How Was the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway Operated?

I've been looking into the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway history, and I'm having trouble in learning about how it was operated.

A big question on my mind is what signaling arrangements did the railway use. Plus, where the depots along the line used strictly for goods, or was it also used as a passenger station?

For those curious, here's where I've found some information on the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway: https://www.lner.info/co/GER/wisbech/wisbech.php

The pages you have linked show that the line was passenger until 1927. I assume that, being a tramway, it was unsignalled and points were not locked.
On closure to passengers, a J70 and coach were reallocated to the Island of Sodor network

East Anglian Film Archive footage of an Anglia TV documentary taken in 1961 (by then of course diesel powered) which may be of interest.
http://www.eafa.org.uk/catalogue/139644

Luckily not all of the J70s went to Sodor, I remember them working the dockside lines in Ipswich in the 1950s

From the book The Wisbech & Upwell Tramway by Peter Paye (Oakwood Press 2009): "The tramway had few signals and those that applied to the line at Wisbech were under the control of the signalman in Wisbech Station signal box and to a lesser degree Wisbech Harbour Junction signal box. Although the line was single with authorized crossing places at [sic] Wisbech, Boyce's Bridge and Upwell no single line train staff or token was issued for permit to enter a single line section." Quoting line's Working Instructions for "emergency procedures" (blockages / late running): "In the event of a blockage on the Tram Line occurring from the failure of an engine or other cause, and another engine is required to be sent to assist the disabled engine or to clear the line, a man with Hand and Detonating signals must be sent 800 yards in advance of the assistant engine. In the event of a Tram having to proceed beyond its crossing point owing to the cancelling or stoppage of another Tram, the Guard, with Hand and Detonating signals, must proceed 900 yards in advance of his Tram."

Re depots / stations issue: Paye's book reproduces passenger timetables from various periods of the line's career up to withdrawal of passenger services at the end of 1927. Timetables show as, beyond Wisbech, points-of-calling at Elm Bridge, Boyce's Bridge, Outwell Basin, Outwell Village, and Upwell. The author writes: "The tramcars stopped for the purpose of setting down or picking up passengers at any point along the line of route." One would infer from that, that the above-named points-of-calling were goods depots with goods sidings, but probably next to no passenger facilities as such -- likely a nameboard, and nothing else; but workings called there for passenger purposes (as anywhere-and-everywhere else on the route, as required).

I incline toward feeling surprised at the above-mentioned abstaining from single-line staff / token use. Thinking on things a little: maybe this was standard (non?-)practice on steam roadside tramways -- most of which in the British Isles were, at least at their beginnings, small independent concerns: the W & U is the only one I can think of, which was from the very start, part of a big railway company's system.

When the line opened, speed was restricted to 8mph and passengers could alight and board at any point. It was later raised to 12mph and stopped only at stations and designated points. It was constructed under the tramways act, several undertakings ran steam trams before the electric tram became universal. Very few tramways were signalled, the few examples I can think of related to blind bends.

The design of the locos was so as not to frighten horses a steam tram must not display any visible motion or emit sparks or smoke

Calthrop said:

.........I incline toward feeling surprised at the above-mentioned abstaining from single-line staff / token use. Thinking on things a little: maybe this was standard (non?-)practice on steam roadside tramways -- most of which in the British Isles were, at least at their beginnings, small independent concerns: the W & U is the only one I can think of, which was from the very start, part of a big railway company's system.

Click to expand...

It would appear from the pages linked to post #1 that this was very much an experimental line with conditions agreed with the Board of Trade. It seems that this line was very much the precursor of the 1890s 'Light Railway' act. We also had at around the same time the start of street tramways for passenger movement using steam or electric power starting to replace horse-drawn trams; all these relied on 'line of sight' movement with very little or no signalling.

A minor oddity concerning the Wisbech & Upwell, causing me a little head-scratching: atlases produced in modern times but purporting to show British rail ownerships on the eve of Grouping, tend to indicate a subtle difference / distinction between the W&U, and the rest of the Great Eastern system. The Ian Allan Pre-Grouping Atlas and Gazetteer shows the general GER system in blue, but the W&U in black, and labelled "Upwell Tramway"; and in its list of eve-of-grouping railway undertakings, shows the Wisbech & Upwell Tramway as a separate one of such. Jowett's Railway Atlas does not single out the W&U in words in any way; but does show it in a lighter shade of blue, than that which it uses for the rest of the GER system.

I don't recall coming across any indication, in Paye's book cited by me above; or elsewhere; that there was any question of the W&U having been nominally / notionally independent, but always worked as regards all practical matters, by the GER -- always seen by me as a GER line from the first, albeit a very unusual one. I wonder whether the atlases' singling it out as described, is simply because of this unusual-ness; or was there "nominal ownership" stuff which I've failed to pick up on? Would be very interested in any light which anyone could shed on this.

Christopher Awdry's "Encyclopaedia of Railway Companies", which I have found useful, doesn't list the W&U as a company, which is negative evidence of some sort.

Thanks. I find on the whole, both Ian Allan, and Jowett, very accurate as regards actual "eve-of-Grouping" ownerships of lines (they can and sometimes do, fall down on other aspects). With your mention from Awdry -- I'm tending to the suspicion that the atlas chaps committed, re the W&U, a (rare) error.

Awdry recounted on a visit to the W&U, the train came to a halt for no apparent reason, and all the train crew ran down a slope and went on their hands and knees. He followed, with the thought that something was seriously amiss and it was a case of every man for himself.

The train crew, in fact were collecting discarded daffodil bulbs, early daffs used to come from Cornwall/Isles of Scilly (the Penzance flower train was replaced by road in the 80's (?)), The Linconshire growers got into the market by forcing the bulbs with light and heat in greenhouses, and after the harvest were discarded. If left for a year or two, they would recover.

Another claim for the W&U is that it was the first line in the UK to become entirely diesel worked

341o2 said:

The train crew, in fact were collecting discarded daffodil bulbs, early daffs used to come from Cornwall/Isles of Scilly (the Penzance flower train was replaced by road in the 80's (?)), The Linconshire growers got into the market by forcing the bulbs with light and heat in greenhouses, and after the harvest were discarded. If left for a year or two, they would recover.

Click to expand...

With Awdry being a clergyman, I wonder whether he felt, here, somewhat conflicted? This way of bulb-acquisition feels like at best, a bit of a grey area as regards the Eighth Commandment...

After being chucked onto waste land and left for over a year, I doubt whether it would be classified as theft

Probably -- some say Christians should be super-scrupulous about such matters; more -- I'm sure -- that there are worse evils, more appropriate for people's concern .

Calthrop said:

Probably -- some say Christians should be super-scrupulous about such matters; more -- I'm sure -- that there are worse evils, more appropriate for people's concern .

Click to expand...

I would classify it as gleaning, which is specifically permitted in the Old Testament Torah (not to mention the story of Ruth).

Ha ! Erudite divines 341o2 and 30907, 1; a-little-learning-is-a-dangerous-thing Calthrop, 0.

Just found my copy of another book on The Wisbech & Upwell Tramway, namely the Wild Swan Publications one, from 1982.
Amongst much interesting material there is a picture of essentially the 'only' signal outside the Wisbech East station limits. This was where the parallel Upwell single line diverged from the 'main' line to Kings Lynn near Wisbech Harbour Junction. As noted above the line was 'controlled' by telephone.
Although the passenger service was worked on an essentially out-and-back basis, with a round trip taking just under two hours it is worth noting that at busy 'harvest' times the freight service could be quite intense. An extract from a 1949 Summer timetable (in the freight-only era) shows a morning round trip, then two trains in succession down to Upwell, one of which returned fairly soon, leaving the second to load. Once the first train had got back to Wisbech there were then three trains in succession down to Upwell, two of which were to be double headed. This provided no fewer than six locomotives and crews down at Upwell simultaneously. (There were six roads at Upwell, together with a central additional run-round release between a couple of them. The six trains would then return at 3.15, 3.20, 3.30, 4.14, 4.45 and 4.50p.m.! Arrival at Wisbech East was timed to connect for various produce trains for destinations as far away as Scotland and London. However, 'passing' in mid route appears to have been very much an exception.
Possibly worth clarifying that the Rev W Awdry hardly needed to 'visit' the Wisbech & Upwell because he was the local vicar of Emneth, which parish included part of the line. Another famous 'railway reverend', the Rev Edward ('Teddy') A Boston, later of Cadeby, was a curate at Wisbech.
The book also talks very clearly about the Great Eastern pedigree of the line with no suggestion that it was a separate company, albeit constructed and operated under rather atypical legislation for a 'main line' railway.
From the Directory of the Railway Companies of Great Britain by Donald J Grant, the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway is listed separately and the entry notes that there was an earlier attempt to build an 'independent' line. However, "The GER built, owned and worked the line".

This post arouses in me, notions of seeking out this Wild Swan Publications book. Mild surprise is sometimes occasioned for me, by there being quite such a high degree of interest among the enthusiast community, in the Wisbech & Upwell -- fascinating though it was -- as opposed to Great Britain's other rural steam tramways (there were only ever a small handful of same). Likely I suppose, this is thanks to the W&U's surviving, albeit for freight only, for much longer than any of its counterparts.

A slightly morbid variety of speculation, to which I am given -- I wonder how many people now alive, have coherent memories of travelling on the W&U in its regular-passenger days? If today were one's hundredth birthday, one would have been aged only-just eight at the time of passenger closure of the W&U at the end of 1927; so, stipulating people's being still mentally "together" enough for the memories to be clear and coherent -- probably, not a great number.

Dr Hoo said:

Possibly worth clarifying that the Rev W Awdry hardly needed to 'visit' the Wisbech & Upwell because he was the local vicar of Emneth, which parish included part of the line. Another famous 'railway reverend', the Rev Edward ('Teddy') A Boston, later of Cadeby, was a curate at Wisbech.

Click to expand...

Am I right in thinking that in some books of the Railway Series, Awdry includes "bit-parts" for himself and his fellow-cleric as above; engaging in a bit of affectionate mischief by characterising -- and having illustrated -- himself and the Rev. B. , as "the Thin" and "the Fat... Clergyman", respectively?

The Wild Swan book is largely an excellent selection of photographs. One of these shows a remarkably 'thin' (and youthful) Teddy Boston with two of the J70 tram engines at Wisbech in 1951, not long before their replacement by the Drewry diesels.

Dr Hoo said:

The Wild Swan book is largely an excellent selection of photographs. One of these shows a remarkably 'thin' (and youthful) Teddy Boston with two of the J70 tram engines at Wisbech in 1951, not long before their replacement by the Drewry diesels.

Click to expand...

I briefly met the Rev. Boston a couple of times, some 2 / 3 decades later -- in the light of those memories, find it hard to imagine him as young and thin; but, "over the course of a lifetime", etc. At all events: fat, jolly clerics are a beloved part of our lore and culture -- am sure that that applies to other religions too...

I was very glad to be able to visit the Rev. Boston's Cadeby Rectory line before it was lost. Quite a contrast with the W&U though.
Great little thread that I didn't want to add to until I found the books.