Jump to content
Sheffield History

Sheffield Victoria Train Station

Recommended Posts

Sheffield History
2 hours ago, History dude said:

I am working on that too.

Some of the things I have put together are on Pinterest

Sheffield Victoria Model and design

I was also able to get some plans of the building. But I can't post them as they were drafted by someone on a Model Railway forum and when I bought them from him there was a condition not to post them online. 

 

Some people find blender easy to use. However I find the software very hard, especially if you are use to Desk Top Publishing or 2d drawing software. Blender does things just the opposite to these software packages.



Oh my word that looks like an amazing project!!

Good luck with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

I am not a fan of the motor car so I don't have a clue to the makes of them in these pictures. So I hope you can tell me what they are?

The first is Victoria in 1967.

The second taken on the 30 December 1969 with more cars? Who owned XWG 734G?

 

Sheffield Victoria Station approach 18th November 1967.jpg

Victoria 30 12 1969.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voldy

The car on the left in the first picture is a Ford Anglia 105E, a very popular car with the police, you should have no trouble locating a suitable model of this type. A Black Cab is at the Station and a MINI is parked behind the one about to depart, I haven't identified that one yet!

A slight typo on the registration on the Rover 2000, it's a Sheffield registered (1969) XWE 734G, with the next couple of cars showing what looks like '67 and '68 (could be a Triumph) registrations, yellow AA badges also evident! Definitely some Executive type users drove these, very much in fashion, limo's.  Sorry, don't know who as I had left Sheffield by then. Probably models still available via someone like Hattons or 'Rails' locally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

A question that seems perfect for this thread. Would Victoria Station still have been here if the big four railway companies not been nationalised in 1948? 

My take on it would be yes it would be still here. The LMS and LNER would have been in competition still with each other. The LNER had the better and faster route to Manchester and there would have been no need to get rid of the over duplication of routes. Plus being private companies the Conservative party would have let them compete with the private road haulage firms and would have been more willing to invest in improvements, rather than moaning about how much public money was being used to top up the national railway system. LNER before the war had already made investments in the electrification scheme, so they would have continued to invest in electrification probably faster than British Rail did. The route to London from Victoria was much better than the Midland's. And I suspect the electrification scheme would have gone all the way to London King's Cross. 

In many way Nationalisation of the railway was disaster for it. Since it meant that someone looking at the whole system could see where two stations serving one place wasn't cost efficient. And even though the rail unions wanted it, they would have thought different I think if they could have seen how many staff lost their jobs because of it. And they lost jobs not because lines lost money. But because one person could view the entire system. And also the National system was easily undercut by private road transport arguing that the British Rail had more advantages over them. When they knew how to bypass them. Had the four railway operators still been running the system, they could have got as much investment as what the road lobby did. And things like building road bridges over the Humber without having a railway on it too, would have been unlikely to have happened. But BR could have never argued the case, since it would have been seen as asking for more public money to invest in the bridge scheme.

Because Victoria had a good connection route with the suburbs of Sheffield that emerged later at Halfway, Mosbrough and Killamarsh, I believe that improvements to the stations, including a new one for Halfway itself would have taken place. Especially as the main line to London also would have still used the route. This would have cut the traffic down using the main roads into Sheffield, which was the argument for the expensive Supertram Scheme. Thus eliminating Supertram. Whereas under BR keeping the route open, when the London link had stopped, wasn't economic. Indeed running trains out of Midland station going North then diverting South would have been silly. And London trains coming down from the North from Rotherham and Leeds for example, again would not making sense turning them around to go via Nunnery Curve to get them back on LNER line to London. Ending up for the need of Supertram from Halfway to Sheffield. 

I rather doubt the Tinsley marshalling yard and depot would have been built though. The two railway companies would have looked at the long term economics of the scheme. Darnall depot would have continued in operation for the LNER and the Midland would have used the one at Attercliffe. The people at British Rail were thinking on a national scale for the movement of freight. Whereas the private road operators were on a local level on that subject, responding to what was needed by private companies. I suspect the four railway companies would have done the same. So would have built yards on the demand that was there already.           

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lemmy117

Seems no one has anything to say on this, so here's my take on it.

Assuming World War 2 hadn't happened and the railways hadn't fallen into such a dilapidated state, and Labour didn't win the election, they Big Four would probably have survived, at least for a while. By the 1950's travel was changing, with an increase in road freight competition and the rise of the private car. Could the companies have competed any better than BR? Railways had to compete on a national scale as far as freight went, to keep the long haul stuff and let local distributors deal with the town areas. The trouble with the smaller depots like Darnall and Attercliffe was they were incredibly labour intensive, and costs were rising, so pushing the traffic onto the roads where fewer people were involved , hence lower costs. With the onset of containerisation new facilities would have to be built, but would each company want to go to that expense? Tinsley was already pretty redundant by the time it opened as the freight traffic had changed in just a few years. The electrification scheme started by the LNER would probably have been extended to London, there was originally a large order for the EM2's which was cut back to just seven, so it was obviously on the cards.

How long the companies would have lasted is another matter, falling passenger numbers, falling freight loads, all due to road traffic, would probably have led to amalgamations and takeovers, and assuming the Government didn't get involved, we would probably end up with a couple of large private companies, like First and Stagecoach. Non profitable routes would have to be cut (just like local bus services are these days), so some rationalisation would be inevitable.

It's difficult to say if Sheffield Victoria would still be with us today, there are so many variables, remember its staple traffic was coal, and that's gone, passenger numbers from the intermediate stations wouldn't be high enough to keep it viable so we are left with just the through traffic from Sheffield to Manchester. The alternative via the Hope Valley has the stone and cement traffic to keep it viable, so the Woodhead would probably been closed, but probably not as early as the 1980's.

It's all conjecture, and others may have a different take on it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

While I agree with a lot in what you say Lemmy117, the growth of the road system might have been altered due to the fact the rail companies were private business. It's likely that they would have been able to take on many of the private road haulers and even take them over. British Rail could have never done that. The eventual loss of the coal trade would have impacted operations. But the increase in home deliveries would have been a great boost to the private companies. When I worked for British Rail in 1977 at Midland, they had a lot of parcel traffic for the catalogue companies and even passengers would have noticed the blue BRUTE trolleys all around platform one. So I saw what railways could have done on the home delivery front. We have all seen the recent adverts on TV for Amazon showing warehouses and big trucks going in and out in large numbers. That would be perfect for the rail system. But those warehouses are not built with rail links. And if cost factors come into it, it's cheaper to send the lorries content by rail than it is by road. Even sticking the lorry on the back of a train loader and linking them together could see 30 of those big trucks pulled by one very efficient engine doing upwards of 70mph. I would like to see 30 Amazon trucks all doing 60 mph on the A57!    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...