawn out what I think they originally intended the alignment to be. For this alignement both of the abutments make sense. I've not shown the 'blue' LBSCR lines because perhaps these simply weren't the LCDR's concern at that stage.
1. The extra bit of viaduct carried a siding.
I don't think so. Any siding would have been very short, and I can't see any reason for one in this location. Crispy noted upthread that there appears to be a similar abutment a bit to the east (above where 'signal box' is written on the map) and suggested this could also have been for a siding, but again I don't think so. However, I do think that other abutment is significant.
2. It was to allow for a tripling of track between here and Brixton, as suggested by Puddy_Tat .
This proposed tripling was what also caught my eye reading the LCDR book. It's not clear exactly when this tripling was first discussed - would it already have been an idea when that first (green) section of track was constructed? It might have been, in which case it would make sense, when building that 2-track viaduct carrying the green lines, to provide for a widening from Barrington Rd eastwards. But the fact that the widening only starts at this point (that is, the curved viaduct round to Loughborough Junction was only built as 2 track) suggests that it was in anticipation of there being a junction, for what would become the red lines. Because the purpose of building an extra track would be to provide extra capacity on the part of the line used by both of those routes (red and green lines). Well, looking at what was built, that sort of makes sense, but the junction actually occurs somewhat to the west (it's known as Canterbury Rd junction). Why extend the extra track beyond this point, necessitating extra bridges over Gresham and Barrington Rds?
3. It was related to the fact that two different companies built the track east and west of Barrington Rd.
Reading the LCDR book the other thing that caught my eye was the agreement between the LCDR and the LBSCR that they build portions of track for each other (because they were both wanting to build a route between Brixton and Peckham). The agreement was that the LBSCR build the route to the east of Barrington Rd, and hand over one pair of tracks to the LCDR, and the LCDR would build tracks to the west of Barrington Rd. Initially I thought this was the answer - surely more than a coincidence that a seemingly mis-aligned bridge abutment was at the exact point where two railways' lines were to interface. Perhaps there was a disagreement, a change of plan on the part of one, something relating to land purchases each side of the boundary being carried out separately, which could result in this.
However - in fact, the interface between the two construction projects would only have concerned the four southernmost tracks where they cross Barrington Rd (the red and blue ones) because the LCDR had already built the 'green' route. In other words, on the section where the mystery abutment exists, the same company built the track on each side.
4. It was for some entirely new route diverging at this point
I've not come across anything that suggests a plan at any point in time for a line diverging to the north here.
5. It was built to allow for a junction that ended up in a different place.
This is what seems most likely to me. It's a kind of combination of theories 2 and 3. This is where the 'other' mystery abutment is significant, because it suggests there was a future section of track planned to head off to the west as well. Below I've drawn what I think they had in mind when they built that initial section of track in 1863 - they already had it in mind that there would be a junction here with a line heading off towards denmark hill, and they probably also had it in mind that the section towards Brixton would become 3 or even 4 track. Maybe this was before any kind of agreement with the LBSCR had been reached, and it's to do with that agreement, that the alignment of things ended up differently? Perhaps it was realised that if the tracks diverged here, the gradient rising to get the 'upper' viaduct over the Elephant-Herne Hill line would be too steep, and that's why the junction was eventually placed at Canterbury junction instead?
Perhaps it was to do with purchasing the necessary land to the west of Barrington Rd or perhaps it was a mixture of all of these things. When you read the history of how stuff was being developed at the time it's pretty clear that everything was constantly changing with deals being made and broken at quite a pace.
Below I've drawn out what I think they originally intended the alignment to be. For this alignement both of the abutments make sense. I've not shown the 'blue' LBSCR lines because perhaps these simply weren't the LCDR's concern at that stage.
Similar threads
