Editorial Notes
Looking back at past editorials in The Railway Magazine highlights the ongoing debate at the time over the best form of terrestrial travel – road -v- rail.
In the January 1959 issue of the magazine, which saw O.S. Nock assuming the authorship of the long running monthly article, ‘Locomotive Practice and Performance’, the editorial focussed on:
- Road and Rail Fares and Services
“It was suggested recently in the editorial columns of a daily newspaper that the time was approaching when long journeys by motor-coach could be made at high speed, over the new trunk roads, ‘at a fraction of the cost of railway travel’. In a reply by letter, Sir Reginald Wilson, a member of the British Transport Commission, pointed out that, in terms of seat-miles of service offered, the train is cheaper than the coach. The reason why railway fares are higher than coach fares is the higher cost incurred by the railways in providing frequent services with enough rolling stock to cater, as far as possible, for peak traffics, and for fluctuations in the number of passengers travelling at all periods. The capital cost of providing rolling stock for morning and evening peak-hour residential traffic is very high. Moreover, much of this stock is not required, or is under-employed, during the greater part of the day.” [1: p1]
It seems as though those promoting road over rail were already perceiving actual costs in a way that would favour road, and in doing so not including at least the infrastructure costs. The argument for the freedom of the road and the travel cost to the consumer at the point of use, would become easier for the road lobby to make as the initial cost of owning a car reduced in relative terms.
- Public Reliance on Railways
The editorial also argued that the railways are expected to provide a near universal passenger service when those who provided motor-coach services were free to pick and choose what services they offered. …
“The motor-coach operator can obtain maximum use of his vehicles restricting his services to what reasonably be expected to be booked up. On the other hand, British Railways maintain a long tradition of public service by providing passengers with the means of travelling when they please, without the necessity of reserving seats in advance. The difference between rail and motor-coach fares, which frequently is lessened by cheap travel facilities provided by the railways, does not appear to be a high price to pay for the ability to meet the needs of countless individuals and surges of traffic whose free movement is essential. The extent to which the community depends on the railways to provide reliable transport at short notice probably is not fully realised. The railways have been a part of our national life for so long that the services they render are apt to be taken for granted.” [1: p1]
- First British AC Electric Locomotive
The Railway Magazine also reported on the first AC electric locomotive to carry passengers on the line between London and Manchester. The converted Metropolitan-Vickers gas-turbine engine, made its initial run with a passenger train on 26th November 1958 carrying representatives of the Press. This was close to ten years before the eventual demise of steam on the main line in August 1968. The editorial commented:
“On 26th November 1958, representatives of the Press visited the Styal line of the London Midland Region, which is included in the Crewe-Manchester electrification scheme. The special train was operated over the 9 miles between Wilmslow and Mauldeth Road and, although the load was only 100 tons, rapid acceleration to a speed of rather more than 70 m.p.h. was a marked feature of the journey. The locomotive is being used for the training of staff, and other locomotives for public services are being built. Multiple-unit trains will be used for local traffic. Regular electrified services between Crewe and Manchester will start in 1960. By 1963, they will be extended to Birmingham and Liverpool; and it is planned to run electric trains between Euston and Liverpool and Manchester by 1968.” [1: p1-2]
The Metropolitan-Vickers Gas-Turbine Locomotive, British Rail No. 18100, was a prototype main line gas turbine–electric locomotive built for British Railways in 1951 by Metropolitan-Vickers, Manchester. It had, however, been ordered by the Great Western Railway in the 1940s, but construction was delayed due to World War II. It spent its working life as a Gas-Turbine loco on the Western Region of British Railways, operating express passenger services from Paddington station, London. It was of Co-Co wheel arrangement and its gas turbine was rated at 3,000 horsepower (2,200 kW). It had a maximum speed of 90 mph (140 km/h) and weighed 129.5 long tons (131.6 t; 145.0 short tons). It was painted in BR black livery, with a silver stripe around the middle of the body and silver numbers. [2]
Early in 1958 it was withdrawn from service, after a short period of storage at Swindon, the locomotive was returned to Metropolitan Vickers for conversion as a prototype 25 kV AC electric locomotive. As an electric locomotive, it was numbered E1000 (E2001 from 1959) and was given the TOPS classification of Class 80. [2]
Contents
As was usual, the January issue of The Railway Magazine focussed on railways in Scotland. …
Notes and News
Perhaps the most significant item of news in this section of the magazine was the demise of Midland and Great Northern line which was confirmed as taking place on Saturday 28th February 1959.
Midland & Great Northern Closure
“The Eastern Region of British Railways has announced that, with the exception of the 15-mile section from Cromer Beach to Melton Constable, the whole of the Midland & Great Northern line will be closed to passengers at midnight on Saturday, 28th February. The sections affected are Saxby to Sutton Bridge (43) miles); Peterborough to Sutton Bridge (27) miles); Sutton Bridge to Melton Constable (40) miles); Melton Constable to Yarmouth Beach (41½ miles); and Melton Constable to Norwich City (214 miles). Bus services throughout the area are to be increased. To improve facilities for seasonal travellers, new signalling will be installed at Vauxhall Station, Yarmouth, and its approaches, to deal with a greater number of holiday trains. Longer platforms, new carriage sidings, and additional amenities also are to be provided. It is hoped to complete much of this work by Whitsun.” [1: p65]
Goods traffic was, as a result, significantly curtailed: “Freight traffic in the area served by the Midland & Great Northern line will be catered for by extended rail cartage facilities from established railhead depots. Spurs affording connection with former Great Eastern lines will be retained. As a result of this planning, freight trains will be withdrawn from the following sections:- South Witham to Bourne; Wisbech North to Sutton Bridge; Sutton Bridge to South Lynn; Gayton Road to Melton Constable; and Melton Constable to Yarmouth Beach. About 77 route miles will thus remain open for freight traffic only, and some 97 route miles will be closed completely.” [1: p65]
The Eastern Region of British Railways estimated that the direct saving from the reorganisation would be £640,000 a year; and taking other factors into account, the total annual saving was likely to be about £1 million.
It is impossible to measure just how significant the negative social impact of the closures was for rural communities in Lincolnshire and Norfolk.
Monmouth
Also included in the Notes was notification of the final closure of routes into Monmouth. …
“The county town of Monmouth is to lose its passenger services, as the two remaining branches are being closed to traffic as from 5th January – the section between Monmouth May Hill and Lydbrook Junction completely. A special last train has been arranged by the Midland Area of the Stephenson Loco-motive Society for Sunday, 4th January. It will leave Chepstow at 11.20 a.m. for Monmouth and Ross-on-Wye, from which it will return by the same route at 1.55 p.m. Thence the train will traverse the Sudbrook branch, for a visit to the Severn Tunnel pumping station, and will complete its tour at Severn Tunnel Junction Station at about 5.30 p.m. Stops will be made en route and an exhibition on the platform of one of the Monmouth stations is planned. The 9 a.m. train from Birmingham to Swansea, via Gloucester, and the 9 a.m. from Swansea to Birmingham, will call specially at Chepstow to connect with the S.L.S. train. The fare for the tour only [was] 10s. 6d., and inclusive of cheap return ticket from Birmingham 22s. 6d., and from Bristol 15s. 6d.” [1: p65-66]
The Why and the Wherefore
Potteries, Shrewsbury & North Wales Railway
In answer to a question from Mr J.M. Duckett, a paragraph about what was to become the Shropshire & Montgomeryshire Railway appeared in the Magazine:
“A railway to connect the Midlands of England with Ireland via a new port at Porthdynllyn, on the Caernarvonshire coast, was projected in 1846, but the scheme came to nothing. An unsuccessful attempt was made to revive it in 1861. In the next year, the West Shropshire Mineral Railway was authorised from Llanymynech to Westbury, on the then recently-authorised Shrewsbury & Welshpool Railway. Eventually this line was modified to extend from Shrewsbury to Llanyblodwell, and the company was amalgamated with the Shrewsbury & Potteries Company, which planned to connect Shrewsbury with Market Drayton and Stoke-on-Trent. The title of the combined undertaking became the Potteries, Shrewsbury & North Wales Railway. It was proposed to extend the line westwards on a mountainous cross-country route from Llanyblodwell to Portmadoc and Porthdynllyn. The company succeeded in building only the section between Shrewsbury and Llanyblodwell, of which the 17 miles from Shrewsbury to Llanymynech eventually became the Shropshire & Montgomeryshire Railway. The remaining 2 miles from Llanymynech to Llanyblodwell passed into the hands of the Cambrian Railways. It frequently has been suggested that, if the complete scheme, including the long and expensive extension to Porthdynllyn, had come to fruition, the Great Northern Railway would have sought running powers over the North Staffordshire Railway to Stoke-on-Trent, or over the London & North Western Railway from Stafford to Shrewsbury, to participate in the traffic passing between the Midlands and Porthdynllyn. Such a step would not have been beyond the bounds of possibility.” [1: p71]
More information can be found here, [5] and here. [6]
References
- The Railway Magazine Volume 105 No. 693, Tothill Press, London, January 1959.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_18100, accessed on 31st December 2025.
- https://www.superstock.com/asset/merchant-venturer-metro-vic-locomotive-bristol-temple-meads-station-may/1895-18190, accessed on 31st December 2025.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_80#/media/File%3AE2001_Ex18100_Parked_at_Akeman_Street_as_a_Weather_Station.jpg, accessed on 31st December 2025.
- https://rogerfarnworth.com/2019/05/18/the-shropshire-and-montgomeryshire-light-railway-and-the-nesscliffe-mod-training-area-and-depot-part-1
- https://rogerfarnworth.com/2019/08/12/the-shropshire-and-montgomeryshire-light-railway-and-the-nesscliffe-mod-training-area-and-depot-part-2
Roger Farnworth 
