• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

A bit of a stretch but any idea where in the Reading area this might have been?

Status
Not open for further replies.

alxndr

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2015
Messages
1,467
From another current thread, I see there’s a NR level crossing map and spreadsheet here:
...and I now think their own data for Odd Lane UWC is wrong.
(Which probably likely explains what I wrote in post #56 earlier.) o_O

From their spreadsheet data for Odd Lane:
The lat/long is 51.36642,-1.043628
and the miles/yards 43.1236 which would be 43m 56ch.

That seems to be pointing to the under bridge much nearer Mortimer station?

Is there a chance please that someone could double check things and see if I’m making some sort of beginners mistake? If I’m right I’ll let NR know using the procedure on that webpage.

I agree that the data does seem to be incorrectly pointing towards the underbridge when it should be further south.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

181

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2013
Messages
801
Interesting, so what was a gravel covered track or roadway useable by cars has become on the map today a public footpath (but not as might have been expected a byway permitting vehicle access).

On the 1-inch map 'reprinted with minor changes and the addition of Rights of Way 1965' it's shown with the dashed symbol indicating 'Footpaths and Tracks', and a red 'W' indicating 'Road used as a Public Path'. I'd guess that its downgrading was associated with closure of the crossing to vehicles -- maybe the railway were able to persuade the highway authorities to get rid of the vehicle crossing for them.
 

BasildonBob

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2019
Messages
36
Location
Reading
Another clue from Hansard 18 July 1968:

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1968/jul/18/level-crossing-silchester

Mr. David Mitchell
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is satisfied that the proposed railway level crossing control at Silchester involving a 30 seconds warning of train approach will be effective in view of the fact that slow moving farm machinery uses this road; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Marsh
The British Railways Board have applied to me for an Order authorising the installation of miniature red and green light protection at Silchester level crossing, and their application is at present being considered in the light of the representations made to me by the highway authority and the local branch of the National Farmers Union. My decision on the Order will be made only after a thorough assessment of all relevant factors, including the adequacy of the proposed 30-second warning period in relation to particular types of traffic at the site.

I wonder if BRB reconsidered the wisdom of replacing the crossing keeper with warning lights and decided it would be easier and safer to close the crossing to vehicles instead.
 

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,370
What revelatory research- 'plot' thickening ...
I note that David Mitchell the then local MP (NW Hampshire) is now dead- but maybe the local constituency office would have material, or memories?
Perhaps the photo was taken (staged) for a story in the Reading Chronicle related to that?
Why were lights etc being considered- near misses?
His son, Andrew Mitchell is MP for Sutton Coldfield. He would have been 12 at the time. Andrew Mitchell former SoS for International Development and infamous for 'Plebgate'.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
On the 1-inch map 'reprinted with minor changes and the addition of Rights of Way 1965' it's shown with the dashed symbol indicating 'Footpaths and Tracks', and a red 'W' indicating 'Road used as a Public Path'. I'd guess that its downgrading was associated with closure of the crossing to vehicles -- maybe the railway were able to persuade the highway authorities to get rid of the vehicle crossing for them.
I bet that is correct - if it was a footpath right of way, then there was only a right for people to walk across the track, if it had been a byway then there would have been a right for vehicles to cross. So the railway was probably able to remove the vehicular crossing without providing an alternative.

This ties with Basildonbob's suggestion at post#63, and of course may well have been part of the outcome of the investigation the Minister refers to in his 1968 answer. Unless it was a 2 stage process - the changes outlined as under consideration in 1968, and then closure to vehicles at some other date since 1968.

The MP probably raised it after a local farmer considered he would be inconvenienced (or worried that the replacement of a staff member with warning lights would be less safe when taking farm machinery across) and flagged it with his local MP, or the NFU, who raised it with the MP who tabled the question recorded in Hansard.
 
Last edited:

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,370
Another clue from Hansard 18 July 1968:

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1968/jul/18/level-crossing-silchester

I wonder if BRB reconsidered the wisdom of replacing the crossing keeper with warning lights and decided it would be easier and safer to close the crossing to vehicles instead.

Thinking the Countryside Act 1968 and recognition of Rights of way may be related. Maybe there's a 'footpaths officer' at the local authority? They may be furloughed of course if not victim of austerity cuts.
 

Wychwood93

Member
Joined
25 Jan 2018
Messages
634
Location
Burton. Dorset.
From another current thread, I see there’s a NR level crossing map and spreadsheet here:
...and I now think their own data for Odd Lane UWC is wrong.
(Which probably likely explains what I wrote in post #56 earlier.) o_O

From their spreadsheet data for Odd Lane:
The lat/long is 51.36642,-1.043628
and the miles/yards 43.1236 which would be 43m 56ch.

That seems to be pointing to the under bridge much nearer Mortimer station?

Is there a chance please that someone could double check things and see if I’m making some sort of beginners mistake? If I’m right I’ll let NR know using the procedure on that webpage.
Via Google maps I would have Odd Lane at 51.354786, -1.060052. A public footpath at the present - no way is it a UWC crossing and certainly not the location that is being sought.
The OS 25" map 1892-2014: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.35518&lon=-1.06055&layers=168&b=1

The former Silchester crossing is at 51.346919, -1.062390. Currently access to the line via double meshed gates on the up side. No access to the down side - a piece of former GWR broad gauge rail used as a post support is visible when the brambles die back.
The OS 25" map 1892-2014: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.34713&lon=-1.06268&layers=168&b=1
Note the structure on the up country side of the crossing - in the wrong place for being in the photo at the start of the thread. It could, of course, have been demolished and replaced by the hut???
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,271
Via Google maps I would have Odd Lane at 51.354786, -1.060052. A public footpath at the present - no way is it a UWC crossing and certainly not the location that is being sought.
The OS 25" map 1892-2014: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.35518&lon=-1.06055&layers=168&b=1

The former Silchester crossing is at 51.346919, -1.062390. Currently access to the line via double meshed gates on the up side. No access to the down side - a piece of former GWR broad gauge rail used as a post support is visible when the brambles die back.
The OS 25" map 1892-2014: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.34713&lon=-1.06268&layers=168&b=1
Note the structure on the up country side of the crossing - in the wrong place for being in the photo at the start of the thread. It could, of course, have been demolished and replaced by the hut???
Ok, but I was just going by post #52, that one seemed fairly specific. So Odd Lane is not the answer to the original question, but it is still wrongly located on NR’s map and in the level crossing spreadsheet. Also the Online SA is wrong in describing Odd Lane as a UWC, it should just be a footpath?

Edit:

Well I reported my concerns with the spreadsheet data, will be interesting to see their reply in due course.
 
Last edited:

BasildonBob

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2019
Messages
36
Location
Reading
Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner - and it isn't Odd Lane. With a little time on my hands, I decided to go exploring, firstly to the top of the track leading to Odd Lane crossing.

Although the route looks promising initially as the restricted byway leaves Clappers Farm Road....

Byway entrance.jpg


it quickly narrows to a wooded path, along which a Riley has not driven for many a long year - if ever!

Odds Lane crossing 1.jpg

The crossing itself is as you would expect from the Google Satellite view. The footpath rises steeply into the woods on the far side.

Odds Lane crossing 2.jpg


So, definitely not here. Time to try option B

Further along Clappers Farm Road is the track leading to the location mentioned by Wychwood 93 above. Right from the start, it looks more promising. At one point someone clearly thought it necessary to install a rubber speed bump....

Speed bump.jpg


At the top of the track, there are locked gates with a sign which helpfully confirms that this was indeed the site of Silchester Crossing

Silchester Crossing sign.jpg


Although the foreground view is quite different, the treeline matches the 1968 picture almost exactly and the concrete posts look similar.


Silchester Crossing.jpg

Reading Chronicle old railway crossing.jpg



There's space just inside the gate on the left hand side for the hut and plenty of room for the Riley to have pulled up beyond the gate without blocking the up line. There's also some ballast on the far side where the crossing exit would have been


Silchester Crossing 2.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Silchester Crossing.jpg
    Silchester Crossing.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 20
Last edited:

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner - and it isn't Odd Lane. With a little time on my hands, I decided to go exploring, firstly to the top of the track leading to Odd Lane crossing.

Although the route looks promising initially as the restricted byway leaves Clappers Farm Road....

View attachment 83319


it quickly narrows to a wooded path, along which a Riley has not driven for many a long year - if ever!

View attachment 83320

The crossing itself is as you would expect from the Google Satellite view. The footpath rises steeply into the woods on the far side.

View attachment 83321


So, definitely not here. Time to try option B

Further along Clappers Farm Road is the track leading to the location mentioned by Wychwood 93 above. Right from the start, it looks more promising. At one point someone clearly thought it necessary to install a rubber speed bump....

View attachment 83323


At the top of the track, there are locked gates with a sign which helpfully confirms that this was indeed the site of Silchester Crossing

View attachment 83324


Although the foreground view is quite different, the treeline matches the 1968 picture almost exactly and the concrete posts look similar.


View attachment 83326

View attachment 83327



There's space just inside the gate on the left hand side for the hut and plenty of room for the Riley to have pulled up beyond the gate without blocking the up line. There's also some ballast on the far side where the crossing exit would have been


View attachment 83328
Impressive work!
 

BasildonBob

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2019
Messages
36
Location
Reading
Thanks! It's been a thoroughly enjoyable exercise in satisfying an idle curiousity and I'm very appreciative of all the responses and contributions
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Thanks! It's been a thoroughly enjoyable exercise in satisfying an idle curiousity and I'm very appreciative of all the responses and contributions
Is the newspaper going to publish the results of the search? For a hard pressed local rag there 's a good story in this thread (questions to the Minister included!, Cash in the attic style railwayana! knowledge of a local signalman / photographer etc etc - all we're missing is the names of the p-way crew who closed off the old crossing and demolished that hut!).

Actually - do we know the name of the chap in the picture? Was the suggestion that he was the crossing keeper, not the driver - driver took the photo maybe?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,271
Thanks! It's been a thoroughly enjoyable exercise in satisfying an idle curiousity and I'm very appreciative of all the responses and contributions
I think it’s been an excellent example of collaborative research, but going the distance for up to the minute photos is the icing on the cake...
 
Last edited:

alxndr

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2015
Messages
1,467
Fantastic. Beat me to it, I was considering taking a drive all the way down there to find out.

Anyone got any more?!
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
Well done @BasildonBob, really enjoyed following this thread even though I didn’t have anything to contribute!
 

Arglwydd Golau

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2011
Messages
1,421
That really is excellent work, BasildonBob! I had to do some serious footslogging recently to identify the location of some of my father's photographs (a narrative that I am supposed to be writing up when I get round to it) so I understand the feeling of satisfaction upon completion!
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
What is also rather interesting to see are the gate pillars in concrete. I don't think the modern image ones are the same as the vintage picture, as the originals already look rather weathered in the 1960s pic, but they do look similar. That maybe simply co-incidence as it were (how many designs for concrete gate posts is anyone going to come up with for a railway context after all?)

Was it confirmed whether this section of the line was originally LSWR or GWR?

That really is excellent work, BasildonBob! I had to do some serious footslogging recently to identify the location of some of my father's photographs (a narrative that I am supposed to be writing up when I get round to it) so I understand the feeling of satisfaction upon completion!
surely it's time for some further examples of your father's fascinating pics, which I recall being very interesting and enjoyable to see in the past! All in the fullness of time I expect!

**Edit - just spotted a recent pic you have posted! Off to have a look at that.
 
Last edited:

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,290
Location
Up the creek
Sorry, what I was thinking was that at some time after the boundary change the sign needed replacing. Whichever part of the DCE’s empire was responsible could have just taken one from their store of signs removed from elsewhere. As all (or almost all) of their area was former SR territory, the odds would be on it being an SR (de)sign. (All guesswork, but possible.)
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,867
Location
Airedale
Sorry, what I was thinking was that at some time after the boundary change the sign needed replacing. Whichever part of the DCE’s empire was responsible could have just taken one from their store of signs removed from elsewhere. As all (or almost all) of their area was former SR territory, the odds would be on it being an SR (de)sign. (All guesswork, but possible.)
My guess too, I obviously misunderstood your previous post.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
It looks to be missing its rear bumper, so maybe not so new or pristine. The number plate dates the car from before 1963 when A -suffix reg plates came in.

Also, what wording appears above the red circle on the opposite gates? Does it normally say something like "Stop and listen", or does it usually give the location? It looks as though there are three words written there, and could start with a P, which strengthens the Pond Head Lane theory.
The car could have been registered later than 1963 though, some registration offices were still using the older style plates until 1965
 

Grumpy Git

On Moderation
Joined
13 Oct 2019
Messages
2,126
Location
Liverpool
I want to know where the rear bumper has gone from the Riley 4, (same basic car as an Austin Cambridge or Morris Oxford)?
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
I want to know where the rear bumper has gone from the Riley 4, (same basic car as an Austin Cambridge or Morris Oxford)?
Possible it dropped off when going over the road hump pictured up thread further down the track?;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top