A proposed tramway that did not get built. … The featured image is a map showing the full length of the proposed line which followed National Route No. 204 in France.
Late in the 19th century before a link from Vievola to the Mediterranean was really on the agenda. Alongside the experimental ‘Train Scotte’, [1: p40][2][3] a “local engineer, M. Chatelanat, proposed building a tramway line between Vievola station … and Ventimiglia. He knew the region well, having just overseen the construction of the rack railway from Monte Carlo to La Turbie. [4] Here is the project he presented in an application filed on 7th February 1899.” … [1: p47]
The submission made by M. Chatelanat began, “The electric tramway for which we are requesting a concession is intended to facilitate the movement of passengers and goods in the Roya Valley through a rapid, convenient, and economical means of communication. Currently, to reach Nice and the other communes of the department, the population of the French part of this valley must either travel more than 60 kilometers along the old Nice-Cuneo road, crossing the foothills of Brouis and Braus, in unsafe conditions due to the steep slopes, the height of the passes, and, in winter, the seasonal inclement weather. Or, since the opening of the national road from Breil to Ventimiglia, travel approximately 30 kilometers and cross two customs lines to join the coastal railway line in Ventimiglia. … Between the coast and Upper Piedmont, especially the province of Cuneo, there is a very intense movement of population every year, but if you want to go by train, you have to make a long detour via Savona, which is long and expensive. The province of Cuneo sends to Nice and the coast some of its products that our region cannot obtain elsewhere. On the other hand, our particular products from the South are in demand and consumed in the upper Po Valley. Facilitating the movement of travelers and this exchange of products between Piedmont and the coast will at the same time allow the French populations of the Roya Valley to come easily and quickly to Nice to stock up and connect with the entire French coast without having to cross the Braus and Brouis passes, such is the goal we are pursuing.” [1: p47]
There were a number of projects of this nature being explored at the time. The tramway between Menton and Sospel is an excellent example. [5][6] Others in the valley of the River Var and in the valley of the River Paillon were also built.
M. Chatelanat continues to explain how up to that time it had not been possible to devise a railway scheme that enable a link between Nice and Cuneo. His proposed tramway was not claimed to be a replacement for the planned railway, but while awaiting the development of the railway scheme, the tramway would “provide great services by greatly reducing the communication difficulties between the two regions. The project [would] not provide the speed of the railway, it [would] require two transshipments at Ventimiglia and Tende. Nevertheless, the transport of goods [would] be significantly more economical and passengers [would] find facilities and comfort there which [would] undoubtedly give the population satisfaction, if not complete, at least acceptable. The electric tramway, executed at a width of 1 metre with gradients of up to 70 mm/m and curves down to 20 metres in radius [could not] be used for the passage of standard-gauge locomotives and wagons, and therefore [could not] be used in the event of war.” [1: p48]
Concern about possible conflict was paramount in the minds of many and projects were vetted and often vetoed by the military. M. Castelanat went on to explain that power for the section of the line would be supplied from a hydraulic plant close to Breil-sur-Roya which could easily be put out of action, and if the overhead cables were also removed no use would be possible. He was sure that no advantage would be gained by a future enemy and that “The tramway must therefore be considered a commercial means of communication with no possibility of use in the event of war.” [1: p49]
Castelanat confirmed that electrical operation would mean no problem would be encountered with gradients up to 7% without the need for any regrading of the highway. He planned stations at Breil, Giandola, Saorge, Fontan, and Berghe. The tramway would use National Road No. 204 without any deviations and would cost around 1,400,000 francs. This tramway would, strictly speaking, be only a section of an international line which would have its origin in Ventimiglia and which would go up the valley of the Roya.
A conference including all the statutory interested parties was arranged for 23rd November 1899. Differing views were expressed about whether the tramway could provide a military advantage to the enemy in the case of war. A few months after the conference, on 2nd May 1900, “Chief Engineer Aubé of the Ponts et Chaussées (Roads and Bridges Department) reached the following conclusions: ‘The establishment of the planned electric tramway has lost much of its appeal since the military authorities ceased, with certain reservations, to oppose the construction of the railway from Nice to Sospel and to the Italian border, near Fontan. This line would, in fact, provide the French population of the Roya Valley with the access to Nice they were willing to seek in an economical manner by means of the tramway connecting them to the international station at Ventimiglia‘.” [1: p50]
The effect of the military’s withdrawal of their opposition to the Nice-Sospel-Fontan line was to render the tramway proposals obsolete. It was 1904 before “an international conference finally approved the construction of the Vievola – Breil – Ventimiglia and Breil – Sospel – Nice railway sections. … [Nevertheless] two tram lines were created[in the area]: one from Menton to Sospel, which operated from 1912 to 1931, [5][6] and a line from Ventimiglia to Bordighera, which operated from 1901 to 1936.” [1: p50]
Instead of the ‘Train Scotte’ and a tramway, from perhaps as early as 1900, but definitely by 1st September 1906, a service connecting with trains was introduced between Vievola station and Ventimiglia. The two images below show the mixture of different vehicles in use. Both focus on the road on the West side of the station building at Vievola.
Banaudo et al provide details of a bus service which started on 1st September 1906. The bus service between Vievola and Ventimiglia provided two buses a day from Vievola to Ventimiglia, the first leaving Vievola at 12:15 and arriving in Ventimiglia at 17:00, the second leaving Vievola at 20:40 and arriving in Ventimiglia at 0:40. The cost of the full journey was 5 lire/person. [1: p52]
The advert in the local paper commented that, “Without making the tedious Bastia-Savona detour, travelers can reach the Nice or western Ligurian coast from Cuneo and nearby towns in just a few hours, take care of their business, and return to their hometowns the same day, if they wish, even finding enough time in Vievola to refuel. Every modern comfort will be available in the station buffet, since, with appropriate consideration, the owner, Mr. Giuseppe Borgogno, has asked the Italian State Railways Administration to expand and repurpose the space for this purpose.” [1: p52]
Banaudo et al share details of services which developed over the next few years with pictures of the various buses in use. [1: p52-56]
Jose Banaudo, Michel Braun and Gerard de Santos; Les Trains du Col de Tende Volume 1: 1858-1928; FACS Patrimoine Ferroviaire, Les Editions du Cabri, 2018.
We begin this article with a look at maps of the Piazza Raffeale de Ferrari and its immediate environs over the years around the turn of the 20th century. The Piazza became one of two focal points for tramways in the city (the other was Caricamento).
I found the series of maps interesting and they provoked a desire to find out more about the network of horse-drawn and later electric trams and tramways of Genoa. ….
Italian Wikipedia informs us that: “The first public transport in Genoa was provided by a horse bus service linking the city centre and Sampierdarena, that started in 1873. In 1878, the French company Compagnia Generale Francese de Tramways (CGFT, French General Company of Tramways) began to build a horse tram system.” [16][17]
Towards the end of the century, the new urban plan led to the construction of new roads with wider carriageways, principal among these were:
Via Assarotti connecting Piazza Corvetto to Piazza Manin;
Via XX Settembre, built between 1892 and 1899, widening Strada Giulia and connecting the Palazzo Ducale (Piazza de Ferrari) with Porta Pila and the banks of the River Bisagno (once the eastern boundary of the city);
Corso Buenos Aires, once outside the city walls, was lowered to the level of Ponte Pila and the new Via XX Settembre, to form a single artery that would connect the centre with the Albaro district;
Corso Torino, perpendicular to Corso Buenos Aires.
After this work was done, the city began to look more modern and the widened streets made room for tramways in the centre and East of the city. The municipal administration began to plan new lines, both towards the eastern suburbs and in the central districts of the city. [19]
The city welcomed competition and set up a series of concessions which were given to different groups: the French Company kept the Western concession; Val Bisagno and the hilly areas to two Swiss businessman (Bucher & Durrer); and the east of the city was granted to a group of local businessmen. [19][20: p66]
The two parties, other than the French, formed companies: Bucher created the Società di Ferrovie Elettriche e Funicolari (SFEF) in 1891. [20: p85] The Genoese entrepreneurs founded the Società Anonima Tramways Orientali (SATO) in 1894. [20: p120] The two companies took on the two concessions which envisaged electric traction on metre-gauge lines to accommodate running on the narrow winding streets of the city centre. [19]
“By 1894, SFEF had achieved no more than a single short electric tram line between Piazza Manin and Piazza Corvetto, whilst SATO had not progressed beyond the planning stage. The CGFT system had extended through the city and the Val Polcevera, but was still horse operated.” [16][17]
“In 1894, the German company Allgemeine Elektrizitäts Gesellschaft (AEG) … bought both the SFEF and SATO companies. The following year AEG created the company Officine Electrical Genovesi (OEG), … which took over the city’s existing electricity supply company, and the Società Unione Italiana Tramways Elettrici (UITE), … which purchased the CGFT’s concession. By the end of 1895, AEG had a monopoly of both electricity supply and public transport provision in the city.” [16][17] Under AEG’s “ownership, SFEF and SATO developed a tram network of more than 53 km (33 mi) reaching Nervi and Prato, whilst UITE electrified their lines to Voltri and Pontedecimo.” [16][17]
As we have already noted, the first electric traction line connected Piazza Corvetto to Piazza Manin, running along Via Assarotti. [20: p92] It was activated by SFEF on 14th May 1893 [20: p96] The single-track line was 800 metres long and ran on a constant gradient of 7% [20: p95]; the tickets cost 10 cents. The electrification (600 V DC) was via an overhead cable and was carried out by AEG of Berlin, which, as we have already seen, later acquired a significant shareholding in the company. [19][20: p86-87]
In subsequent years the SFEF network expanded rapidly; in 1895-96 the Monte line to the North of the city centre entered into service, including the Sant’Ugo spiral tunnel; in 1896 the line from Piazza Principe to Piazza Brignole was born. It included two tunnels in the Castelletto area. [21: p20] , In 1897, the Val Bisagno line up to Prato began operation. [19][21: p26]
The first SATO line entered into service on 26th July 1897, connecting Piazza Raibetta to Staglieno through the Circonvallazione a Mare, [20: p122] followed two years later by the long coastal line to Nervi. [20: p127] In 1900 the eastern trams reached the central Piazza de Ferrari, travelling along the new Via XX Settembre which was formed through widening of the old Via Giulia. [19][21: p53]
The two networks, SFEF and SATO, were technically compatible and the two companies, both controlled by AEG, soon unified the two networks. [20: p142]
“Finally in December 1901, AEG merged SFEF and SATO into an enlarged UITE.” [16][17]
The enlarged UITE found itself managing 70 km of network, divided between the 30 km of the ‘Western network’: (formerly the French Company) and the 40 km of the ‘Eastern network’ (formerly SFEF and SATO). [20: p170-171] The unification of the network led to an increase in overall traffic, symbolised by the creation of the vast ring terminus in Piazza de Ferrari in 1906. [20: p129]
This seems the right time to look again at the ‘ring terminus’ in Piazza de Raffeale Ferrari. ….
In 1908, after three years of construction work, Galleria Certosa (Certosa Tunnel) was put into use. It facilitated tram journeys to and from the Polcevera valley, avoiding the crossing of San Pier d’Arena. [19][21: p38] The tunnel connected Piazza Dinegro, in the port area, to the Rivarolo district in Val Polcevera. It was 1.76 km long. [22]
In 1934, Galleria Certosa was used every day by five lines: Tram No. 9 (San Giorgio-Rivarolo), tram No. 10 (San Giorgio-Bolzaneto), tram No. 11 (San Giorgio-Pontedecimo) and the two circular lines between San Giorgio and Sampierdarena. [22]
Having noted the construction of Galleria Certosa in the early years of the 20th century (above), it is worth looking at some other tunnels which were built to facilitate the movement of trams.
Galleria Vittorio Emanuele III (renamed Galleria Giuseppe Garibaldi on 27th November 1943)
There seems to be quite a story to the life of this tunnel! The first two photographs show the first tunnel. They focus on the portal in Piazza Della Zeccan.
These next two photographs show the tunnel as it was first widened in the form which preceded the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele III which had a much smaller bore.
Named after Christopher Columbus, whose house was nearby, the gallery was opened to the public in the 1930s and was hailed as the city’s gateway to the sea. It connected Piazza de Ferrari and Piazza della Vittoria.
Now long gone, there was a tram tunnel on Via Milano to the Southwest of the city centre. It took the tramway (and roadway) under San Benigno Hill. It was.built in 1878 by the Compagnia Generale Francese dei Tramways for its horse-drawn trams. Its Southwest portal was in Largo Laterna. Its Northeast portal is shown in the first image below.
In the early years of the 20th century, the municipal administration began to consider the idea of taking control of the tram service. In anticipation of this, in 1913, it built its own line from Marassi to Quezzi, known as Municipal Line A, it was operated by UITE on behalf of the Municipality. [19][21: p44]
Before the start of World War 1, the tram network provided these services: [19]
21 De Ferrari – Manin – Staglieno 22 De Ferrari – Manin 23 De Ferrari – Manin – Castelletto 24 De Ferrari – Manin – Castelletto – San Nicholo 25 Circuit in the hilly suburbs 26 Piazza Principe – Corso Ugo Bassi 27 De Ferrari – Zecca – Principe 28 Caricamento – De Ferrari – Galliera ‘Ospital 29 De Ferrari – Carignano 30 Circular Raibetta – Brignole – Corvetto – Raibetta 31 De Ferrari – Staglieno – Molassana – Prato 32 De Ferrari – Staglieno – Molassana 33 De Ferrari – Pila – Staglieno 34 Staglieno – Iassa 35 Pila – Staglieno 36 Pila – Staglieno – Molassana 37 De Ferrari – San Fruttuoso 38 De Ferrari – Foce 39 De Ferrari – San Francesco – Sturla – Priaruggia – Quinto – Nervi 40 De Ferrari – San Francesco – Sturla – Priaruggia – Quinto 41 De Ferrari – San Francesco – Sturla – Priaruggia 42 De Ferrari – San Francesco – Sturla 43 De Ferrari – Villa Raggio – Lido 44 De Ferrari – Tommaseo – San Martino – Borgoratti 45 De Ferrari – Tommaseo – San Martino – Sturla 46 De Ferrari – Tommaseo – San Martino 47 De Ferrari – Tommaseo 48 Raibetta – Pila
III. Municipal line:
A De Ferrari – Quezzi
The Western Network, particularly before World War One
Lines 1 to 11 constituted the Western Network. All of these lines had their city centre terminus at Piazza Caricamento. The Piazza is shown on the adjacent 1916 map.
The map shows part of the Port area of Genoa (Genova) in 1916 with a significant series of standard-gauge railway sidings in evidence (black lines) and some red lines which indicate the metre-gauge tram routes. Piazza Caricamento is close to the water halfway down the map extract. [31]
There were three main routes out of Piazza Caricamento, one of which followed the coast round to meet the lines on the East of the city. The other two shared the bulk of the services leaving the piazza. One of these two routes ran West through San Pier d’Arena (Sampierdarena), the other ran through Galleria Certosa.
The route to San Pier d’Arena (Sampierdarena) closely follows the coast and ran through the Galleria on Via Milano before the San Benigno Hill was raised to the ground.
Pictures of the Galleria can be seen earlier in this article.
West of the Galleria, the original tramway ran along what is now Via Giacomo Buranello (what was Via Vittorio Emanuele) to Sampierdarena. This route appears to the North of the SS1 on the satellite image below.
Before looking at line further West from Sampierdarena we need to note a line which was added to the network before WW1.
A second tramway was built which ran alongside the railway sidings on what is now the SS1, it was then Via Milano, towards Sampierdarena. The route is illustrated by the mid-20th century view below.
That route along Via Sampierdarena (Via Milano and Via Colombo) and then Via Pacinotti is illustrated at the bottom of the map below. After running along the centre of Via Sampierdarena, trams turned inland, heading Northwest to join the earlier route, West of Piazza Vittorio Veneto on Via Pacinotti.
A map provided by the Marklinfan.com Forum which shows the new coastal tram route mentioned above. [92]
The Western Network’s Coastal Line(s)
At Sampierdarena the original lines of the Western network separated. Some lines continuing along the coast and others turning inland. The lines diverged at the West end of Piazza Vittorio Veneto. The coastal line ran along what is today Via Frederico Avio, then turned onto what is now Via Antonio Pacinotti, before turning West on what is now Via Raffaele Pieragostini, crossing the River Polcevera at Ponte di Cornigliano, running along Via Giovanni Ansaldo before joining Via Cornigliano at Piazza Andrea Massena.
We have followed the Western Network as far as we can along the coast. We now need to look at the line(s) of the Western network which ran up the valley of the River Polcevera from Sampierdarena.
To do this we need to return to Piazza Vittorio Veneto in Sampierdarena.
The Western Network and Val Polcevera (the Valley of the River Polcevera)
The lines to the North left Piazza Vittorio Veneto at its Western end, passing immediately through an underpass under the FS Standard Gauge railway.
In the 19th century the route was known as ‘Via Vittorio Emanuele’. In the early years of the 20th century the road was renamed ‘Via Umberto 1’. In 1935, the city gave the road the name ‘Via Milite Ignoto’ (the Unknown Soldier). This decision appears to have been short-live as very soon the road was divided into two lengths, the more southerly length becoming ‘Via Martiri Fascisti’, the remaining length, ‘Via delle Corporazioni’. After the end of Word War Two renaming again occurred. In 1945 the names which continue to be used in the 21st century were chosen – ‘Via Paolo Reti’ and ‘Via Walter Fillak ‘. Fillak and Reti were partisans in WW2. [59][66]
A view from above … This is Piazza (Via) Vittorio Emanuele seen from the West. The tram tracks can be seen heading away through the underpass in the foreground. [75]
The route of this part of the old tramway network begins at this rail underpass (where the street is now named, ‘Piazza Nicolo Montano’, having once been Via Nino Bixio), [65] before running along Via Paolo Reti and then Via Walter Fillak. Just beyond the underpass the railway station access left the road on the left. The first old postcard views below show this location.
Two pixelated, low definition images showing the bottom end of what was Via Umberto 1. One the left in both images is the incline leading to the Sampierdarena Railway Station forecourt. [59]A tram sits at a stop at Piazza Montano. This image was shared on the Foto Genova Antica Facebook Group by Annamaria Patti on 22nd May 2022. [3]Three further postcard views, of better quality, of the bottom end of Via Umberto 1, (c) Public Domain. [59][62][63]The view to the Northeast from the rail underpass in 2024. The station approach is on the left. The old tramway curved round to the left below the station approach’s retaining wall. [Google Streetview, August 2024]Just a little further along the old tram route. The retaining wall on the left supports the station approach road. The tramway ran on along what is now Via Paolo Reti. For some distance the road was flanked by a retaining wall supporting the FS standard-gauge railway. [Google Streetview, August 2024]
The adjacent Google satellite image shows roads over which the old tramway ran. In the bottom right is Piazza Nicolo Montano. It is also possible to make out the station approach ramp which has a number of cars parked on it. In the immediate vicinity of the passenger railway station, railway buildings can be seen separating Via Paolo Reti from the railway but very soon the road and the railway run side-by-side with the railway perhaps 2 to 3 metres above the road. Via Eustachio Degola passes under the railway just to the North of the station buildings. Towards the top of the satellite image, Via Paolo Reti can be seen turning away from the railway wall. [Google Maps, December 2024]
Via Paolo Reti (the former Via Umberto 1) turns away from the railway wall which is now much lower than it was near the station buildings. [Google Streetview, August 2024]Via Umberto 1, looking North from the bend visible in the photograph above where the road leaves the side of the railway, (c) Public Domain. [68]Via Paolo Reti (once Via Umberto 1) at the same location as the monochrome image above. [Google Streetview, August 2024]
The monochrome image below purports to show Piazza San Marino. As far as I can work out the piazza was historically, ‘Piazza Vittorio Emanuele III’ and later renamed for another partisan from World War 2 – ‘Piazza Ricardo Masnata’.
A relatively low quality image of Piazza San Marino and Via Umberto 1. The piazza later became Piazza Ricardo Masnata. This view looks North with a tram visible on the left, (c) Public Domain. [64]Piazza Ricardo Masnata, looking North. There is little to link this image from 2024 with the monochrome image above, other than the alignment of the roads and the shape of the piazza. However, at the centre of this image is a lower building which also appears in the monochrome image. [Google Streetview, August 2024]Via Umberto 1 looking North from what became Piazza Ricardo Masnata, (c) Public Domain. [67]The same location in the 21st century. [GVia Umberto 1, now Via Walter Fillak with a tram heading towards Genoa. [69]The same location on Via Walter Fillak in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, August 2024]
The line from Sampierdarena ran towards Certosa where, once Galleria Certosa was completed, it met the line through the tunnel.
The tramway followed Via Celesia through Rivarolo (Superior). Rivarolo and Via Celesia can be seen at the bottom of this extract from openstreetmap.org. [79]
This image from the early 20th century looks North along Via Celesia. Space on the street was clearly at a premium! [80]Via Celesia in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, August 2024]
North of Via Celesia, the tramway ran along Via Rivarolo.
This postcard shows the junction at the North end of Via Celesia, circa. 1920s. Via Rivarolo is ahead. This image was shared on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group by Mario Vanni on 18th August 2019, (c) Public Domain. [82]The smae location in the 21st century. [Google Streeetview, August 2024]This next extract from openstreetmap.org shows Via Rivarolo entering bottom-left. Trams ran on into Teglia on Via Teglia and continued on to Bolzaneto (in the top-right of this extract) along Via Constantino Reta. [79]This postcard view looks South along what is now Via Teglia (then Via Regina Margherita. This image was shared on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group by Elio Berneri on 19th October 2020, (c) Public Domain. [83]A very similar view at the same location in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, August 2024]Car 906 in service on line 7 Caricamento – Pontedecimo, one of the longest of the UITE, is seen here running in Bolzaneto. The photograph was taken facing North. In the background you can see another Tramcar, as well as a third on the track in the opposite direction, (c) Public Domain. [84]A similar North facing view in Bolzaneto in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, August 2024]A tram waits at Piazza del Municipio in Bolzaneto. This image was shared by Mario Vanni on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group on 8th July 2021, (c) Public Domain. [85]A very similat view of the same location in the 21st century. The road on which the bus is standing is now known as Via Pasquale Pastorino. [Google Streetview, August 2024]A few hundred metres to the Northeast is the area known as ‘Bratte’. A tram waits in the mid-20th century to set off for Caricamento. This image was shared on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group by Roberto Della Rocca on 12th December 2020. [86]A similar view at the same location in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, August 2024]
North of Bratte, Trams crossed the River Secca, a tributary of the Polcevera, following Via Ferriere Bruzzo and then continued North alongside the River Polcevera on Via San Quirico.
Tram No 79 leads a trailer car South on Via San Quirico in the first decades of the 20th century. It seems as though Ponte Tullio Barbieri can be seen behind the tram. This image was shared by Sergio De Nicolai on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group on 21st October 2018. [88]A similar location on Via San Quirico in the 21st century. [Google Streetview, July 2022]
Trams passed under the FS Standard-gauge lines close to Ponte Tullio Barbieri. [Google Streetview, June 2022]Trams ran on through the centre on San Quirico on Via San Quirico.Before returning to the side of the river, passing under the railway again. [Google Streetview, July 2022]
The next length of the journey is the last. Trams terminated at Pontedecimo. [79]
A tram and trailercar on Lungo Polcevera in Pontedecimo close to Pontedecimo Railway Station, This image was taken looking South along the river bank and was shared by Giorgio Gioli on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group on 4th November 2020. [89]This view looks South along the bank of the River Polcevera at a location similar to that in the image above. [Googler Streetview, January 2021]
The central piazza in Pontedecimo. The terminus of the tram service. This image was shared on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group by Roberto Cito on 29th October 2023. [87]Trams terminated in Pontedecimo. [Google Streetview, July 2022]The tram depot at Pontedecimo. This image was shared on the C’era una volta Genova Facebook Group by Alessandro Lombardo on 30th October 2019. [90]
There was a short tramway in the quartzite quarry close to Ord which was operational in the mid-20th century. …
The small village of Ord sits on the Northwest side of the Sleat Peninsula. [1]The small building shown on this map near to Coille a’ Chuaraidh is the approximate location of the quarry. [6]A road from the village runs Southeast across the Sleat Peninsula. The quartzite quarry was on the North side of the road at Coille a’ Chuaraidh. [1]
J.G. Stein & Co. of Bonnybridge commenced quarrying at Ord, Sleat Peninsula, Isle of Skye in 1944 and this continued until 1960. Silica was extracted from the quartzite ore and used as a heat resistant substance in industrial furnaces, fire bricks, cements, boilers etc. Only the explosives store and a storage building, now used as a bothy, survive. [1]
Ore was removed from the quarry in trucks that ran on a very short rail track to the road where it was loaded onto lorries and taken to the pier at Armadale. The ore was then loaded into a waiting puffer (coastal trading boat). [1]
The high cost of transport away from Skye meant that the quarry was uneconomic and it closed in 1960. [2]
The tramway/railway was very short – only 110 metres in length. [4]
The tramway was operated by manpower, no mechanical propulsion was employed. Rolling stock consisted of a number of wooden-framed tipper wagons, allegedly used on the Skye Marble Railway. [3]
This image is a postcard view of the Skye Marble Quarry.At the centre of the image is one of the tipper wagons used at Kilchrist and which may well have been bought for use at Ord Quarry. [5]
Until the 1970s, there were a number of these wagons gradually deteriorating on the beach at Ord, although there is no longer any sign of them. [4]
The first tramway in San Sebastian (Donostia in Basque), owned by La Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebastián (TSS), opened on 18th July 1887 as a metre-gauge horse-powered line. “It provided a service from the eastern suburb of Ategorrieta to and from the town centre and beach. The tramway was then extended beyond Ategorrieta to the town of Herrera, including 2.1 km of reserved track and a 100-metre tunnel, avoiding the severe gradients of the Miracruz hill. The single-track-and-loop line eventually reached Rentería in 1890.” [1: p185]
The Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebastián (CTSS) was founded on 28th August 1886 and is one of the oldest businesses in Gipuzkoa. At first, it provided Horse-powered services in the city. [2]
“The horse trams, known as ‘motor de sangre’ (literally blood engines), soon showed their limitations and for this reason the heads of the Company studied ways to modernise the transport system.” [2] It hoped to upgrade services by using steam trams but environmental concerns resulted in the local authority refusing the Company’s application. Instead, the Genèva-based Compagnie de l’Industrie Electrique et Mécanique was awarded the contract to build a line across the city. “A partial electric service was inaugurated on 22nd August 1887, and through running between San Sebastián and Rentería became a reality on 30th October. The rolling stock was built in Zaragoza using Thury (later Sécheron) electrical equipment, and consisted originally of motor trams 1-10 capable of hauling two trailers at 24 km/h. Several extensions were added to the tramway system until there were nine numbered services (1-9) all of which started from Alameda in the centre of San Sebastian.” [1: p185]
San Sebastian’s tramways were built to metre-gauge.
On 22nd August 1897, the first electric trams began to circulate between Rentería and Ategorrieta and the electrification of the city was completed on 22nd October of that same year. Donostia became the second city in Spain to have electrical trams (after Bilbao whose first line was up and running in 1896) and the first to electrify all its services (the Basque capital still had horse trams on some lines until 1909). [2]A tram at the Monte Ulia tramway terminus. [3]San Sebastian, Gros district and Mount Ulia, circa 1919. [3]
Barry Cross says: “Given the success of the urban tramways, it came as no surprise when the local entrepreneur, Vicente Machimbarena y Gorgoza, applied for the concession to build a 3.09-km ‘railway’ up the side of Monte Ulía, in 1893. The relevant legislation came into effect in 1895 and specified electric traction with overhead supply and the use of a rack to surmount a maximum gradient of 6%. However, when the engineer, Narciso Puig de la Bellacasa, was asked to undertake the initial surveys in 1896, they were for an adhesion line only. It was not until 1900 that sufficient money (ESP 530 000) had been raised to form the company, ‘Ferrocarril de Ulía’. Work on its construction began the same year, and the line opened on 9th July 1902. Although conceived as a railway, the completed metre-gauge line was merely an extension of the town tramways, with which it connected at Ategorrieta. As built, the continuous gradient varied between 4.5 and 5.5%, the only flat section being the mid-point passing loop.” [1: p185]
Cross continues: “The composition of the initial tramcar fleet accurately reflected the line’s tourist nature, since both the three two-axle motor trams and six trailers were of an open crossbench design known as ‘jardineras’. All cars were built in Zaragoza by Carde y Escoriaza, which equipped the motor cars with 2 x 52-kW motors and both rheostatic braking and electromagnetic track brakes. The early success of the line prompted the company to buy a further three motors and six trailers of the same design in 1907.” [1: p185]
The original tram service ran every 30 minutes. This was improved to 15 minutes from 1907. There were no intermediate stops on the climb up Monte Ulia. The tourist tram’s main purpose was to reach the summit.
Aerocar
The ‘Ferrocarril de Ulía’ Company, while paying a 2% dividend in 1904 also increased its capital to ESP 1 million with a view to building “something variously described as a ‘Tranvía Aereo’ and as a ‘Transbordador Funicular’. It opened on 30th September 1907 and proved to be one of the world’s first passenger suspension cableways, similar in concept although not in design to the aerial cableway across the Devil’s Dyke near Brighton, which had been built 13 years earlier. It began near the Monte Ulía tram terminus and rose gently just above the tree-tops to the Peña de las Aguilas, from where visitors could obtain impressive views along the Cantabrican coast.” [1: p186]
A close view of the fragile-looking passenger car of the Tranvia Aereo’. [4]
The next four images are postcard views of the Monte Ulia Aerocar. ….
“The world’s first aerial tram was probably the one built in 1644 by Adam Wiebe. It was used to move soil to build defences. Other mining systems were developed in the 1860s by Hodgson, and Andrew Smith Hallidie. Hallidie went on to perfect a line of mining and people tramways after 1867 in California and Nevada. Leonardo Torres Quevedo built his first aerial cableway in 1887. His first for passengers was this one at San Sebastian Donostia in 1907.” [3] Wikipedia’s Spanish site suggests that the cableway closed in 1912. [4] certainly, “Monte Ulia’s tramway and cableway were to be seriously threatened from 1912 onwards by the creation of rival attractions on Monte Igueldo, the mountain across the bay. Earlier but unrealised schemes had envisaged running a tramway around the base of this impressive mountain on a sort of Marine Drive, and taking it out to sea on a jetty to the island of Santa Clara, where a casino was to be built. However, so ambitious a project never materialised, and it was later decided to build a funicular instead. This would run from Ondarreta to the top of Monte Igueldo and be provided with a connecting tram service via a short branch line from the Venta-Berri Alameda tramway operated by the TSS.” [1: p186]
After 1912, the Monte Ulia line became progressively more unprofitable and closed down in 1916. However the ‘Aerocar’ story does not end in 1916 in San Sebastian. For a little more, please head through this article beyond the next section about a funicular railway. …
The Funicular de Igueldo
Cross tells us that “The main promoter of this new scheme was Emilio Huici, and the engineer in charge of the funicular project was Severiano Goni, who later built the Artxanda funicular in Bilbao. The Swiss firm of Von Roll supplied the electrical and mechanical equipment, leaving it to a local workshop to manufacture the funicular car bodies. Each car had five compartments with 30 seats and room for 20 standing. The line was 312 metres long and climbed 151 metres at gradients between 32 and 58%, making it the steepest of its kind in Spain.” [1: p186]
“The funicular opened for business on 25th August 1912, offering visitors to the summit the chance to dine at its restaurant until midnight, or to take “five o’clock tea” on a terrace overlooking San Sebastián. A return trip to the summit cost ESP 0.50, while from 5th September 1912 onwards the mountain enjoyed a through tram service from Alameda to the lower station of the funicular.” [1: p186]
The travelling distance of 320 metres connected Ondarreta Beach at the bottom, with the popular Monte Igueldo Amusement Park at the top, offering spectacular coastal views of La Concha Bay along the way. [3]
The next four images are postcard views of the funicular railway. …
The Spanish Aerocar in North America!
Cross points us to a similar but larger ‘Aerocar’ which was opened in 1915 in North America. It crossed the Whirlpool Rapids on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. “It was built by the Spanish engineer, Leonardo Torres Quevedo, who, undaunted by the financial failure of his first cableway on Monte Ulía, had been persuaded to build a second. Its success can be measured by the fact that it survives to this very day.” [1: p186]The Canadian has been upgraded several times since 1916 (in 1961, 1967 and 1984).[1] The system uses one car that carries 35 standing passengers over a one-kilometre trip.[2]
The Canadian has been upgraded several times since 1916 (in 1961, 1967 and 1984). The system uses one car that carries 35 standing passengers over a one-kilometre trip. [5]
Three images of the Canadian ‘Spanish Aerocar’ follow below. …
Three images of the Aerocar’. [6]
The ride on the ‘Aerocar’ is featured on the Niagara Parks website. [7]
References
Barry Cross; The Spanish Aerocar; in Light Railway and Modern Tramway, July 1992, p185-186.
P.W. Gentry wrote about Stockport’s trams in the July 1949 issue of Modern Tramway.
He says: “Besides possessing several interesting features of its own, the Stockport system today commands added attention as the last last surviving member of that once network of standard gauge undertakings encircling Manchester. It is an unusually pleasing system by virtue of its compact and simple arrangement, its focal point being Mersey Square.” [1: p123]
The article in Modern Tramway caught my attention because for about 9 years I worked in Stockport as a highway engineer.
This is a second article looking at Stockport Corporations Tramways. The first article which looked at the history of the network and followed one axis of that network can be found here. [2]
Mersey Square was the main hub of Stockport’s tramway network and appeared as a schematic plan in Gentry’s article in The Modern Tramway. …
Before looking at the remaining tram routes operated by Stockport Corporation it is worth noting the trams which Stockport Corporation used to operate the network. P.W. Gentry listed these as follows:
This table is taken from Gentry’s article. [1: p126]
Edgeley to Mersey Square and Mersey Square to Reddish andGorton
This first axis of the network was covered in my first article about Stockport Corporation Trams, here. [2] Two further axes are worth our attention: the first, below, that between Gatley and Bredbury; the second that between Manchester and Hazel Grove.
Gatley to Mersey Square and Mersey Square towards Bredbury
Tram services entered Mersey Square and crossed the Mersey. Services to the West of the town commenced here and ran along Princes Street to Bridge Street. That length of the network is covered in an earlier article which can be found here. [2]
We resume this article at the Northeast end of Princes Street and its junction with Bridge Street and then follow the route to Hyde.
This completes the length of the tramway from Stockport to Hyde. The next article in this short series will cover the line from Manchester to Hazel Gri
References
P.W. Gentry; Stockport Corporation Tramway; Modern Tramway, Vol. 12 No. 138, June 1949, p123-126.
Harry Postlethwaite, John Senior & Bob Rowe; Super Prestige No. 14, Stockport Corporation; Venture Publications, Glossop, Derbyshire, 2008. This document is made freely available by MDS Books as a .pdf: https://www.mdsbooks.co.uk/media/wysiwyg/Stockport_Download_1.pdf, accessed on 14th January 2025.
In the Summer of 2024, my wife and I visited Giants’ Causeway as part of a few days meandering along the North coast of Ireland. When reading a series of older copies of the Modern Tramway, I came across an article written in 1950. … The Modern Tramway of September 1950 featured an article by D. G. Evans about one of the very early electric tramways – The Giants’ Causeway and Portrush Tramway. His article is quoted in full in this article.
Wikipedia tells us that The Giants’ Causeway, Portrush, & Bush Valley Railway & Tramway was a “pioneering 3 ft (914 mm) narrow gauge electric railway operating between Portrush and the Giant’s Causeway on the coast of County Antrim, Northern Ireland. The line, 9 1⁄4 miles (14.9 km) long, was hailed at its opening as ‘the first long electric tramway in the world’. [2] The Giant’s Causeway and Bushmills Railway today operates diesel and steam tourist trains over part of the Tramway’s former course.” [3]
The Giants’ Causeway, Portrush, & Bush Valley Railway & Tramway. [24]
Writing in 1950, Evans says that:
“The recent decision of the shareholders to close down the Giant’s Causeway tramway was sad news to those who knew the line and can recall the pleasure of breezy rides along the cliff tops in the qua’nt cars that had seen but little change since their first day of operation. The line was the first tramway in the United Kingdom to be operated by electricity and the current was produced by a hydro- electric power station at Walkmills, one mile from the Bushmills terminus. A waterfall on the river Bush was the source of the hydro-electric power.
Opened from Portrush station to Bushmills in January, 1883, the line was extended to the ultimate terminus at Giant’s Causeway in 1887. The original current collection was from a side conductor rail 17in. above ground and 22in. from the inside running rail. This method was of course unsuited to a street tramway and the portion of the line which ran in the centre of the street through the town of Portrush was therefore worked by steam tram engines of the usual vertical boiler pattern. This method of operation of the first half-mile of the tramway persisted until 1899, when a change over to the overhead trolley system was made. From that date until 1915 the steam tram engines were retained for use during the peak traffic periods in the summer at which time the original power station proved inadequate for the needs of the system.” [1: p185]
Wikipedia gives some of the background to the opening of the line: “The Giant’s Causeway Tramway came about through the enthusiasm of William Atcheson Traill, M.A.Ing., of Ballylough (1844–1934), together with his brother Dr Anthony Traill, who between them undertook most of the promotion and fundraising for the line. W.A. Traill was a man with not only an interest in railways but also a keen interest in technological developments in engineering. The Act of Parliament incorporating ‘The Giant’s Causeway, Portrush, and Bush Valley Railway and Tramway Company’ was passed on 26th August 1880. It authorised a tramway from Portrush to Bushmills and a railway from there to join the Ballycastle Railway (also 3 ft. gauge) at Dervock. The only section of the railway never built was a short spur at Dervock. [5] The Dervock section was abandoned by an 1885 Act, which authorised extension from Bushmills to the Causeway.” [3][6]
“At the Berlin Trade Fair of 1879 Siemens was demonstrating the first railway electrification system and it was that which led the British branch of the firm to be commissioned to incorporate this new technology into the Giant’s Causeway Tramway venture. Sir William Siemens (1823–83) was briefly a Director and Siemens Brothers of London were appointed electrical engineers to the company, their representative being Dr Edward Hopkinson, who later went on to work on the Bessbrook and Newry Tramway and the City & South London Railway. Surveying and civil engineering work was carried out by Edward Price, son of the eminent Irish civil engineer James Price.” [3]
“The line was the world’s first to be powered by hydroelectricity, something that was later developed at Bessbrook and in Switzerland. Traill built a generating station at Walkmill Falls (24 feet (7.3 m)) head), near Bushmills, installing 104 horsepower (78 kW) Alcott water turbines to produce up to 250 volts at 100 amps of electrical power for his line. Later 160 horsepower (120 kW) turbines were installed. [8] This building, although without its equipment, is still in existence.” [3]
“Because of legal problems over water rights, erection of the Walkmills turbines was delayed and when the first section of the tramway, from Portrush to Bushmills, was opened on 29th January 1883 some of the timetabled passenger traffic was handled by steam tram engines which were in any case necessary on the town section in Portrush where it was impossible to provide electric power since this was originally fed to the trains via an elevated third rail which ran alongside the line. Therefore, a 25 horsepower (19 kW) steam generator was installed at the Portrush depot, [9] (by 1936 replaced by a 550 volt diesel generator for the Portrush-Dunluce section).” [3]
“The ceremonial opening, using electric traction, took place on 28th September 1883 although a full scheduled electric service did not begin until 5th November and steam locomotives remained available for use until at least 1926.” [3] In 1897, of the annual mileage travelled, “17,797 miles (28,641 km) were steam operated and 4,721 miles (7,598 km) electric. In 1901 the figures were 7,423 miles (11,946 km) and 23,550 miles (37,900 km) respectively. Very little use of steam was made after 1916.” [3]
Evans tells us that:
“In 1915, the Portrush power plant was installed and the two remaining steam engines were kept as stand-by equipment for use in the event of electricity failures. They were finally sold in 1930 to a public works contractor.
The voltage was 550 d.c., the Portrush plant supplying the Portrush-Dunluce section and the original station outside Bushmills the remainder of the line. Laid to the 3ft. gauge, the line was 7.5 miles in length, single track throughout with loops at irregular intervals.
The loops were normally run through on the landward line, the other line being used only when it was necessary to pass another car. All points (except those at the Portrush terminus which were tramway section) were of light railway type, controlled by dolly-weighted point levers which normally held the rails set for the direct (or landward) line.” [1: p185]
Wikipedia tells us that “the section from Bushmills to the Giants’ Causeway opened on 1st July 1887. In 1895, a cyclist died of electric shock after coming into contact with the conductor rail. At the subsequent inquiry it was revealed that the line voltage varied from an average of 290 V up to 360 V, and the company agreed to a temporary reduction in the voltage, which limited the number of services that could be electrically worked. The third rail was replaced by overhead electric wire using side poles from 26th July 1899, apparently initially at 250 V. Voltage drop remained a problem and the tram was the subject of a song by the Irish Rovers which comments on its slow speed. The song was written by Hugh Speers of Bushmills. [10] After upgrading of the Bushmills generating station in 1907 it was possible to produce a 550 V output.” [3]
Evans continues:
“As the wiring was double and followed the rails through the gantry type standards at loops, it followed that the trolley pole had to be changed from the wire normally used (the landward wire) to the seaward wire when a loop wasto be used pass another tram. The writer has often seen this trolley changing performed whilst the cars her were at full speed on a downward grade and has marvelled at the dexterity with which the trolley wheel was placed on the opposite wire. The operation was also seen when the cars were descending the long hill outside Portrush. It seemed usual to lower the trolley bo boom west of White Rocks loop to the Holyrood Hotel. and coast from a point just West of White Rocks loop to the Holyrood Hotel.
The Portrush terminus was outside the N.C.C. (formerly B. & N.C.R.) station and consisted of a run-round loop and lay-by siding in Eglinton Street. At one time there was a short branch which diverged just beyond the loop and ran down to the Harbour, but this was taken up about 1893.” [1: p185-186]
“For a short distance, the line ran due north before turning in a 75-degree curve into Causeway Street. The single track was of tramway section rails as far as the outskirts of the town. From a point near the depot the line was laid on flat-bottom light railway track on the seaward side of the Portrush-Bushmills road. The depot consisted of a dead end road with a permanent way yard at one side. The auxiliary power station was also here. This power station had a modern diesel plant installed in latter years.
After leaving the depot the line ran through open country on its roadside reservation. Climbing steadily, it passed the famous Royal Links and at White Rocks gained the cliff tops. Onward to Dunluce, the trams ran close to the sea and in places the cliffs fell almost sheer from the trackside. There can be no doubt that the tramway, with its open toast-rack cars, was the best means of appreciating this wild and rugged coast.” [1: p186]
“Before reaching Dunluce, the tramway climbed to its highest point at Clooney Hill. This section, nearly 200ft, above the sea, abounded in sharp curves, gradients of 1 in 40 and even a short stretch of 1 in 30.
Beyond Dunluce, the line ran inland for a short distance below Gallows Hill, reaching the coast again at its most spectacular point. Here one could gaze down 140ft. to the foam-covered rocks below. From this point the line again ran inland and after three more passing loops reached Bushmills, a village known for its whisky. Bushmills had a light railway station provided with waiting room, luggage office and lavatories.” [1: p,186-187]
“At one side of the station yard is a small tram shed with accommodation for two cars. The line to the car shed is of interest in that it was to have formed the beginning of an extension to Dervock on the 3ft. gauge Ballycastle Railway. It was with a view to through running with the latter railway that the narrow gauge was adopted for the electric line. The owners wisely decided that an extension to the Causeway would probably be more remunerative.
From Bushmills the line was completely private right-of-way and negotiated cuttings and embankments of railway proportions. After passing a loop, the Bushfoot Golf Links request halt was reached. Soon after this, the line crossed the Bush river by the impressive Victoria Jubilee Bridge, a three-span structure so named because it was erected in 1887.” [1: p187]
“On the other side of the bridge the line passed through sandhills and rabbit warrens, reaching the coast again and following it for a short distance before finally turning inland for the last time. There were two loops between the Victoria Bridge and the terminus; the layout at this latter point consisted of a run-round loop and a siding. The passenger accommodation was unpretentious, consisting merely of a shelter. The tourist had still almost a mile to walk before reaching the Causeway itself, and here, as is usual in such places, he has to pay for admission.” [1: p187]
This extract from the 6″ Ordnance Survey shows the remaining length of the line. The terminus is shown in the top-right of the image. [23]
Discover Portrush describes the last part of the journey, thus: “the tram would run behind Black Rock Strand for about half a mile before turning right and climbing towards the Causeway Terminal. On the left passengers would see Runkerry House, a fine red sandstone house constructed in a striking location. Then part of the McNaughten Estate, occupied by two unmarried McNaughten ladies – later it became a home for the elderly after being passed to the government in lieu of death duties. Later still, it became an outward bound centre and is now divided into apartments.” [21]
The next three views show the modern preservation line’s buildings in the early 21st century.
The first of these three views shows the approach to the stationary from the Southwest.vThe second is a panorama of the station site and the third looks into the Station site from the East. [Google Streetview, September 2011]
Operation
Evans describes the operation of the original line:
“The somewhat tortuous route along the cliff tops gave the line a reputation for scenery rather than speed, but high speeds were frequently attained on the long falling gradient between White Rocks and the Portrush depot.
When the full summer service was operating, the lengthy sections between passing loops rendered operation difficult, and, as some of the loops were not visible from each other, boy signallers were employed. These boys were supplied with white and red flags which they would display to the drivers from a convenient vantage point, the red flag calling on an eastbound car and the white a westbound
The small shed at Bushmills was used by the morning tram from the village which left, with a load of school children and others, to journey into Portrush before the main service started from the depot The winter service was extremely meagre and did not continue beyond Bushmills out to the Causeway unless three or more passengers booked through to that point. During the summer peaks five sets (of one motor car and two trailers) were often in operation at one time.” [1: p187-188]
Wikipedia tells us that “Traill, a former geological surveyor, expected a considerable mineral traffic between quarries along the line and Portrush harbour, and there was originally a goods branch into the main square of Bushmills. However, this traffic fell away, the narrow gauge harbour branch being taken up when the Northern Counties station was opened in 1893, [11] and for most of its life the line primarily served tourists visiting the Causeway. From 1925/26 the line was closed down during each winter.” [3]
“Increased patronage, partly from military traffic, during World War II meant a brief revival of winter services, but receipts were becoming inadequate to support maintenance of the company’s ageing assets, and the line did not reopen after the end of the 1949 season (last day of regular service 30th September 1949), [12] and was subsequently dismantled.” [3]
Nos. 20-23 (toast-rack motor-cars with canopies, originally completely open).
No. 24 (vestibuled motor-car, Peckham pendulum truck, originally double deck 3ft 6in. gauge car and purchased as such from Dunfermline and District Traction Co., August, 1937. It had longitudinal cushioned seats).” [1: p188]
Wikipedia expands somewhat on the rolling-stock record provided by Evans: “the original cars were built by the Midland Railway Carriage and Wagon Company and were later followed by 5 examples from GEC, each with 2 x 20 horsepower (15 kW) British Thomson-Houston motors, and also a Peckham car. There were a maximum of six electric power cars owned at any one time, all being single-truck, single-deck vehicles with both enclosed and “toast rack” examples; typically these would haul several 4-wheel “toast rack” trailers, of which there were 15. There were four steam tram engines, ordered from Wilkinson of Wigan. They had vertical boilers, weighed 7 tons and burnt coke. No.2 was scrapped in 1899, No.1 converted to a ballast wagon in 1910 and Nos. 3 (Dunluce Castle) and 4 (Brian Boroihme) were sold in 1930 for the River Bann Navigation works near Portstewart.” [3][11]
“In 1938 a final electric tram was added to the stock as number 24. This vehicle was formerly a double deck Dunfermline and District Tramways car which was both re-gauged and extensively modified to become a single decker with enclosed ends for the Giants Causeway route.” [3][14]
The modified Dunfermline tram which was given the number 24. It was once a double-deck tram and ran originally on a different gauge. [21]
“A power car and trailer are restored at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, Cultra and another power car is in the care of the National Transport Museum of Ireland at Howth.” [3]
Full details of the steam locomotives can be found here. [17]
Evans concludes:
“The disappearance of this historic tramway, which changed so little in its 66 years of operation, yet provided a useful amenity, and an attraction for tourists, will be mourned by many and the line will be greatly missed by holidaymakers who have in previous years enjoyed rides along its scenic coastal route.” [1: p188]
The editor of The Modern Tramway commented: “We understand that a conference of local authorities is being held to urge the Government to subsidise the Giants Causeway line to the amount of £2,000 a year, so that it may be carried on as a tourist attraction. This is a move that commands our support, but we submit that the modernisation of the line might after a while actually render the subsidy unnecessary.” [1: p188]
Preservation
The Giants’ Causeway and Bushmills Railway was later constructed over the final two miles (3.2 km) of the Tramway and carried its first passengers at Easter 2002. Trains were running at least until the end of 2024. [3][13]
The Giant’s Causeway and Bushmills Railway (GC&BR) is a 3 ft (914 mm) narrow gauge heritage railway operating between the Giant’s Causeway and Bushmills. It “uses equipment originally assembled by Lord O’Neill for a tourist line at Shane’s Castle, Country Antrim, which closed in 1994. The idea of using this to revive part of the Tramway was largely conceived and promoted by David Laing. The Giant’s Causeway and Bushmills Railway Company is a not-for-profit organisation with charitable status. Clearance of the trackbed commenced at the end of 1999 and the railway carried its first passengers at Easter 2002.” [27]
“On 10th July 2010 the railway took delivery of a specially customised 4 coach diesel multiple unit capable of accommodating up to 90 passengers. Manufactured by Severn Lamb UK Ltd., it was designed to enhance the visitor experience to the North Antrim Coast and to recreate, in so far as was possible, the passenger experience of the original hydro electric tram. Commissioning of the new rolling stock by the manufacturers began on Monday 12 July with the inaugural journey three days later. The DMU is powered by a Kubota V3600-E3 engine and shares the line with the previous steam rolling stock. All vehicles run on bogies. The power vehicle is on the Causeway side and is shorter (4 windows) than the three trailers (5 windows).” [27]
Rolling Stock
In addition to the 4-coach DMU, the line has three locomotives and a number of coaches.
The Locomotives owned by the preservation line. [27]
References
D. G. Evans; The Giants’ Causeway and Portrush Tramway; in The Modern Tramway Vol. 13 No. 153, London, September 1950, p185-188.
Railway Times; 22nd September 1883. (Cited by the article at Reference No. 3)
The Modern Tramway reported in December 1950 on the purchase by the Sudan Light & Power Company of the new 4-motor bogie tramcars. The bogies and equipment were being “supplied by the English Electric Company and the underframes and bodies by Charles Roberts and Company Ltd., under sub-contract to the English Electric Company. All motor tramcars and trailers [were to] be fitted with air brakes. As will be seen from the drawing reproduced, the body design [was] a pleasing example of modern British practice. The trailer cars [were] of similar outline.” [1: p270]
I published an article about the railways/tramways of Sudan in May 2022. That article can be found here. [7] This present article should be seen as an addendum to that article.
The image is embedded from Getty Images. It is a high-angle view of pedestrians, cars and an EEC tram &n trailer at the tram terminus in Omdurman, Sudan, circa 1955. The tramline connects Omdurman, on the west bank of the River Nile, with Khartoum. (Photo by Three Lions/Hulton Archive/Getty Images). [4]
The Modern Tramway continues:
“Electric tramway operation in Khartoum began on 16th January, 1928 when the line from Khartoum North to Omdurman via Khartoum and the White Nile Bridge was opened. The Khartoum Tramways were the first electric tramways in the Sudan and transport in the city and outskirts had been previously provided by two steam tramway lines, which were closed on the opening of the electric line.” [1: p270]
The Modern Tramway describes the electric tramway which replaced the steam-powered trams:
“The present rolling stock of the 3ft. 6 n. gauge Khartoum tramways consists of 16 single-truck motor trams, 15 4-wheel trailers, one 4-wheel electric locomotive and 30 goods trucks. All the stock was built by the English Electric Company Ltd. Four passenger services are operated, viz:
Khartoum Central Station Omdurman Central Station (5 miles).
Khartoum Central Station Khartoum North (3) miles).
Omdurman Central Station Abu Rouf (14 miles).
Circle (12 miles).” [1: p270]
“Headways are 18, 20, 20 and 30 minutes respectively. In addition a freight service is operated between Khartoum railway station and Omdurman. The main Iine begins at Khartoum North (where it made end on junction with a steam tramway to Shabat Reach, a service now operated by motor buses) and shortly turns south to cross the Blue Nile; on gaining the other bank, the line turns east, passing through the main part of Khartoum and running parallel to the Blue Nile. On this section there is the main depot and a large loop which runs round to the Central Station and the back of the city before turning north to rejoin the main line. At Mogren Point, the main line crosses the White Nile and immediately turns north towards Omdurman; this city stretches for 6 miles along the river and during the régime of the Mahdi it became the capital of his empire. The city is memorable for the battle fought outside its walls in 1898 between the followers of the Mahdi and the British. Some distance after turning north, there is another depot at Zaptia, on the western side of the line. At Omdurman Central Station the tramway turns east, back towards the river Nile, which it reaches at Abu Rouf, the final terminus. From this point, there is a ferry service to the terminus of the former steam tramway at Shabat Reach on the other side of the Nile. The tramways are all single-line-and-loop and there are several goods sidings. In 1948, 8,883,851 passengers were carried, whilst goods traffic averages 12,000 tons yearly.” [1: p270-271]
“At the time of the inauguration of the electric tramways it was thought that due to the very dry nature of the ground in Khartoum, satisfactory earth points could not be obtained for earthing the track for a track return system. It has since been established that it is possible to provide earth points, and the new trams will operate on the normal single overhead and track return system.” [1: p271]
The Modern Tramway acknowledged the help of the Sudan Light and Power Company Ltd., who provided the information on which these notes are based.
References
Modern British Tramcars for Khartoum; in The Modern Tramway Vol. 13 No. 156, London, December 1950, p270.
P.W. Gentry wrote about Stockport’s trams in the July 1949 issue of Modern Tramway.
He says: “Besides possessing several interesting features of its own, the Stockport system today commands added attention as the last last surviving member of that once network of standard gauge undertakings encircling Manchester. It is an unusually pleasing system by virtue of its compact and simple arrangement, its focal point being Mersey Square.” [1: p123]
This article in Modern Tramway caught my attention because for about 9 years I worked in Stockport as a highway engineer.
We know that tramways arrived in Stockport in the 1880’s from the Manchester direction when “the Manchester Tramways and Carriage Co, Ltd., [opened] a horse-car service into Mersey Square via Levenshulme.” [1: p123]
In 1889, the Stockport and Hazel Grove Carriage and Tramway Co. Ltd. was formed and “instituted horse car services southwards to Hazel Grove and Edgeley at Easter 1890.” [1: p123]
Stockport tramcar No. 5, dating from 1901, is preserved at the Heaton Park Tramway. The lower saloon of tramcar No. 5 was recovered from a field, where it had been used as a hen house, in 1971. It was restored by the ‘Stockport 5 Tramway Trust’. It now runs on the Heaton Park Tramway, a tramway museum in Heaton Park, Manchester. [2]
Stockport Corporation began tramway operations when, in 1890, “an Order under the Tramways Act was obtained for the construction and operation of electric tramways. Work commenced in Sandy Lane on 12th February 1901 and the three routes projected were opened in stages.” [1: p123]
Woodley Route: to Woodley Station by 26th August 1901; and Pole Bank by 30th May 1902.
Reddish Route: to Sandy Lane by 3rd September 1901; to Holdsworth Square by 30th May 1902; and to the Bull’s Head in Reddish by 25th November 1903.
Cheadle Route: to the Robin Hood on Brinksway by 23rd January 1902; to Cheadle Heath Bridge by 25th July 1903; to Cheadle Green by 5th May 1904; and to the Horse & Farrier, Gatley Green by 24th May 1904.
In parallel, negotiations secured the purchase of the horse tramways. First, the Levenshulme line (which was electrified by Manchester Corporation by 1903 and maintained by them). The Stockport & Hazel Grove undertaking was purchased in 1994 for £14,000 and electrified by 5th July 1905.
Tram service No. 35 was by then running from Manchester to Hazel Grove.
Mersey Square was the main hub of Stockport’s tramway network. …
The National Library of Scotland retains three digital versions of the OS 25″ mapping:
An extract from Map: Cheshire X.15; Ordnance Survey, 25 inch to 1 mile; revised: 1907; published: 1932 which shows Mersey Square as it was in 1907. It seems as though publication of this map was delayed for 25 years! [6]An extract from Map: Lancashire CXII.9; Ordnance Survey, 25 inch to 1 mile; revised: 1917; published: 1922, which shows Mersey Square as it was in 1917. [7]An extract from Map: Lancashire CXII.9; Ordnance Survey, 25 inch to 1 mile; revised: 1934; published: 1936, showing Mersey Square as it was in 1934. The tram depot has been enlarged and the additional depot on Heaton Lane constructed. Heaton lane Depot is accessed via the branch West off Wellington Road. [8]
The sequence of extracts from the Ordnance Survey’s 25″ series of maps shows the development from 1907 to 1934. The most significant changes in that period were: the dualling of the trackwork on the A6 South of the Square; and the development of the Tram Depot. As can be seen from the map extracts, the main depot building was widened to reach the river bank and then extended Southwest towards Mersey Square. A surprising change appears in the latest extract – the conversion of the dual track work on Chestergate where it passes under the A6, Wellington Road to a stretch of single track.
Mersey Square in 1932, seen from the West. This image was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 19th January 2021 by Chris Paul. [13]
The 1930s to the 1970s saw major changes to the centre of Stockport. The River Mersey was culverted from Mersey Square, Northeast to Bridge Street and a dual carriageway road was created along the line of the River Mersey. This new road was not used by trams but it altered traffic arrangements at Mersey Square while it was in use.
The construction of Merseyway in the 1930s is nearing completion in this photograph which was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 18th October 2020 by Dave Moran. [12]The view Southwest from Bridge Street, showing the dual carriageway over the River Mersey in the mid-20th century. This image was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 26th June 2020 by Julian Ryan. [9]Merseyway was built on a series of reinforced concrete portal frames spanning the river. Given the positioning of the vehicles on the structure, this image probably comes from while the road was closed. The image was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 26th September 2018 by Marilyn Ann Cronshaw. [11]Merseyway is seen from the Southwest, looking Northeast in the mid-20th century. The tram depot is on the left. This image was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 10th August 2020 by Keith Povey. [10]A final view of Merseyway as a road across the roundabout at its Southwest end in Mersey Square. The photograph was taken from Wellington Road and it was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 6th October 2020 by Mark Lloyd. [14]Mersey Square seen from the Southeast in 1948. The oddly shaped roundabout at the end of Merseyway is on the right with the old fire station above it. This image was shared on the Memories of Stockport Facebook Group on 28th August 2023 by Michael Sidebottom. [15]Traffic emerging from Mersey Square onto Wellington Road (A6). Manchester is away to the right, Hazel Grove to the left. Heaton Lane Tram Depot is beyond Wellington Road on the right of the image. This photograph was shared by Marilyn Ann Cronshaw on 24th June 2015. [16]Mersey Square, Stockport in the 21st century. [Google Maps, January 2025]
By July 1905, the network was “in its final shape, with a total route mileage of 19.46. Of this, however 2.51 route miles (Vernon Park Pole Bank) was the property of Bradbury and Romiley Urban District Council, 1.64 miles (Cheadle Heath Bridge Gatley Green) belonged to Cheadle and Gatley U.D.C. and 0.88 miles to Hazel Grove and Bramhall U.D.C., all these sections being leased to Stockport Corporation for operating purposes. The total length of track over the system as a whole was 34.03 miles, and the cost of track construction averaged the modest figure of £7,227 per route mile.” [1: p124]
In addition to joint working with Manchester Corporation, a similar arrangement was made with “The Stalybridge, Hyde, Mossley and Dukinfield Transport and Electricity Board, Pole Bank being the point of connection between the two systems. Stockport cars were operated through to Hyde Town Hall from 1st January, 1903, when the Pole Bank Hyde line was the property of the Oldham, Ashton and Hyde Electric Tramways, Ltd., a B.E.T. subsidiary, but it was not until 1923, when this undertaking sold out to local authorities and the Hyde – Pole Bank section was taken over by the Joint Board, that mutual through running could be started. A joint S.H.M.D.-S.C.T. service was introduced in March 1925, between Hyde and Edgeley via Mersey Square and continued until the Joint Board ceased to operate trams on 26th May, 1945. Thereafter, Stockport maintained the service unaided until 2nd March, 1947, when buses took over and the trams were cut back to Vernon Park.” [1: p124]
The withdrawal of the through services into Manchester occurred in the late 1940s but, Gently says, “luckily, only one section of the purely local system [had] suffered likewise, that being the Cheadle-Gatley section, on which buses were substituted on 21st September 1931. An early trolleybus route to Offerton was given up as impracticable many years [earlier].” [1: p124]
Wikipedia tells us that the fleet of tramcars steadily increased, with the Corporation owning a total of 87 double-deck electric tramcars through the life of the system, [3] although the highest number at any one time was 85 [4] and numbers settled down at 82, “all of which [were] of the single-truck top-covered vestibuled type with an average seating capacity of 60. Only 26 cars [had] open balconies, and these [were] used only at peak periods; ten of them [had] reversed staircases. The 56 totally enclosed cars [included] 30 which [were] fully upholstered on both decks, the seats being particularly deep and comfortable. The car [equipment comprised] Westinghouse, DK.30 or DK.35 motors and Dick, Kerr DB.1 (form K3) controllers, and hand-operated track brakes [were] fitted on account of the steep gradients. In 1944, the fleet numbering was re-arranged with the primary object of grouping together between 1 and 29 all those cars which, on account of a low bridge near Bredbury, had low-built top-covers, these being identified by a large H (denoting “Hyde,” the route concerned) on either side of the headlamp.” [1: p124] This was needed until abandonment of the lines beyond Vernon Park rendered this unnecessary. [5]
Most of the network survived the Second World War but was progressively closed in 1950 and 1951, only surviving for a short while after the Modern Tramway article of 1949. … “The Crossley Road to Hazel Grove route was the first to go, on 14th January 1950, followed by the Edgeley to Vernon Park route on 3rd March 1951, the Cheadle route on 10th April 1951 and finally the Reddish line on 25th August 1951.” [3]
Wikipedia also explains that: “The Corporation also ran a small trolleybus line, using three vehicles which collected current from the overhead lines using the German Lloyd-Kohler system, the only use of this system in Britain. The route opened in 1913, but the onset of the First World War made obtaining spare parts from Germany impossible, and it ran intermittently, due to maintenance problems. It was replaced by motor buses in 1920.” [3]
It is interesting to note that the deals made with adjacent networks “allowed long journeys to be made by tram, with the route from Hazel Grove to Seaforth Sands near Liverpool being 51.5 miles (82.9 km). One lady is known to have travelled between Liverpool and Stockport for pleasure on several occasions, although it took almost a whole day to reach her destination.” [3]
Gentry noted that Stockport’s track was “double throughout on the Levenshulme, Cheadle Heath, Edgeley and Hazel Grove routes and mostly so on Reddish except between the top of Lancashire Hill and Clare Road; this latter section, together with Princes Street and most of the Vernon Park route [was] single-and-loop. The rail used [weighed] 101 lbs. per yard. The chief depot [was] located in Mersey Square, with a subsidiary depot nearby in Heaton Lane.” [1: p124]
Trams ran through St. Peter’s Square and down the ramp into Mersey Square. The tram stop was in the centre of the paved area with both the Tram Depot and the Fire Station close by.
Reddish Road then turns to the North and later to the Northwest.
Another extract from the 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1934 (this sheet published in 1935). The tram tracks turned with Reddish Road as the road ahead led to Reddish Station forecourt. [36]As this next extract from the 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1934 shows, trams followed Reddish Road over the railway via Reddish Bridge and on to Holdsworth Square. [36]North of Holdsworth Square trams ran North along Gorton Road crossing the LMS & LNER Joint Railway between Manchester and Hayfield adjacent to that line’s Reddish Station. The location is shown on this extract from the 1934 25″ Ordnance Survey. [37]
The next map extract and photograph show the terminus of the route we have been following from Mersey Square to Gorton. …
This first article has looked at the history of Stockport Corporation’s Tramways and has highlighted two of the tramway routes operated by Stockport Corporation. The line from Edgeley to Mersey Square and the line from Mersey Square to Gorton. Subsequent articles will look at other routes operated by the Corporation.
References
P.W. Gentry; Stockport Corporation Tramway; Modern Tramway, Vol. 12 No. 138, June 1949, p123-126.
Harry Postlethwaite, John Senior & Bob Rowe; Super Prestige No. 14, Stockport Corporation; Venture Publications, Glossop, Derbyshire, 2008. This document is made freely available by MDS Books as a .pdf: https://www.mdsbooks.co.uk/media/wysiwyg/Stockport_Download_1.pdf, accessed on 14th January 2025.
The June 1950 issue of The Modern Tramway carried a report by A. A. Jackson on the tramways in the French port of Marseilles.
Marseilles sits in a natural basin facing West into the Mediterranean and surrounded by hills on three sides. Jackson’s article was based on personal observations in 1945 and later information provided by D. L. Sawyer and N.N. Forbes. He writes:
“The suburbs extend to the lower slopes of these surrounding hills and they are connected to the centre of the city by a tramway system that is now the largest in France. The original operator was the Compagnie Genérale Française des Tramways (Réseaux de Marseille) but the tramways have been under sequester since 1946. The route mileage at the present time is kilometres and the gauge is standard (i.e. 1.44 metres).
The important dates in the history of the system are:
1873: First horse tramway. (This date is questioned by other sources with 1876 being quoted for the first use of horse-drawn trams. The French Wikipedia entry talks of planned routes dating from 1873 but the concession only being awarded in 1876.) [2][3][16]
1876: C.G.F.T. acquired the tramways (excluding the Aix interurban).
1890: Electrification begun.
1904: C.G.F.T. acquired and electrified the steam railway, L’Est-Marseille.
1907: Allauch (12 km.) and La Bourdonnière (12 km.) routes opened.
1910: Electrification completed. Le Merlan route opened.
1922: First rolling stock modernisation began.” [1: p134]
These dates are not comprehensive. Jackson was writing at the end of the 1940s and could not be expected to cover later events. It is worth noting Wikipedia’s comment that, “Unlike most other French cities, trams continued to operate in Marseilles, even as through the 1950s and beyond trams disappeared from most cities around the world. The original tram system continued to operate until 2004, when the last line, Line 68, was closed. Trams remained out of operation for three years between 2004 and 2007, in advance of the effort to renovate the tram network to modern standards.” [2]
The Tramways of Marseilles in 1949. [1: p134]
Wikipedia says that “the network was modernised by the constant introduction of newer tramcars, to replace the older ones. In 1938, thirty-three trailers were recovered from Paris. These meant that reversible convoys could be operated. In 1939, the tramway company owned and operated 430 tramcars, 350 trailers and 71 lines.” [2]
A 1943 proposal would, if it had been realised, seen tunnels provided in the centre of Marseilles, the busiest lines would have been brought together in two tunnels. This project did not come to fruition.
Wikipedia continues: “In 1949 a further modernisation occurred. The first articulated tramcars was designed and built (Algiers tramway possessed articulated SATRAMO tramcars). These were created by joining two older tramcars. These tramcars remained unique [in France] until 1985 when Nantes tramway opened.” [2]
The city council did not want to keep its network of trams. The haphazard modernisation of tramcars was evidence of the council’s intentions. “The process of replacing tramways with trolleybuses and buses began after World War II in 1945 and accelerated from 1950. The first closures meant that Canebière was tramway-free from 1955. The last closure occurred on 21st January 1960.” [2] But not all lines closed. …
Line No. 68 opened in December 1893 and is the only tramway line to remain in service during the later part of the twentieth century. It “stretched from Noailles to Alhambra, serving La Plaine, the Boulevard Chave, the La Blancarde railway station and Saint-Pierre cemetery. The central terminus [was] situated in a tunnel. This tunnel, built in 1893, [was] unique in France and was built to give access to the city centre, avoiding the narrow streets of some of Marseille’s suburbs. Because of the problems involved in converting the line to bus use it was decided to keep the line operational.” [2]
Line 68 [was] 3 km (1.9 mi) long and was out of use for a few years. The decision to modernise it was taken in 1965 and the line had reopened by 1969 when twenty-one PCC tramcars were purchased and the whole track relaid. “The first of the PCC cars arrived on 26th December 1968 and the first tram went into service on 20th February 1969. The last of the old tramcars was withdrawn that spring. Modernisation resulted in an increase in passengers. Numbers increased from 4,917,000 passengers in 1968 to 5,239,000 in 1973.” [2]
The PCC cars were later modernised in 1984. Three new cars were delivered and all cars made into double cars. The line operated successfully until 2004 when it closed for reconstruction. After refurbishment, “the short section between La Blancarde and Saint Pierre was reopened as part of a new network on 30th June 2007. The section along Boulevard Chave to Eugène Pierre [reopened later the same year] … the tunnel to Noailles was … [reopened in] …summer 2008.” [2]
Returning to Jackson’s article of 1949/50, he continues:
“The longest route is that to the industrial town of Aubagne, 17 km. inland (service 40) and this is further extended 14 km. eastwards by an original trolley-bus route (to Gémenos and Cuges). The Aubagne tram line, which also carries the associated service 12 to Camoins les Bains (12 km.) and a short working to St. Pierre (service 68), begins at the Gare Noailles, a sub-surface tramway station in the centre of the city and the trams leave this station in tunnel, proceeding thus for 1 km. with no intermediate stop, to emerge on a quiet, broad boulevard before branching, (service 12 to Camoins, 40 to Aubagne). After the junction, each of these two lines continues outwards on roadside reserved track for most of its length. The origin of these important suburban arteries was the steam railway L’Est Marseille which was constructed in 1892 from the Gare Noailles to St. Pierre, and converted to an electric tramway by the C.G.F.T. in 1904. Bogie cars and trailers provide a fast service on these routes and the local services to St. Pierre are worked by single-truck cars, One so often hears aesthetic criticism of tramways that it is interesting to note that a well-known League member once explored the Marseilles system and left the city, blissfully unaware of the existence of this interesting sub-surface terminus.” [1: p134-135]
“The other City termini are in side streets off the main thoroughfare La Canebiere (Boulevard Garibaldi, Alliées Leon Gambetta, Cours Belsunce, Cours Joseph Thierry) also opposite the Préfecture, and on the two main streets leading north out of the city (Place Jules Guesde and Place Sadi-Carnot). To cross the city involves a change of cars in all but one instance, the sole remaining cross-city service being No. 41, Chartreux St Giniez. Coastal lines extended to L’Estaque in the north-west and to La Madrague in the south, the latter serving the popular beach and pleasure resort La Plage du Prado (rather similar to Sunderland’s Sear burn route). Other lengthy routes (mostly with rural termini) are: Chateau Gom bert (5), La Bourdonnière (1) Allauch (11), Les trois lucs (7), Le Redon (24) and Mazargues (22 and 23). The circular service, No. 82, serves the residential and coastal areas to the south of the city and enjoys wide roads and unrestricted run ning over most of its length; it traverses the scenic Corniche for part of its run. This is one of the few routes on which cars may be seen running without the almost inevitable trailer. In the older parts of the city many of the streets are narrow, but the greater part of Marseilles is planned on the usual French pattern and therefore possesses wide streets and boulevards well suited to tramway operation. As in Italy, the track in the boulevards is often placed against either curb, well away from the main traffic stream, and in such places the parking of cars is strictly controlled to ensure that tramway operation is unrestricted. At boulevard intersections such as the Rond Point du Prado there are well planned circular layouts joining all tracks. Four-wheeled trolleybuses of standard design and small oil buses have replaced the trams on a number of strictly urban routes unsuitable for tramway operation (the oil bus substitutions are presumably an intermediate stage with the eventual intention that they be replaced by trolleybuses). These trolleybus and oil bus substitutions retain the old tramway services numbers although in certain cases the original tramway route has been extended or slightly modified. Mr. D. L. Sawyer, who was in Marseilles recently, reports that the trolleybuses are not unaffected by the daily shaking up they receive from the rough, uneven street surfaces which gives one cause to reflect that an effective trolleybus installation in many European cities would prove to be a very expensive business as the traditional street surfaces would need to be completely replaced with a surface rather more kind to the not-so-sturdy trolleybus. The tram tracks, which suffered badly from war time neglect, were very noisy in 1945, but they have now been put in excellent condition.” [1: p135-136]
The “Régie Départmentale des Chemins de Fer et Tramways des Bouches du Fer et Tramways des Bouches du Rhône formerly operated a reserved-track roadside electric tramway from Marseilles to the university and cathedral city of Aix en Provence, 29 km to the north. This line was physically connected, by end-on junction, with the Marseilles system, and its Marseilles terminus was at the Place du Change, by the Vieux Port. The dark blue and silver bogie cars, towing one or more heavy bogie trailers, operated an hourly service with a journey time of just under 90 minutes. The Aix terminus was at the extreme end of the main street, the Cours Mirabeau, at the Place Forbin, and the depot and works were situated at the Pont de l’Arc, Aix. This line was converted to trolleybus operation during the winter of 1948-49 and the main trunk road has thus been burdened with additional vehicles. Mr. Sawyer states that the trolleybuses have reduced the journey time considerably; this is hardly surprising as the trams they have replaced were not modern and the number of stops on the tram route was unnecessarily large. New tramcars and a certain amount of track re-alignment would probably have produced an even greater improvement than the trolleybuses it is certain that they would have been a better investment.” [1: p136]
Jackson reports on the rolling-stock in use on the network:
“The rolling stock of the Marseilles system is an interesting mixture of semi-modern and modernised cars, painted blue and cream and mostly of single-truck design. The trailers approximately equal the motor cars in number and are of even greater variety; one type, a covered toastrack, is known locally as ‘Buffalo’ and is very popular during the hot Mediterranean summer. Extensive use is made of twin-units in Marseilles thus obviating the necessity of shunting at termini. The cars are fitted with deep throated hooters and the sound of these, together with the clanging of the bells that announces the changing of the traffic lights is a characteristic of the city. The rolling stock is housed in five depots, all marked on the map, viz., Arenc, Les Catalans, Les Chartreux, La Capelette and St. Pierre. The repair and construction workshops are at Les Chartreux. The high price of materials and the financial situation forbid the purchase of new trams under present conditions and the current programme is therefore concerned with the rehabilitation of existing equipment. A fine and bold beginning has been made in car No. 1301, placed in service in the summer of 1949. This is an articulated car, built from two of the more modern motor cars and the result is a vehicle of pleasing and efficient appearance, 21 metres in length with a passenger capacity of 175 (35 seats) and a maximum speed of 50 km. per hour. One driver and one conductor only are needed (a saving of 35 per cent on personnel against the motor car and trailer type of unit); loading is through the front entrance, unloading through centre and rear exits. The car is double-ended and the doors are pneumatically controlled, one by the driver and the other two by the conductor. The tram cannot start until the central door is closed.
The tickets are issued on the usual carnet system and the books of tickets can be purchased at a reduced price at kiosks and tobacco shops, a book of twenty 5-franc tickets costing 85 francs. Two tickets are taken by the conductor for one section, three for two sections, and four for three sections or over. After 9 p.m. and on Sundays the rate is increased by one ticket and on special journeys to the Sports Stadium and Race Course, a minimum of five tickets is taken. The length of the sections is short and it is only on the longer suburban routes that the all-over fare becomes cheaper. Many cars are equipped for “pay as you enter” (although to use the word “pay” is not entirely accurate as the carnet system means that the conductor rarely handles money). On the Aubagne route (No. 40) a special fare tariff is in force; the complete journey requires five tickets costing eight francs each. Transfer tickets are not used as they have been declared unsuitable for Marseilles.” [1: p136-137]
The French Wikipedia entry for the trams of Marseilles gives some significant detail relating to the trams used on the network. The original, early, rolling-stock delivered between 1891 and 1925 was “cream-coloured, the colour adopted by the CGFT on all the company’s networks. All the motor cars had open platforms and could be transformed in summer, with the glass frames on the side walls being replaced by curtains. The numbers were painted in large figures on the four sides of the vehicles.” [16]
Two axle trams: [17]
No. 501 to 524, “Saint Louis” motor car, 1891-95, power: 2 × 12 hp , empty weight 6.7 tonnes, ex No. 201 to 224 before 1900; (Drawings can be found here. [18])
No. 525, prototype “K” engine, 1891-95, power: 2 × 27 hp, ex No. 301 before 1900;
No. 526-530, “P”, 1898, power: 2 × 27 hp, ex No. 1 to 5 Marseille Tramways Company
From 1925, the engine bodies were modernized. They were rebuilt with closed platforms and their capacity was increased. The trucks (chassis) remained original, but the electrical equipment was reinforced to gain power. This fleet was completed by two series of new engines. All modifications were made according to the criteria of the “Standard” type, a standard defined for vehicles to use the future tunnel network. [17][24]
Bogie trams: [17]
1200, prototype of a closed platform tram;
1201-1231, 1924, transformation of the “C” trams, 1002-1033, power: 4 × 32 hp, empty weight 16.4 tons;
2001-2004, 1929, known as “Pullmann”, delivered new, power: 4 × 42 hp, empty weight: 21.5 tonnes.
Trailers
The number of trailers varied between 400 and 500 depending on the period. The majority of trailers had 2 axles and were numbered in the series 1 to 500. These included: open trailers called “Badeuse” with side access to the rows of transverse benches; and closed trailers with access via end platforms. [17]
In addition there were a number of bogie trailers:
138-153, 1899, transformed into tram cars;
2051-2054, 1928, accompanying the “Pullmann” engines 2001-2004;
2201-2233, 1937, purchased from the STCRP (Parisian network) and coupled to the 1200 locomotives;
2551-2572, 1944, of the “Standard” type, coupled to the 1200 motor cars. [17]
Jackson continues:
“In 1945, overcrowding of trams had reached a peak as there then existed no other means of public transport and the number of cars in service had been reduced by the shortage of electricity and lubricants and the ravages of war-time lack of maintenance. Passengers were then to be seen riding on the steps, on the bumpers, on the roofs and even standing tightly jammed between the trailer and the motor car, precariously balanced on the couplings; indeed it was often difficult to see the cars for the passengers. This is only mentioned as a tribute to the sturdiness and reliability of electric tramways which here, as in many other cities all over the world, continued to operate and bear the brunt of all the city’s passenger traffic long after war conditions had forced other means of transport out of service.” [1: p137]
“With regard to the future, it is encouraging to know that the main tramway routes will be retained and modernised and that modern tramway equipment and reserved track routes of the electric light railway type will be a feature of the Marseilles of the future-a fine tribute to the planners of the original tramway system. It is officially recognised that trolleybuses would be unable alone to cope with the heavy traffic of this great French port, and only a small number of tram routes remain to be converted to trolleybus operation. Further tramway subways, including one under the Canebière, were proposed some years ago and it may be that these will, after all, be built as they would be considerably less expensive than the tiny network of underground railways that is part of the current plans.” [1: p138]
It is worth a quick look at the development of Marseille Metro further below.
Jackson also provides details of the different services in place in 1949 (his list was correct as at May 1949, but omitted some all-night services and short workings):
Line 23, Tram No. …34 (first digit not visible) in Place Castellane. This image is made available under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0). [30]
The 21st Century
Marseilles modern tram network was inaugurated on 30th June 2007. The first phase of the new Marseille tram network opened on that date. It consists of one line linking Euroméditerranée in the northwest with Les Caillols in the east. Between Blancarde Chave and Saint-Pierre stations, it runs on part of the former Line 68.
“In November 2007, the portion of the old Line 68 between Blancarde Chave. and E-Pierre (near the entrance to the tunnel) reopened, and two lines were created. Line 1 links E-Pierre and Les Caillols, and Line 2 runs from Euroméditerranée to La Blancarde, where a transfer between the two lines was created. La Blancarde train station is a transit hub: a station on Line 1 of the Marseille Metro opened in 2010, and it has long been served by TER regional trains to and from Toulon.” [2]
“In September 2008, Line 1 was extended to Noailles via the tunnel formerly used by line 68. This tunnel now carries a single track since the new trams are wider than the [PCC trams]. In March 2010, Line 2 was extended 700 metres North from Euroméditerranée-Gantes to Arenc.” [2]
“In May 2015, the 3.8 km (2.4 mi) Line 3 was inaugurated. It shares Line 2 tracks between Arenc and la Canebière where Line 2 turns west. Line 3 continues South on new track through Rue de Rome to Place Castellane. Line 3 extensions south, 4.2 km (2.6 mi) to Dromel and la Gaye, and 2 km north to Gèze are planned. Tram Line 3 will therefore continue to run parallel to the Dromel-Castellane-Gèze Metro Line 2, which may limit its ridership.” [2]
Rolling-stock: “Customized Bombardier Flexity Outlook trams are used on the new tram line[s]. Composed of five articulated sections, they were 32.5 m (106 ft 8 in) long and 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in) wide. Twenty-six were delivered in 2007.[2][3] They were extended by 10 m (32 ft 10 in) by adding two additional articulated sections in 2012. [6] In 2013, six new Flexity were ordered for the T3 line.” [2]
“Their exterior and interior appearance was designed by MBD Design. [6] The exterior resembles the hull of a ship, and the driver’s cabin resembles the bow. A lighted circle displays the colour of the line the tram is on. Inside the tram, the floor, walls, and ceiling are coloured blue, and seats and shutters are made of wood.” [2]
“The tram network is run by Le Tram, a consortium of Régie des transports de Marseille and Veolia Transport. The proposal to privatize the operation of public transit was unpopular, and resulted in a 46-day transit strike.” [7]
Marseilles Metro
The Marseilles Metro is independent of the tram network. It consists of two different lines, partly underground, serving 31 stations, with an overall route length of 22.7 kilometers (14.1 mi). [10] Line 1 opened in 1977, followed by Line 2 in 1984. Two stations, Saint-Charles and Castellane , each provide interchange between lines. [11]
The mention of ‘Lickey’ in the railway press usually conjures up thoughts of the Lickey Incline and the bankers needed to enable steam-powered trains to make the climb.
In an article written in 1949 (Modern Tramway’s Prize Article of 1949) and published in February 1950, B.J. Pridmore prophetically proposed a Light Rail solution to anticipated traffic issues on the transport corridor centred on the Bristol Road.
Would cities in the UK which already had some reserved tram tracks have benefitted from forward thinking that sustained the use of trams through the latter years of the 20th century on tracks and routes which would be suitable for the current wave of Light Rapid Transit/Modern Tramway provision?
Here is Pridmore’s article in full (illustrations are from a variety of referenced sources):
“Summary
There are few cities with a passenger transport route so convenient for conversion to a rapid-transit light railway as is the Birmingham route to the Lickey Hills. In this article is submitted a scheme for such a conversion, describing the route, the alterations required to the track and vehicles, the attractive services which could be operated, and the possibility, in the future, of the possession by Birmingham of a true rapid-transit installation giving a public passenger transport system freed from the delays due to street congestion.
Introduction
The Lickey route of the Birmingham tramways extends about eight miles Southwest of the city, connecting it to the suburb of Edgbaston (2 miles) and the almost separate entities of Selly Oak (4 miles), Northfields (6 miles) and Longbridge (7 miles and location of the Austin Works), bifurcation at this point giving two termini at the dormitory villages of Rednal and Rubery on the edge of the Lickey Hills.
The traffic on this route is partly of a business character, with a morning peak to the city, two small mid-day peaks, outward and inward, from the city to Selly Oak, and the evening peak of outward-bound traffic. Superimposed upon this are the industrial peaks, of a general nature to and from the city, and of a concentrated nature in the opposite directions to and from the Austin Works at Longbridge. Further traffic is of an interurban nature: between each of the shopping centres of Northfields and Selly Oak as well as from each of these to Birmingham there is appreciable miscellaneous traffic. There is also considerable holiday traffic to the Lickey Hills on non-working days.
Services are operated from the city to Rubery and Rednal, with many short workings to Selly Oak, and extra mid-day journeys from Longbridge to Northfields and Selly Oak, whilst services on the inner (and suburban) section of the route are amplified by the superposition of those to and from Pershore Road (Cotteridge). which share the Bristol Road with the Lickey routes for the first two miles or so to the junction at Pebble Mill Road.
This trunk route with large and varied traffic and high load factor has already about three-quarters of its length constructed as reserved track. Much of this has recently been relaid “solid” on a concrete foundation, instead of on the ballasted sleepers as originally.
It has only two short gradients of any magnitude, and would thus seem ideal for gradual conversion towards an interurban light railway giving ample capacity on the route and removing public transport from the road proper, hence also reducing congestion in the bigger Birmingham of tomorrow for it is along this route that Birmingham seems ripe for the next phase of expansion.
In the remainder of this article it is suggested how, ultimately, this route should be converted to a light railway as a contribution towards ideal transport in the greater Birmingham of the future.
The Track and the Route
The present Navigation Street terminus loop should be improved to give loading islands outside two parallel tracks at the terminal loading point; the track layout should include crossovers to enable Pershore Road cars to be separated from Lickey cars, and Selly Oak and other short working cars to be separated from through cars (as will be needed for peak-hour services, q.v.). The one-way streets forming the loop are amply wide enough to permit the tram tracks to be relocated at the sides and be totally reserved; public transport would thus be segregated from the rest in this most congested section of the route.
Tram No. 842 sits at the Navigation Street terminus of the route from Birmingham to Rednal and Rubery. [3]The Navigation Street terminus of the tram service to and from the Lickey Hills. Tram services No. 70 and No. 71 circulated round the loop shown on this extract from the 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1913 (published in 1918). [6]
The Bristol Road as far as Pebble Mill Road will ultimately have to be widened if traffic increases much more; but taking in part of the footways and front gardens would in general give room for the central eighteen feet of reservation which would suffice for the tramway. Alternatively, the reservation could be at the side and a three-lane road be left for the remainder of the traffic. As an interim measure local road-widening and the provision of loading islands with queue barriers, the former combined with pedestrian crossings, at the few important stops, should be undertaken.
The narrow road through Selly Oak and under the railway bridge presents the greatest obstacle; track reservation should be made when this is widened, while the provision of loading islands would seem the only present practicable measure.
The roads through Northfields and Longbridge are amply wide enough for a narrow track reservation (lacking the wide grass borders of the present reservations) and conversion of these sections to dual carriageway with central reservation for the tramway should be done as soon as the conversion scheme is commenced.
The tracks at present reserved can remain as now except that it would be wise to convert the remainder of the sleeper track to ‘solid’ track before high-speed running is commenced.
The Cars
Pending the acquisition of new cars (possibly like those at Llandudno, which show what can be done on 3ft. 6in. gauge if the spirit is willing), conversion of about 20 cars of the ‘800’ class for the base service and its reserves, and rehabilitation of another forty air-braked cars, would enable the Department to put the scheme into operation with the minimum of delay.
The cars to be converted should have their roofs and ends removed and the body sides made straight (instead of waisted). The roofs and ends should be renewed and the cars at the same time lengthened about two feet each end. The new ends and roofs should be on the lines of those of the post war Glasgow cars: platform doors should be added and the stairhead doors and bulkheads omitted. Large destination and route number blinds should be fitted below the top-deck windows. Interior decoration should be as modern and attractive as in any other vehicle of early 1950s – brown ceilings are out of place to-day.
To reduce noise the short coil springs on the bogies might be replaced by rubber pads. The long coil springs should be shortened and stiffened (to reduce noise) and have rubber pads above them, again to reduce noise. The motor gear ratio should be decreased by about 10 per cent and helical gears fitted. Automatic but optional field shunting, giving 66 per cent of normal field, should be added. This should give free-running speed of up to 35 m.p.h., yet, by reason of the large amount of free-running possible on such a route, should not unduly stress the motors thermally. The present controllers would suffice for the more arduous duty if a lineswitch contactor were added to perform circuit breaking; the cost and complexity of contactor control would not, in such a conversion, be justified. The present brake installation could be retained if rubber bushed joints were used in the rigging to reduce noise.
The cars to be rehabilitated should be given straight sides, new roofs, rubber rods in the springing, automatic optional weak field, and lineswitch circuit breakers. These alterations would render them comparable in appearance and performance with No. 843, which in good condition, is still an advertisement for 3ft. 6in. gauge possibilities.” [1: p37-38]
These should be spaced as widely as possible, on the theory of ‘greatest good for greatest number’, even if the short-distance passenger suffers during peak hours. It is more important that the many living in Selly Oak and beyond should have a fast journey home than that an Edgbaston passenger should be set down at the end of his turning. There should be three stops only between Navigation Street and Pebble Mill Road, located where they will be of most use to peak-hour passengers. These stops should have loading islands and queue barriers as described earlier. Other stops, convenient for short distance passengers, clearly labelled ‘not used in peak hours’, should be provided to attract the extra revenue, so useful to any undertaking, which accrues from the casual off peak travel which is a consequence of an attractive service being available.
Beyond Pebble Mill Road, peak-hour stops at each outskirts and the centre of Selly Oak, Northfields, and Longbridge, should be the main points for loading and unloading; there should be some additional stops between these centres at places where the need is obviously great. None of these additional stops should be separated by less than a quarter of a mile, however, but additional stops ‘not used in peak hours’ should also be provided where considered appropriate.” [1: p38-39]
The junction of Pebble Mill Road and Bristol Road, Birmingham as shown on the 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1939 which was published in 1945. [7]Looking Southwest along Bristol Road through its junction with Pebble Mill Road. The trams for The Lickey Hills stopped just beyond the junction. Pebble Mill Road central reservation was at times used to store trams and particularly after the closure of the network before there was room for them at the Depot. [Google Streetview, June 2024]
Pridmore continues:
“Services
A base frequency of 12 cars per hour from Navigation Street, half of which would run to Selly Oak only, would probably suffice. Pershore Road should be symmetrically superimposed. The equal service to
During peak hours, however, a different technique would facilitate traffic flow and give quick travel to long-distance passengers; it is suggested that 12 packets of departures per hour be arranged. The first of each packet would be a fast to Rednal or Rubery, running non-stop to Pebble Mill Road. The second would be a duplicate of the first, but routed to the alternative terminus, stopping only at the peak hour stops to Pebble Mill Road to pick up only. Thence both these cars, would continue, using peak hour stops only (as is presumed in all peak hour services), to their respective termini. The third car would be the triplicate, running as the duplicate but probably to Selly Oak, Northfields or Longbridge only, as the traffic for the extremities of route dictates. Fourth would be the Pershore Road car, stopping also to set down at intermediate points to Pebble Mill Road, and fifth would be its duplicate performing similar duties as necessary.
If a less or more frequent service should prove necessary its pattern should be similar to that indicated above, as the suggested total frequency of 60 cars per hour is well within the capacity of a single line of tramway, whilst the use of packet departures will facilitate the through-running of the long-distance cars.
Inwards peak hour working, when with the load, would be arranged so that cars from Bristol Road would stop only to set down between Pebble Mill Road and Navigation Street, and that such cars should be given priority at the Pebble Mill Road junction.”
The necessity for large destination blinds on the cars, a point mentioned earlier, is now appreciated; the indication of “limited stop” must be given, as well as the destination, and regular users will wish clearly to be aware of both whilst a car approaches their stop.” [1: p39-40]
The success of a scheme such as that described above would commend its application to the similar but not quite so heavily trafficked routes to Pype Hayes and Erdington on the east of Birmingham.
When the full conversion to reserved track had been completed in the less near future, consideration should be given to the provision of a third track to Pebble Mill Road to permit the regular operation of peak hour expresses both ways, and for the ultimate operation of two or three-car trains of single deck high-speed vehicles much as the P.C.C. cars on metre gauge lines in the U.S.A. and elsewhere.
The use of such trains would then render possible the economic construction of cross-town subways in further effort to remove passenger transport from the sorely congested central streets of Birmingham.
The transport problem of Birmingham, as of many large cities, is becoming increasingly severe. The author is of the opinion that such problems can only be solved by the provision of an urban transport installation, and not by the use of supposedly flexible vehicles on the existing network of roads; it is the attempt to solve the problem by this latter means that is responsible for the congestion in the centre of Birmingham at the present time. An embryo specialised installation exists in Birmingham to-day; it is recommended that it be developed as far as possible for its specialist purpose while there is still time and before the traffic of the future swamps the Bristol Road completely, as it will do if numberless small vehicles are expected to cope with it in competition with the many others who regard themselves as having equal claim to the surface of a public road.” [1: p40]
References
B. I. Pridmore; A Lickey Light Railway; in Modern Tramway Vol. 13 No. 146, London, p37-40.
Roger Farnworth 
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
