London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 12:31 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,160
Default ?Q?Re=3a_Almost_Terminal=3a_Marylebone=c2=92s_Bru sh_With_Des?=?Q?truction?=

On 12/03/2019 18:00, bob wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:30:05 on Sun, 10
Mar 2019, John Williamson remarked:
On 10/03/2019 10:23, Robin9 wrote:
I remember The Economist magazine in the 1960s propagating
the idea that the North Line London through Islington and
Camden should be converted into an inner ring road. That
magazine had a real bee in its bonnet about converting rails
to roads.

In the 1960's roads, especially motorways and dual carriageway trunk
roads were seen as the future of transport, replacing the old
fashioned, worn out and irrelevant railways.

The Economist were not by any means the only press organ promoting the
conversion.


Indeed, the almost criminal lack of 40yrs hindsight was shared by many.

It was an echo of the earlier conversion of many canals into railways....


Were very many converted, rather than paralleled by, and pushed towards
obsolescence?

Contour canals would be real pain to convert to a railways, as would
later 'straighter line' ones with flights of locks too steep for a
train, and of course most of the tunnels would be too small bore.


I went to a talk given by a Subterranea Brittanica guy once where he was
touting their then-new database of all railway and canal tunnels, and I
asked how they categorised tunnels that had been converted from canal to
railway use. He said the only example in the UK is Higham/Strood (Built as
a single tunnel but a mid-tunnel collapse resulted in two separate
tunnels).


Why was the tunnel built? Would a lock on either side not have been
cheaper? Is it because there is no stream available to feed what would
be a highpoint of the canal? Would not pumping water up from the Medway
still have been cheaper than digging a tunnel? Is any canal fed by pumping?

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc

  #2   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 03:09 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,327
Default Almost Terminal: Marylebone’s Brush With Destruction

In message , at 12:31:14 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?


The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are
others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/speci...-our-heritage/
heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations
--
Roland Perry
  #3   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 04:31 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,160
Default ?Q?Re=3a_Almost_Terminal=3a_Marylebone=e2=80=99s_ Brush_With_?=?Q?Destruction?=

On 14/03/2019 15:09, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:31:14 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?


The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/speci...-our-heritage/
heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations


Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use pumps, as
opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply disappointed.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc
  #4   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 08:51 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,327
Default Almost Terminal: Marylebone’s Brush With Destruction

In message , at 16:31:58 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?

The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are
others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/caring-for-our-heritage/
heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations


Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use pumps,
as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply disappointed.


From wikipedia, re K&A:

"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce Tunnel
under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton and
Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."
--
Roland Perry
  #5   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 09:10 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,845
Default ?Q?=20Almost=20Terminal:=20Marylebone=C2=92s?= ?Q?=20Brush=20With=20Destruction?=

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:31:58 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?
The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are
others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/caring-for-our-heritage/
heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations


Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use pumps,
as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply disappointed.


From wikipedia, re K&A:

"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce Tunnel
under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton and
Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."


Presumably the pumps were steam-powered?



  #6   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 09:26 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,364
Default ?Q?Re=3a_Almost_Terminal=3a_Marylebone=c2=92s_Bru sh_With_Des?=?Q?truction?=

On 14/03/2019 21:10, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:31:58 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?
The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are
others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/caring-for-our-heritage/
heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations

Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use pumps,
as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply disappointed.


From wikipedia, re K&A:

"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce Tunnel
under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton and
Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."


Presumably the pumps were steam-powered?


The one at Crofton still is.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

  #7   Report Post  
Old March 14th 19, 10:10 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,160
Default ?Q?Re=3a_Almost_Terminal=3a_Marylebone=e2=80=99s_ Brush_With_?=?Q?Destruction?=

On 14/03/2019 20:51, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:31:58 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Is any canal fed by pumping?
Â*The Kennet and Avon is probably the most well known, but there are
others:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/caring-for-our-heritage/

heritage-team-blog/heritage-team/pumping-stations


Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use pumps,
as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply disappointed.


From wikipedia, re K&A:

"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce Tunnel
under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton and
Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claverton_Pumping_Station

"The pumping station was built between 1809 and 1813 to overcome water
supply problems"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crofton_Pumping_Station

"It contains an operational Boulton & Watt steam engine dating from 1812"

So they both seem to have been afterthoughts whose construction started
around or after the canal opening. The water usage of a canal depends on
how often the locks are operated, so maybe the canal was planned to have
less traffic than ended up using it.

I'm still not sure if any canal was actually planned with pumping, or
why the Strood tunnel was built at all. Although the Thames and Medway
Canal was built to compete against the journey around the Hoo Peninsula,
so journey time will have been more of an issue than with most canals.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc
  #8   Report Post  
Old March 15th 19, 06:54 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,327
Default Almost Terminal: Marylebone’s Brush With Destruction

In message , at 22:10:56 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:
Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use
pumps, as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply
disappointed.

From wikipedia, re K&A:
"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce
Tunnel under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton
and Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claverton_Pumping_Station

"The pumping station was built between 1809 and 1813 to overcome water
supply problems"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crofton_Pumping_Station

"It contains an operational Boulton & Watt steam engine dating from 1812"


But you've overlooked:

The pumping station was built between 1807 and 1809 in time for
the opening of the canal in 1810.

So they both seem to have been afterthoughts whose construction started
around or after the canal opening.


https://www.croftonbeamengines.org/our-history/

The first design of the Kennet & Avon canal by the distinguished
Scottish civil engineer, John Rennie, called for a 4.5 km (2.5
mile) tunnel between the Wiltshire villages of Crofton and
Burbage but, in those days, tunnelling was a very expensive and
uncertain process and a cheaper alternative was sought.

This involved raising the summit level of the canal and
constructing a much shorter tunnel. However, this new summit was
12 m (40 ft) higher than any reliable local, natural water
source and so a pumping station was needed at Crofton to keep it
topped-up. Crofton Pumping Station was built in 1807 and started
work soon after.

The first engine installed in the Engine House at Crofton was a
second hand Boulton and Watt, purchased in 1802 from the West
India Dock Company. This engine had a 90 cm (36 inch) diameter
steam piston and a 2.5 m (8 foot) stroke. It had a wooden beam
and worked a 66 cm (26 inch) diameter lift pump. It arrived at
Crofton in 1807, and was at work by 1809.

The Engine House was designed to accommodate two engines and a
second Boulton and Watt was ordered in 1810 and was installed
and working by 1812...

The water usage of a canal depends on how often the locks are operated,
so maybe the canal was planned to have less traffic than ended up using
it.


Or, as it turns out, not.
--
Roland Perry
  #9   Report Post  
Old March 15th 19, 12:53 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,160
Default ?Q?Re=3a_Almost_Terminal=3a_Marylebone=e2=80=99s_ Brush_With_?=?Q?Destruction?=

On 15/03/2019 06:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 22:10:56 on Thu, 14 Mar
2019, Basil Jet remarked:
Thanks. What I meant to ask was were any canals planned to use
pumps, as opposed to having pumps retro-fitted when water supply
disappointed.
From wikipedia, re K&A:
"The canal opened in 1810 after 16 years of construction. Major
structures included the Dundas and Avoncliff aqueducts, the Bruce
Tunnel under Savernake Forest, and the pumping stations at Claverton
and Crofton, needed to overcome water supply problems."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claverton_Pumping_Station

"The pumping station was built between 1809 and 1813 to overcome water
supply problems"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crofton_Pumping_Station

"It contains an operational Boulton & Watt steam engine dating from 1812"


But you've overlooked:

The pumping station was built between 1807 and 1809 in time for
the opening of the canal in 1810.

So they both seem to have been afterthoughts whose construction started
around or after the canal opening.


https://www.croftonbeamengines.org/our-history/

The first design of the Kennet & Avon canal by the distinguished
Scottish civil engineer, John Rennie, called for a 4.5 km (2.5
mile) tunnel between the Wiltshire villages of Crofton and
Burbage but, in those days, tunnelling was a very expensive and
uncertain process and a cheaper alternative was sought.

This involved raising the summit level of the canal and
constructing a much shorter tunnel. However, this new summit was
12 m (40 ft) higher than any reliable local, natural water
source and so a pumping station was needed at Crofton to keep it
topped-up. Crofton Pumping Station was built in 1807 and started
work soon after.

The first engine installed in the Engine House at Crofton was a
second hand Boulton and Watt, purchased in 1802 from the West
India Dock Company. This engine had a 90 cm (36 inch) diameter
steam piston and a 2.5 m (8 foot) stroke. It had a wooden beam
and worked a 66 cm (26 inch) diameter lift pump. It arrived at
Crofton in 1807, and was at work by 1809.

The Engine House was designed to accommodate two engines and a
second Boulton and Watt was ordered in 1810 and was installed
and working by 1812...

The water usage of a canal depends on how often the locks are operated,
so maybe the canal was planned to have less traffic than ended up using
it.


Or, as it turns out, not.


Thanks.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 11:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017