Crew diagram and schedule for the Great Train Robbery mail train.

[citycat]

A video from the Man Alive series from back in the day popped up on my youtube feed recently about what happened to the Great Train Robbers.

I have always been curious about the schedule of the mail train and the diagrams for the crew but have never found anything online.

How far did the Glasgow crew work down that night. Jack Mills and his secondman David Whitby were Crewe based so the changeover presumably took place at Crewe. However, another more recent book states they took over at Rugby which seems a bit far for Glasgow men to work.

Does anyone know what the diagrams were for the Glasgow and Crewe men including the guards? What train was Jack diagrammed to work back from Euston if the robbery hadn’t taken place? Does anyone know the schedule and stops for the mail train?

Many thanks for any info or speculation.

 

[Gloster]

I have read that they they took over at Crewe. I am not sure if Glasgow crews still went through to Crewe or whether Preston was their limit. It is possible that the Glasgow crew handed over to a Carlisle crew at Carlisle, but the latter probably wouldn’t go south of Crewe either.

I presume that their return working was probably one of the expresses from Euston. Both Jack Mills and the guard were probably in one of the top links and so would generally get one of the better turns.

 

[jfollows]

In September 1963, just after the robbery (morning of Thursday August 8, 1963) it was 1M44
6:50pm from Glasgow Central
(I don’t have the Scottish Region times), then
D420 Limited Load from Carlisle
Carlisle 8:54 - 9:4
Lineside apparatus at Penrith, Carnforth, Lancaster
Preston 10:53 - 11:3
Warrington 11:36 - 11:41
Crewe 12:12 - 12:30
Tamworth 1:23 - 1:38
Rugby 2:10 - 2:15
Lineside apparatus at Leighton Buzzard, Berkhamsted, Hemel Hempstead, King’s Langley, Harrow
Euston 3:54
12-hour clock as used at the time

This from the next timetable, I don’t have the one covering the day itself, but it was unlikely to have been significantly different then.

 

[Gloster]

In September 1963, just after the robbery, it was 1M44
18:50 from Glasgow Central
(I don’t have the Scottish Region times), then
D420 Limited Load from Carlisle
Carlisle 8:54 - 9:4
Lineside apparatus at Penrith, Carnforth, Lancaster
Preston 10:53 - 11:3
Warrington 11:36 - 11:41
Crewe 12:12 - 12:30
Tamworth 1:23 - 1:38
Rugby 2:10 - 2:15
Lineside apparatus at Leighton Buzzard, Berkhamsted, Hemel Hempstead, King’s Langley, Harrow
Euston 3:54
12-hour clock as used at the time

With those times they would probably have booked on around midnight and would have their break after arrival. They wouldn’t have been ready to take out a train until half-past four at the earliest, so I presume that they would have lodged unless there was a fast parcels or the like that would get them back to Crewe within their eight hours.

 

[6Gman]

I would have thought:

Glasgow or Carlisle men to Carlisle. [but see below]
Carlisle or Crewe men to Crewe. [but see below]
Crewe men to Euston (and probably a lodging turn?).

In the early 1950s the Up Postal to Euston was Turn 266 in No.1 Link, the crew lodged and returned on the 7.15pm which I think was the Down Royal Highlander. Pacifics both ways, definitely top link stuff! And it seems that Glasgow-Crewe was a Polmadie crew who would then have lodged; not sure what they worked back. But of course that was some years earlier and I think there was a move away from lodging turns in the late 50s/early 60s.

 

[citycat]

Thanks for the replies, and the schedule from jfollows.

 

[Gloster]

I have found a book (The Great Train Robbery, Russell-Pavier and Richards, Phoenix, 2013) which, although a bit more thorough and less sensational than many others, is still a bit shaky on some railway details. So take the following with bit of care.

It says that the 6.50 p.m. Glasgow stopped at Carstairs from 7.32 to 7.45 to attach four vehicles from Aberdeen; it arrived in Carlisle at 8.54.The Warrington departure is given as 11.43 and Euston arrival at 3.59 a.m. (Could this be a retiming for slacks or diversions due to engineering work?)

The London guard took over at Carlisle, but it is implied that the loco crew did not change there, so most likely a Glasgow crew worked through to Crewe and lodged. It can be inferred that Mills and Whitby signed on shortly before midnight.

 

[jp4712]

By far the best book I've found is The Great Train Robbery - Confidential by Graham Satchwell, who was a senior BTP detective and who is, occasionally, seen on these forums. He's better on railway detail than the majority of authors on this topic.

 

[citycat]

By far the best book I've found is The Great Train Robbery - Confidential by Graham Satchwell, who was a senior BTP detective and who is, occasionally, seen on these forums. He's better on railway detail than the majority of authors on this topic.

It’s his book that states that the engine crew joined at Rugby so I wonder where he got that information from?

It’s interesting that he speculates towards the end of the book that one of the signalmen may have been in on the job, and that Jack Mills who normally disliked the mail job, made a special request to do the mail diagram that night.

 

[Gloster]

It’s his book that states that the engine crew joined at Rugby so I wonder where he got that information from?

It’s interesting that he speculates towards the end of the book that one of the signalmen may have been in on the job, and that Jack Mills who normally disliked the mail job, made a special request to do the mail diagram that night.

I really think that someone must knock these vague conspiracy theories on the head. They are even less plausible than the suggestion that Otto Skorzeny was behind it all. One should not traduce the dead.

As I said in another recent thread, it is not totally impossible that the signalman was involved, but it involves an awful lot of ‘ifs‘. No substantive evidence or even reasonable suspicion seems to have ever come to light.

There are all sorts of innocent reasons why the driver might have changed his turn, some work related and others not, or he might have been asked by someone else to swap, a detail that has been lost in the mists of time. Furthermore, if he was ‘in’ on the robbery he probably wouldn’t have suffered a head wound when he was hit, which may have happened when he fell as a result of the blow, as he would have been prepared.

People still do not seem to accept that, although it was a complicated raid, it was unusually carefully planned: the gang had inside information from the ‘Ulsterman‘, as he is usually known, (probably a GPO employee) and included a gang that had been successfully robbing trains on the Southern Region, the leader of which had a thorough knowledge of the necessary railway equipment. Just accept that it was a well-organised gang that had a fair amount of luck, at least until they were caught.

 

[citycat]

I really think that someone must knock these vague conspiracy theories on the head. They are even less plausible than the suggestion that Otto Skorzeny was behind it all. One should not traduce the dead.

As I said in another recent thread, it is not totally impossible that the signalman was involved, but it involves an awful lot of ‘ifs‘. No substantive evidence or even reasonable suspicion seems to have ever come to light.

There are all sorts of innocent reasons why the driver might have changed his turn, some work related and others not, or he might have been asked by someone else to swap, a detail that has been lost in the mists of time. Furthermore, if he was ‘in’ on the robbery he probably wouldn’t have suffered a head wound when he was hit, which may have happened when he fell as a result of the blow, as he would have been prepared.

People still do not seem to accept that, although it was a complicated raid, it was unusually carefully planned: the gang had inside information from the ‘Ulsterman‘, as he is usually known, (probably a GPO employee) and included a gang that had been successfully robbing trains on the Southern Region, the leader of which had a thorough knowledge of the necessary railway equipment. Just accept that it was a well-organised gang that had a fair amount of luck, at least until they were caught.

I’m not saying that I myself believe these theories. I’m just saying that it’s interesting that an ex detective investigating the robbery should come up with these theories, especially regarding Jack Mills.

You’d think they would conduct a deep initial investigation if it became apparent he had requested to change his turn and probably rule it out quite early if there was nothing to it.

It’s strange that Mr Satchwell mentioned it at all, possibly causing offence or distress to living relatives.

 

[6Gman]

I’m not saying that I myself believe these theories. I’m just saying that it’s interesting that an ex detective investigating the robbery should come up with these theories, especially regarding Jack Mills.

You’d think they would conduct a deep initial investigation if it became apparent he had requested to change his turn and probably rule it out quite early if there was nothing to it.

It’s strange that Mr Satchwell mentioned it at all, possibly causing offence or distress to living relatives.

I find the idea that Jack Mills was in some way "in" on the plan very, very hard to believe.

My father knew him and I encountered him on one occasion, though I was very young at the time.

And from all I've been told - and you can imagine how it was a topic of conversation among traincrew - there is no way Jack Mills would have been assisting the robbers.