Partial branch-passenger bus-substitutions, "way back when"

[Calthrop]

A to me, fascinating and hitherto unknown matter, lately come upon in a book of "railway trivia"; concerning a minor branch line in my childhood home area. This is the former Great Northern branch from Holme to Ramsey (North). I'd been aware that this branch lost its passenger service in 1947. The book tells, however, of the LNER as from 1931, making-over the branch's passenger service into part-rail, part-bus. Quoting: "The normal rail timetable was continued up to and including the 1015 from Holme to Ramsey (North), but after that the remaining four services of the day in each direction were replaced 'experimentally' by 'omnibuses of the Peterborough Electric Traction Company'. It seems likely that this hybrid arrangement saved at least one train crew and may have avoided having to deploy a second locomotive to maintain the freight trips. Whatever the underlying motive, it seems to have worked well enough and continued for many years."

As above -- a bit of information totally new to me. I found it a little surprising, especially coming from the time in history from which it does -- to me, an unexpected move on the part of Britain's then and long after, rather conservatively-inclined rail industry: a kind of ploy perhaps more to expect from rail administrations in other countries (France comes to mind). (One wonders what happened re the Ramsey (North) branch's passenger service, in World War II with its special circumstances of various kinds.)

Would be interested to learn of any similar doings elsewhere in Britain, in decades long past (nothing known to me, of any such local-line "hybrid" passenger arrangements set up post-nationalisation in 1948; but I don't claim to be an expert in such matters). Of particular interest, re the big national railway companies / nationalised network: such arrangements more likely, one feels, to have been implemented by small independent local lines.

 

[RT4038]

A to me, fascinating and hitherto unknown matter, lately come upon in a book of "railway trivia"; concerning a minor branch line in my childhood home area. This is the former Great Northern branch from Holme to Ramsey (North). I'd been aware that this branch lost its passenger service in 1947. The book tells, however, of the LNER as from 1931, making-over the branch's passenger service into part-rail, part-bus. Quoting: "The normal rail timetable was continued up to and including the 1015 from Holme to Ramsey (North), but after that the remaining four services of the day in each direction were replaced 'experimentally' by 'omnibuses of the Peterborough Electric Traction Company'. It seems likely that this hybrid arrangement saved at least one train crew and may have avoided having to deploy a second locomotive to maintain the freight trips. Whatever the underlying motive, it seems to have worked well enough and continued for many years."

As above -- a bit of information totally new to me. I found it a little surprising, especially coming from the time in history from which it does -- to me, an unexpected move on the part of Britain's then and long after, rather conservatively-inclined rail industry: a kind of ploy perhaps more to expect from rail administrations in other countries (France comes to mind). (One wonders what happened re the Ramsey (North) branch's passenger service, in World War II with its special circumstances of various kinds.)

Would be interested to learn of any similar doings elsewhere in Britain, in decades long past (nothing known to me, of any such local-line "hybrid" passenger arrangements set up post-nationalisation in 1948; but I don't claim to be an expert in such matters). Of particular interest, re the big national railway companies / nationalised network: such arrangements more likely, one feels, to have been implemented by small independent local lines.

There was a time in the 1980s when the Skegness-Boston line (with its many manual level crossings) was reduced to one shift working as an economy, and trains at the beginning and end of the day were substituted by omnibuses.

I think various railway lines had Sunday services substituted by omnibuses (the then services 162 and 165 [Bedford-Lidlington/Bletchley] substituted for withdrawn Sunday service on the Bedford-Bletchley line). In some cases rail ticket acceptance was also arranged, such as Rugby-Market Harborough and intermediately on the Midland Red 565 Sunday service. However, for accounting reasons no doubt, this ticket acceptance was rarely straightforward!

 

[Taunton]

From the 1930s, and continuing to the late 1950s closure of the line, trains on the "inland" minor line from Exeter through Heathfield to Newton Abbot were replaced during the daytime on summer Saturdays by a bus, hired from Exeter Corporation, between Exeter St Davids, St Thomas, and the first station on the branch, Alphington Halt. This was done to free up capacity on the main line south from St Davids. The trains, generally just a 14xx and an auto-coach, were run from the Newton Abbot end. All in the timetable, though the timings for the bus trying to get across the river bridge on pre-motorway days summer Saturdays seem pretty ambitious!

 

[Waldgrun]

The Bishops Castle Railway before it closed in 1935 appeared to run three trains a day, however the last service was in fact a company owned bus! Also, it seems, so I have read that this arrangement wasn't quite legitimate!

 

[30907]

The LNER also closed the intermediate stations on the York-Scarborough line, ostensibly to prioritise seaside traffic; passengers were directed to the normal bus service (no doubt part-owned by the railway).

It was common practice for rail tickets to be valid on parallel bus routes, and winter Sundays (and weekday late evenings) saw Seaton and Lyme Regis completely served by buses (from Axminster for both), but again these were the regular service buses.

 

[mailbyrail]

Some connections, particularly on Sundays, on the Kingsbridge-Brent service in Devon had for many years been shown as being by Western National bus service. In the Western Region timetable for 1963 sunday services to Wadebridge and also the 10pm service weekday service Axminster-Lyme Regis were shown as Western National.

 

[davetheguard]

Further to mailbyrail's post above, another Devon example was the Newton Abbot - Heathfield - Exeter St. David's Teign Valley Line. Some summer Saturday trains terminated at Alphington Halt in Exeter, located just before the branch joined the main line; connection forward was by local bus. This was presumably because paths on the main line through Exeter St. Thomas to Exeter St. David's were not available due to the heavy holiday traffic.

 

[Calthrop]

Thanks, everyone, for interesting material.

There was a time in the 1980s when the Skegness-Boston line (with its many manual level crossings) was reduced to one shift working as an economy, and trains at the beginning and end of the day were substituted by omnibuses.

I was thinking more, "back in the day" -- the times, up until the 1960s, when the bulk of Britain's rail system was still in place and -- sometimes in a "qualified" way -- operational. As from the latish 20th century it's been, for good or ill, in very many respects "a different world".

I think various railway lines had Sunday services substituted by omnibuses (the then services 162 and 165 [Bedford-Lidlington/Bletchley] substituted for withdrawn Sunday service on the Bedford-Bletchley line). In some cases rail ticket acceptance was also arranged, such as Rugby-Market Harborough and intermediately on the Midland Red 565 Sunday service. However, for accounting reasons no doubt, this ticket acceptance was rarely straightforward!

From the 1930s, and continuing to the late 1950s closure of the line, trains on the "inland" minor line from Exeter through Heathfield to Newton Abbot were replaced during the daytime on summer Saturdays by a bus, hired from Exeter Corporation, between Exeter St Davids, St Thomas, and the first station on the branch, Alphington Halt. This was done to free up capacity on the main line south from St Davids. The trains, generally just a 14xx and an auto-coach, were run from the Newton Abbot end. All in the timetable, though the timings for the bus trying to get across the river bridge on pre-motorway days summer Saturdays seem pretty ambitious!

A fascinating thing, new to me -- an instance of "bustitution" to make rail operation smoother at a heavily-burdened time, rather than to save money. As you mention, re problems before the times of motorways: with the West Country being (with all due respect to its inhabitants) a delightful region, but one which is physically a somewhat far-flung cul-de-sac at an extremity of this island -- huge numbers of holidaymakers going there / coming back thence, particularly at summer weekends, could not but make the journey tend to be difficult, both on rail and on the old-fashioned road system !

The Bishops Castle Railway before it closed in 1935 appeared to run three trains a day, however the last service was in fact a company owned bus! Also, it seems so I have read that that this arrangement wasn't quite legitimate!

I've read of the BCR's venerable Berliet bus, used as a fall-back in situations of loco failure; but its regular use substituting for one of the day's trains, is an interestingly new thing to me ! As per my OP: I'd find doings of this kind more to be expected of independent light railways run on a shoestring, than of the Big Four companies, or BR in its early days.

The LNER also closed the intermediate stations on the York-Scarborough line, ostensibly to prioritise seaside traffic; passengers were directed to the normal bus service (no doubt part-owned by the railway).

It was common practice for rail tickets to be valid on parallel bus routes, and winter Sundays (and weekday late evenings) saw Seaton and Lyme Regis completely served by buses (from Axminster for both), but again these were the regular service buses.

Some connections, particularly on Sundays, on the Kingsbridge-Brent service in Devon had for many years been shown as being by Western National bus service. In the Western Region timetable for 1963 sunday services to Wadebridge and also the 10pm service weekday service Axminster-Lyme Regis were shown as Western National.

(Also @RT4038) Sundays can maybe be regarded as a special case; late evening services "bustituted", an understandable but, I feel, relatively "small-time" measure. @30907 -- I'd known about the LNER's 1930 closure of York -- Scarborough line intermediate stations (though hadn't realised that it was "ostensibly to prioritise seaside traffic", rather [per the railway's version !] than as an economy measure). With that, and the Ramsey branch with "all-bus after mid-morning": both pretty drastic alterations in procedure, I feel, on the part of "big-time rail", by the standards of the period. Both venues were part of the LNER system -- I'm wondering whether such actions as of the 1930s, might have been particularly an LNER "thing"?

 

[SargeNpton]

There are, today, some long-term replacement buses for operating convenience rather than engineering works. For example, the first service from Shrewsbury to Hereford on Sunday mornings. This has been a bus for at least 10 years as it cuts out the need to open some of the signalboxes for an extra shift.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thanks, everyone, for interesting material.



I was thinking more, "back in the day" -- the times, up until the 1960s, when the bulk of Britain's rail system was still in place and -- sometimes in a "qualified" way -- operational. As from the latish 20th century it's been, for good or ill, in very many respects "a different world".





A fascinating thing, new to me -- an instance of "bustitution" to make rail operation smoother at a heavily-burdened time, rather than to save money. As you mention, re problems before the times of motorways: with the West Country being (with all due respect to its inhabitants) a delightful region, but one which is physically a somewhat far-flung cul-de-sac at an extremity of this island -- huge numbers of holidaymakers going there / coming back thence, particularly at summer weekends, could not but make the journey tend to be difficult, both on rail and on the old-fashioned road system !



I've read of the BCR's venerable Berliet bus, used as a fall-back in situations of loco failure; but its regular use substituting for one of the day's trains, is an interestingly new thing to me ! As per my OP: I'd find doings of this kind more to be expected of independent light railways run on a shoestring, than of the Big Four companies, or BR in its early days.





(Also @RT4038) Sundays can maybe be regarded as a special case; late evening services "bustituted", an understandable but, I feel, relatively "small-time" measure. @30907 -- I'd known about the LNER's 1930 closure of York -- Scarborough line intermediate stations (though hadn't realised that it was "ostensibly to prioritise seaside traffic", rather [per the railway's version !] than as an economy measure). With that, and the Ramsey branch with "all-bus after mid-morning": both pretty drastic alterations in procedure, I feel, on the part of "big-time rail", by the standards of the period. Both venues were part of the LNER system -- I'm wondering whether such actions as of the 1930s, might have been particularly an LNER "thing"?

Both venues were part of the LNER system -- I'm wondering whether such actions as of the 1930s, might have been particularly an LNER "thing"?

Interesting thought - and I think I may be correct in saying that at least the BR(NER) were at least a fair bit enthusiastic about line closures before Beeching report was commissioned. Indeed I recall a section in a BTF film (could be 'This is York') where the closed line is featured showing a BR van collecting items for forwarding from local farms and this spun as an improved service tot he customer. So maybe they inherited the approach to such things from the early LNER examples as you say, taking it to the next stage of closure?

Yes. Mins 13 to 15 of the film here (ref Thornton-Le Dale cited)

And that film is from 1953 it seems

Obv this is more than simply a bustitiution situation, given it is closure.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

As a variation on this theme, the GWR did run its own 'road motor' services from 1903 - 1929 which in some cases competed directly with its own rail services. In the case of the Plymouth Millbay to Yealmpton branch it was fatal; 'bustitution' occurred by stealth with the Plymouth - Yealmpton - Modbury - Kingsbridge GWR bus being far more convenient. The passenger rail service was progressively reduced and succumbed in 1930, shortly after Western National took over. It was reactivated 1941-1947 due to the severe bombing of Plymouth, albeit from Friary. Bustitution also occurred from the start for branch lines that were never built - Helston to The Lizard was the pioneer, but the Yealmpton branch was originally to run to Modbury. Saltash to Callington, Kingsbridge to Salcombe and Moretonhampstead to Chagford were also early GWR bus routes that had originally been intended as railways.

 

[Taunton]

'bustitution' occurred by stealth with the Plymouth - Yealmpton - Modbury - Kingsbridge GWR bus being far more convenient. The passenger rail service was progressively reduced and succumbed in 1930, shortly after Western National took over.

Not sometimes realised is that a number of the large traditional "country bus" operations were owned 50% by the railway, pretty much all round the country, from around 1930. The GWR, who had developed bus services to a greater extent than the others, merged their routes in to these bus companies. In the West Country there was a slight extra complication that there was National Bus, based in Exeter, which appeared to comprise just one company secretary, and which in turn owned Western National 50-50 with the GWR and Southern National 50-50 with the SR, and the various bases generally reflected the dominant company. All the head office managers appeared to have the same job at both companies, while the directors were 50% from National Bus and 50% from the relevant railway company. It was a strange arrangement, because all around Exeter and South Devon was the area for a quite different bus company, Devon General, and the two National brands ran with separated parts elsewhere, so the staff at head office couldn't travel to work on their own buses. The structure lasted through nationalisation, the directors now coming from the two relevant rail regions, and even for a few years beyond the Southern Region giving up their West of England rail area to the WR. I think it was only the 1968 Transport Act that ended railway directors at the major bus companies.

The relevant bit is the bus "being far more convenient". Commonly they would be every half an hour, running from the Main Street (actually in the South-west this is commonly called Fore Street) instead of half a dozen trains a day from a station way out of town, this last something the South-west notably specialises in.

 

[Andy R. A.]

I am reminded of the curious arrangement that took place on the LNER Finchley to Edgware Branch. In mid 1939 the service was covered by buses on Sundays to allow for work to be undertaken on electrification of the line. This became bus worked completely just after the outbreak of World War 2. Part of the branch was reopened and electrified to Mill Hill East to serve Inglis Barracks with the Northern Line tube service in 1941, but the rest of the line was covered by buses. The section between Mill Hill East and Edgware never did reopen to passengers, although freight continued to 1964. One of the strange practices resulted in Mill Hill (LMS, later 'Broadway') station issuing LNER headed tickets (Mill Hill the Hale), which were accepted on London Transport buses to Mill Hill East and Edgware. The sale of tickets remained available into the 1960s but finally fizzled out when the Mill Hill East to Edgware section closed completely.

 

[Calthrop]

As a variation on this theme, the GWR did run its own 'road motor' services from 1903 - 1929 which in some cases competed directly with its own rail services. In the case of the Plymouth Millbay to Yealmpton branch it was fatal; 'bustitution' occurred by stealth with the Plymouth - Yealmpton - Modbury - Kingsbridge GWR bus being far more convenient. The passenger rail service was progressively reduced and succumbed in 1930, shortly after Western National took over. It was reactivated 1941-1947 due to the severe bombing of Plymouth, albeit from Friary.

Most interesting about the Yealmpton branch -- if I'd ever known about withdrawal of its rail passenger service in 1930, I'd forgotten. The usually authoritative Passengers No More by Daniels and Dench, seems unaware of this 1930 passenger closure (or chooses to gloss over it, because of the wartime-and-after ups-and-downs as mentioned): just gives date of passenger service withdrawal as 6/10/47. (I have something of a mental block about the Yealmpton branch: tend to have difficulty remembering whether it was GW, or LSW-then-Southern -- often have to look at the "crib" to be certain. Feel that I have some excuse for this, with LSW / Southern's Plymouth Friary -- Plymstock -- Turnchapel [pass. service withdrawn 1951] having occupied the same trackage -- LSW / Southern-owned, GW running powers -- for a couple of miles of these routes east-south-east out of Plymouth.)

Bustitution also occurred from the start for branch lines that were never built - Helston to The Lizard was the pioneer, but the Yealmpton branch was originally to run to Modbury. Saltash to Callington, Kingsbridge to Salcombe and Moretonhampstead to Chagford were also early GWR bus routes that had originally been intended as railways.

These very early bus routes in various parts, over stretches which ultimately never got railways; can have a bit of a poignant feel to them -- "the future, not good for branch lines in the depths of the countryside, casting its shadow". I love, in a rueful kind of way, the thing with the Leek & Manifold Valley n/g line at the start of its working life in 1903: when the "Manifold" opened, the North Staffordshire Railway's concurrently-created standard-gauge line (Leekbrook -- Waterhouses) giving access to it, was a little way short of completion -- till the s/g branch could be opened, the NSR temporarily covered the gap by running road buses Leek -- Waterhouses. One can imagine the narrow-gauge line's initiators / promotors uneasily thinking, "something's a bit 'off' here -- should we in fact ever have started with this railway of ours?"

Not sometimes realised is that a number of the large traditional "country bus" operations were owned 50% by the railway, pretty much all round the country, from around 1930. The GWR, who had developed bus services to a greater extent than the others, merged their routes in to these bus companies. In the West Country there was a slight extra complication that there was National Bus, based in Exeter, which appeared to comprise just one company secretary, and which in turn owned Western National 50-50 with the GWR and Southern National 50-50 with the SR, and the various bases generally reflected the dominant company. All the head office managers appeared to have the same job at both companies, while the directors were 50% from National Bus and 50% from the relevant railway company. It was a strange arrangement, because all around Exeter and South Devon was the area for a quite different bus company, Devon General, and the two National brands ran with separated parts elsewhere, so the staff at head office couldn't travel to work on their own buses. The structure lasted through nationalisation, the directors now coming from the two relevant rail regions, and even for a few years beyond the Southern Region giving up their West of England rail area to the WR. I think it was only the 1968 Transport Act that ended railway directors at the major bus companies.

The relevant bit is the bus "being far more convenient". Commonly they would be every half an hour, running from the Main Street (actually in the South-west this is commonly called Fore Street) instead of half a dozen trains a day from a station way out of town, this last something the South-west notably specialises in.

Interesting how in general there was pre-World War II, more working-together in country areas involving rail services of the big companies; and bus ditto; than I for one had been aware of. (Or as per @Sir Felix Pole, "co-operation" which was in fact competition -- one assumes that it made sense in some way, to those responsible...)

 

[Calthrop]

Both venues were part of the LNER system -- I'm wondering whether such actions as of the 1930s, might have been particularly an LNER "thing"?

Interesting thought - and I think I may be correct in saying that at least the BR(NER) were at least a fair bit enthusiastic about line closures before Beeching report was commissioned. Indeed I recall a section in a BTF film (could be 'This is York') where the closed line is featured showing a BR van collecting items for forwarding from local farms and this spun as an improved service to the customer. So maybe they inherited the approach to such things from the early LNER examples as you say, taking it to the next stage of closure?

Yes. Mins 13 to 15 of the film here (ref Thornton-Le Dale cited)

And that film is from 1953 it seems

Obv this is more than simply a bustitiution situation, given it is closure.

I saw this film many years ago -- thank you for the chance to watch it again.

By my understanding -- British Railways (all Regions), did over the approximate period 1950 -- 53, much closing of "hopeless" back-country branch lines -- Pickering to Seamer, as above, one among many; very often, closure was "passenger" -- freight services retained over at least part of the route; but not in the case of this line. (My bolding) -- the "spin" element: the railway scene has seen lots of that, as regards retrenchment of things happening on rail. Has something of a "1984" air -- the bad, can always be dressed up as good; but it's one of the things that humans do: those in charge, paint stuff which is truly for their own ends, as beneficence on their part.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The use of road services to cover gaps in rail provision goes back a long way. Sunday services were a case in point. The Great Western Railway was quite happy to promote 'Coaches and Omnibuses' (horse-drawn) operated by others when its trains didn't run. Cholsey and Wallingford or Bodmin Road and Bodmin in their 1903 timetable for example.

 

[Taunton]

Interesting how in general there was pre-World War II, more working-together in country areas involving rail services of the big companies; and bus ditto; than I for one had been aware of. (Or as per @Sir Felix Pole, "co-operation" which was in fact competition -- one assumes that it made sense in some way, to those responsible...)

The initial railway bus services were seen as an adjunct to the rail line, such as Helston to Lizard. In time the bus industry grew up, services which started from half a dozen connecting trips became every 30 minutes, maybe every 10 minutes, and they completely outclassed the local rail service for how many passengers they had.

The "company" bus services from the 1930s were notable profit centres, far more than the rail branch lines had ever been, and began making a significant contribution to railway profits. Managers were incentivised to develop them considerably. The fact was that almost all of this was new business, not a diversion from trains that previously ran mostly empty to trains that now ran almost completely empty. Bear in mind the railway only owned half the business, the other half belonged to investors, who did not want to see their income throttled.

 

[RT4038]

I saw this film many years ago -- thank you for the chance to watch it again.

By my understanding -- British Railways (all Regions), did over the approximate period 1950 -- 53, much closing of "hopeless" back-country branch lines -- Pickering to Seamer, as above, one among many; very often, closure was "passenger" -- freight services retained over at least part of the route; but not in the case of this line. (My bolding) -- the "spin" element: the railway scene has seen lots of that, as regards retrenchment of things happening on rail. Has something of a "1984" air -- the bad, can always be dressed up as good; but it's one of the things that humans do: those in charge, paint stuff which is truly for their own ends, as beneficence on their part.

I don't think that is quite fair - the service provided by a rail route was not necessarily 'good' and road transport 'bad'. After all, between Pickering and Seamer the passengers had already voted with their feet and bums, and transferred their custom to the 'United' Automobile services, who no doubt ran far more frequently and probably cheaper. How parcels being delivered to a farm by road vehicle from York, rather than waiting for a pick up freight to deliver it to a remote station, for onward conveyance by ? could be considered 'bad' I do not know. I don't think there was any 'spin' element - the new arrangements were better! Perhaps if the Railway organisation had been less wedded to rail conveyance as much as possible, and more to a transport solution employing the most efficient means, they would have a greater share of the transport pie now?

 

[Calthrop]

I don't think that is quite fair - the service provided by a rail route was not necessarily 'good' and road transport 'bad'. After all, between Pickering and Seamer the passengers had already voted with their feet and bums, and transferred their custom to the 'United' Automobile services, who no doubt ran far more frequently and probably cheaper. How parcels being delivered to a farm by road vehicle from York, rather than waiting for a pick up freight to deliver it to a remote station, for onward conveyance by ? could be considered 'bad' I do not know. I don't think there was any 'spin' element - the new arrangements were better! Perhaps if the Railway organisation had been less wedded to rail conveyance as much as possible, and more to a transport solution employing the most efficient means, they would have a greater share of the transport pie now?

OK -- I'm not trying to be fair -- it's "head" versus "gut". "Gut"-wise, I like back-of-beyond rail branch lines; "head"-wise, I consider that -- with very-widely-available road motor transport in the offing -- many of same should never in the first place, have been instituted and built. You're probably right -- but at times I feel, quoting Solzhenitsyn (who wasn't in this, writing approvingly) -- "I don't want your good one ! Give me my bad one !"

 

[Dr Hoo]

I saw this film many years ago -- thank you for the chance to watch it again.

By my understanding -- British Railways (all Regions), did over the approximate period 1950 -- 53, much closing of "hopeless" back-country branch lines -- Pickering to Seamer, as above, one among many; very often, closure was "passenger" -- freight services retained over at least part of the route; but not in the case of this line. (My bolding) -- the "spin" element: the railway scene has seen lots of that, as regards retrenchment of things happening on rail. Has something of a "1984" air -- the bad, can always be dressed up as good; but it's one of the things that humans do: those in charge, paint stuff which is truly for their own ends, as beneficence on their part.

Yeah; it's real conspiracy theory stuff. One could almost imagine that there was some secret, overarching body - a sort of *British Transport Commission* - that had been established by an evil government to do things like operating an efficient system of transport properly integrated across all modes (rather than just railways) and even provided with a propaganda unit - *British Transport Films* or something - to brainwash the populace into thinking that its evil actions were in some way in the public interest.

 

[Calthrop]

Yeah; it's real conspiracy theory stuff. One could almost imagine that there was some secret, overarching body - a sort of *British Transport Commission* - that had been established by an evil government to do things like operating an efficient system of transport properly integrated across all modes (rather than just railways) and even provided with a propaganda unit - *British Transport Films* or something - to brainwash the populace into thinking that its evil actions were in some way in the public interest.

OK -- I'm a hopeless sentimentalist. "Seeing with one's head" that something makes, in many ways, good sense -- doesn't mean that one has to like it with one's gut, or to like all the smooth justifications made for it, by those who implement it.

 

[WesternLancer]

I saw this film many years ago -- thank you for the chance to watch it again.

By my understanding -- British Railways (all Regions), did over the approximate period 1950 -- 53, much closing of "hopeless" back-country branch lines -- Pickering to Seamer, as above, one among many; very often, closure was "passenger" -- freight services retained over at least part of the route; but not in the case of this line. (My bolding) -- the "spin" element: the railway scene has seen lots of that, as regards retrenchment of things happening on rail. Has something of a "1984" air -- the bad, can always be dressed up as good; but it's one of the things that humans do: those in charge, paint stuff which is truly for their own ends, as beneficence on their part.

agreed ref 'spin'!

 

[WesternLancer]

I don't think that is quite fair - the service provided by a rail route was not necessarily 'good' and road transport 'bad'. After all, between Pickering and Seamer the passengers had already voted with their feet and bums, and transferred their custom to the 'United' Automobile services, who no doubt ran far more frequently and probably cheaper. How parcels being delivered to a farm by road vehicle from York, rather than waiting for a pick up freight to deliver it to a remote station, for onward conveyance by ? could be considered 'bad' I do not know. I don't think there was any 'spin' element - the new arrangements were better! Perhaps if the Railway organisation had been less wedded to rail conveyance as much as possible, and more to a transport solution employing the most efficient means, they would have a greater share of the transport pie now?

All fair points, tho these decisions often pass on a 'disbenefit' to someone else - using the film example probably increasingly congested streets in York with delivery vans taking up road space that others wanted to use.
Not unlike the present day where apparently we have seen vast increase in 'white van' type delivery services running here and there - with commensurate road use, congestion, air pollution etc whilst retail switches from more centralised 'local distribution hubs' a.k.a. 'shops'.

But of course these are common themes associated with change, 'efficiency' etc etc

 

[Taunton]

Not unlike the present day where apparently we have seen vast increase in 'white van' type delivery services running here and there - with commensurate road use, congestion, air pollution etc whilst retail switches from more centralised 'local distribution hubs' a.k.a. 'shops'.

I do notice that such comparisons are invariably one sided, detailing any congestion/pollution that delivery vehicles might be imagined to make, while ignoring any balancing traffic reduction that happens from customers no longer driving to/from shops/retail centres, and reduced distribution truck traffic to the shops which now have reduced turnover or are closed.

 

[WesternLancer]

I do notice that such comparisons are invariably one sided, detailing any congestion/pollution that delivery vehicles might be imagined to make, while ignoring any balancing traffic reduction that happens from customers no longer driving to/from shops/retail centres, and reduced distribution truck traffic to the shops which now have reduced turnover or are closed.

Yes, points well made, it's a total minefield of course (and being at risk of an off topic one best not to be strayed into...). It's like those statements where they say a new business park creates x jobs, when unless the creation of the business park involves new jobs beyond its construction, or allows businesses to expand when they otherwise would simply not expand, they are just jobs that existed somewhere else that have moved to the new business park. They have not been 'created' at all.

I often think, that in retai terms
- once the goods were brought to a small shop within walking distance of your home, corner shop or local high street model (cost of delivery born by retailer or product producer, costs factored into retail price)
- then those costs were reduced by moving shop to out of town retail park (cost shifted such that consumer collects items in a car they have financed, and also use for other purposes), items cheaper, costs of 'final mile delivery' shifted to shopper
- current step - manufacturer / retailer delivers it to your door from warehouse, you often pay a delivery charge on top of retail price.

But rather off topic, though I assume the first model suits itself best to the provision of a local branch line, from whence the products are distributed around the town's small neighbourhood shops by horse and cart/mechanical horse/van!

 

[Irascible]

I often think, that in retai terms
- once the goods were brought to a small shop within walking distance of your home, corner shop or local high street model (cost of delivery born by retailer or product producer, costs factored into retail price)
- then those costs were reduced by moving shop to out of town retail park (cost shifted such that consumer collects items in a car they have financed, and also use for other purposes), items cheaper, costs of 'final mile delivery' shifted to shopper
- current step - manufacturer / retailer delivers it to your door from warehouse, you often pay a delivery charge on top of retail price.

But rather off topic, though I assume the first model suits itself best to the provision of a local branch line, from whence the products are distributed around the town's small neighbourhood shops by horse and cart/mechanical horse/van!

Let's not forget that at one point you'd have home delivery after popping into your local shops to make orders. Something of a full circle now. It's going to be interesting to see as we tend to move towards more of a distributed working pattern & centralised commercial pattern ( somewhat of a complete reverse ) how traffic patterns are going to change. However if your population is small enough that a bus could have covered for the branch line, then I suspect it's also small enough that a lorry can cover deliveries from a regional distribution depot...

One thing I did wonder was if ( and even why not, if it didn't ) there was any road haulage substitution for local *goods* trains.

 

[Taunton]

One thing I did wonder was if ( and even why not, if it didn't ) there was any road haulage substitution for local *goods* trains.

This was done very extensively. The principal local goods traffic on rail was coal for local delivery, the various coal merchants would typically base at the railway sidings in their town or village. This was replaced in the 1960s by centralised Coal Concentration Depots, an investment by the railway but also by the local merchants, who had to move to new premises (where many merged up or abandoned, in what was anyway a declining market). As an example, all the local station coal facilities in The Wirral were replaced by a CCD near the Birkenhead North emu depot, with its own Class 03 shunter. The volume at the depots initially was such that block trains from collieries were justified, but as time passed and coal demand declined, these reduced to just a few wagons. There aren't any left now of course. I understand that remaining coal delivery is now imported from Poland, bagged at the docks, and roaded to retail distributors.

 

[Irascible]

This was done very extensively. The principal local goods traffic on rail was coal for local delivery, the various coal merchants would typically base at the railway sidings in their town or village. This was replaced in the 1960s by centralised Coal Concentration Depots, an investment by the railway but also by the local merchants, who had to move to new premises (where many merged up or abandoned, in what was anyway a declining market). As an example, all the local station coal facilities in The Wirral were replaced by a CCD near the Birkenhead North emu depot, with its own Class 03 shunter. The volume at the depots initially was such that block trains from collieries were justified, but as time passed and coal demand declined, these reduced to just a few wagons. There aren't any left now of course. I understand that remaining coal delivery is now imported from Poland, bagged at the docks, and roaded to retail distributors.

Was it done at all ( or to any degree ) before common carrier status was cancelled? or perhaps pre-ww2? ( around the time the OP was looking at for bus replacement ).

Local coal deliveries served local gasworks too, that was in decline roughly contemporary with local goods, I guess ( I'm not quite old enough to remember working coal gas ).

 

[daodao]

As a variation on this theme, the GWR did run its own 'road motor' services from 1903 - 1929 which in some cases competed directly with its own rail services. In the case of the Plymouth Millbay to Yealmpton branch it was fatal; 'bustitution' occurred by stealth with the Plymouth - Yealmpton - Modbury - Kingsbridge GWR bus being far more convenient. The passenger rail service was progressively reduced and succumbed in 1930, shortly after Western National took over. It was reactivated 1941-1947 due to the severe bombing of Plymouth, albeit from Friary. Bustitution also occurred from the start for branch lines that were never built - Helston to The Lizard was the pioneer, but the Yealmpton branch was originally to run to Modbury. Saltash to Callington, Kingsbridge to Salcombe and Moretonhampstead to Chagford were also early GWR bus routes that had originally been intended as railways.

The April 1910 Bradshaw timetable shows the bus services from Helston to the Lizard as connections to the Helston-Gwinear Road branch line on weekdays. The 2 Sunday journeys for the branch line itself between Helston and Gwinear Road are shown as being operated by buses, not trains - an early example of bustitution?

 

[WesternLancer]

Let's not forget that at one point you'd have home delivery after popping into your local shops to make orders. Something of a full circle now. It's going to be interesting to see as we tend to move towards more of a distributed working pattern & centralised commercial pattern ( somewhat of a complete reverse ) how traffic patterns are going to change. However if your population is small enough that a bus could have covered for the branch line, then I suspect it's also small enough that a lorry can cover deliveries from a regional distribution depot...

One thing I did wonder was if ( and even why not, if it didn't ) there was any road haulage substitution for local *goods* trains.

Good points!