Beeching: The wonderful gift of hindsight.

[yorksrob]

I think the worst accusation that can be levelled at Beeching was that he had (or was given) a fixed view of what shape the network should be and mis-interpreted the data to justify it.

 

[Greenback]

Thanks for that. I was wandering round outside Llanelli station a few weeks ago for the first time in many years and remembered the old line outside. New housing there now.

Where we live in Seaside, there used to be several railway lines in the streets. All once part of the Llanelli Docks Company. I;ve seen several old photos of steam locos puffing awy only feet from people's front doors!

I think the worst accusation that can be levelled at Beeching was that he had (or was given) a fixed view of what shape the network should be and mis-interpreted the data to justify it.

I think that about sums it up. We should also remember, I think, that there was a lot less of a free thinking attitude during Beeching's time. You were basically brought up to do what you were told, and Dr Beeching was told to make the railways pay.

I think he tried to do that to the best of his ability, but the attitudes, deference to authority and ideas of the time would thwart any attempt to provide an independent analysis of future transport needs, or to even analyse the then usage of the railway in a satisfactory manner.

 

[D365]

Where we live in Seaside, there used to be railway line sin the street. All once part of the Llanelli Docks Company. I;ve seen several old photos of steam locos puffing awy only feet from people's front doors!

How is this even legal now?

 

[Greenback]

They a different view of things in the US! I enjoyed the on street running through Oakland on the Coast Starlight!

 

[yorksrob]

They a different view of things in the US! I enjoyed the on street running through Oakland on the Coast Starlight!

Alas, if only we still had our own version at Weymouth !

 

[Greenback]

Alas, if only we still had our own version at Weymouth !

I regret that I never travelled on that one!

 

[John55]

Nothing has changed. The people making decisions are still amateurs, i.e. MPs, who are wide open to the blandishments of professionals acting on behalf of vested interests; perish the thought that brown envelopes might be involved.

The running of the railways should have been left to a management team not subject to the whims of ambitious politicians who entered the revolving door of the Ministry of Transport.

That is really not the case, the closures carried on at a rapid pace through the 1970s and 1980s - generally smaller chunks at a time but still significant.

The figures I quoted were for the passenger lines as the discussion had drifted in that direction and these numbers are easy to find. As someone else has pointed out these lines had all closed to passengers before 1970, Beighton station, for example, as early as 1954 according to the Disused Stations website.

I chose 1970 as if you look at the route miles closed to passengers by year it can be seen the raft of closures starting from the Beeching report has fizzled out by then.

1964…..1058
1965……600
1966……750
1967……300
1968……400
1969……250
1970……275
1971……..23
1972……..50
1973……..35
1974………0

At the risk of over-using hindsight, some of today's transport needs were predictable. Even in the 1960s we knew oil wouldn't last forever and that road congestion was a problem. The future potential for rail was, frankly, ignored.

There was a report published in 1965 called “The Development of the Major Trunk Routes” which looks in some detail at the potential for passenger and freight on the railways of Britain. In many respects it is an over optimistic document with rather optimistic expectations of traffic available to the railways. It identified that one big unknown was the effect of exploitation of North Sea oil and gas. As noted elsewhere in this thread coal production halved between 1964 and 1984 as a result to the detriment of the railway business.

This does not see any future for slow stopping services of course but it does look at the future development of rail traffic.

Beeching was also given a strict remit about making the railways pay. I doubt that remit included looking decades ahead and deciding that railways would be worth their while again!

I'm not really disagreeing with what you say, governments are extremely short termist, and they had already pretty much decided that roads were the future.

The remit that the railways had to pay their own way was in the legislation which created the British Transport Commission in 1947. That objective remained until round 1968 when the Public Service Obligation grants were introduced to pay BR to provide unremunative services. There was absolutely no change in the directions given to the BTC or BR by any Government in the 50s or 60s about profitability. Up until 1968 BTC or BR would make a loss and have to borrow money to pay the bills which would be have to be written off by the Government from time to time.

He probably didn't have to exert undue influence. He had given Beeching strict parametres within which to work. ie no consideration was to be given to social consequences of closure.... "HARDSHIP" was the key word. If it couldn't be shown that hardship would occur as a result of closure then so be it. Holidaymakers making their way to resorts could find other means if a line was closed and were not considered to suffer any "hardship". Suggestions of how to improve a service or how costs could be cut were not allowed as evidence at a TUCC hearing. But at the end of the day it was the Minister for Transport who decided. Strangely after the hearing into the closure proposal for Carmarthen - Aberystwyth (a line which occasionally gets discussed as a reopening possibility) the wording of the TUCC report was carefully chosen. It said that they believed there would be “severe hardship” to workers using the first trains into and out of Aberystwyth and the return evening service. To a lesser degree there would be hardship to occasional travellers using the line to/from South Wales. The committee believed there would only be a slight impact to the tourist industry. No recommendation or otherwise as to closure was made and the report then went to the Minister for Transport for his decision. It was another year before the approval was actually given.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The procedures for closing railways were the same in 1963 as in 1948. There were no changes introduced between nationalisation and the Beeching era.

The framework in which the railway was run at the time of the Beeching era was that set by the 1947 Transport Act. It wasn't anything new introduced by the Government in the 1950s or 1960s. The sad thing is that no one was particularly interested in changing that framework until the 1968 Transport Act.

One of the sad aspects is that immediately after the second world war there was one part of the British railways which was interested in low cost operation of rural and low traffic railways. Unfortunately this was in Northern Ireland and there seems to have been little action on the GB side of the Irish Sea to follow some of the work being done there until very much later.

It is slightly odd to me that the design of the BR dmus built from 1954 onwards owe almost everything to designs produced in Ireland in the previous 10 - 15 years. The driving force for their introduction in GB being an Irishman.

 

[Gwenllian2001]

The procedures for closing railways were the same in 1963 as in 1948. There were no changes introduced between nationalisation and the Beeching era.

The framework in which the railway was run at the time of the Beeching era was that set by the 1947 Transport Act. It wasn't anything new introduced by the Government in the 1950s or 1960s. The sad thing is that no one was particularly interested in changing that framework until the 1968 Transport Act.

One of the sad aspects is that immediately after the second world war there was one part of the British railways which was interested in low cost operation of rural and low traffic railways. Unfortunately this was in Northern Ireland and there seems to have been little action on the GB side of the Irish Sea to follow some of the work being done there until very much later.

It is slightly odd to me that the design of the BR dmus built from 1954 onwards owe almost everything to designs produced in Ireland in the previous 10 - 15 years. The driving force for their introduction in GB being an Irishman.

You seem to have overlooked the 1962 Transport wherein a new procedure was set out for the closure of railway lines. Section 56(7) of the Act required that British Railways gave at least six weeks notice of their intention to close a line and to publish this proposal in two successive weeks in two local newspapers in the area affected. The notice would give the proposed closure dates, details of alternative transport services (including services which BR was to lay on as a result of closure) and inviting objections within the six week period to a specified address. A copy of the notice was also to be sent to the relevant Area Committee.

Rail users affected by a closure could also send their objections to the Area Committee (this was not required to be specified in the Closure Notice) who would then report to the Minister of Transport. The Area Committee would consider the "hardship" which it considered would be caused as a result of the closure, and recommend measures to ease that hardship. The closure would not then be proceeded with until the Committee had reported to the Minister and he had given his consent to the closure. Based on the report, the Minister could subject his consent to closure to certain conditions, such as the provision of alternative transport services.

There was also provision in the Act to safeguard the routes of closed railways that might be considered to be of strategic value and this was honoured although it seems to have been quietly forgotten and routes so designated were often blocked or built over later.

The design of the DMUs introduced on both sides of the Irish border owed a great deal to GWR Railcars. They might not have looked like the GW cars but mechanically they were very similar.

 

[Waddon]

Just out of curiosity, is there a list anywhere of lines that Beeching proposed for closure but never actually got closed and are still open as National Rail routes today? Would be interesting to see how popular some of those routes are now

 

[Railcar B]

I don't know of a complete list, but one or two come to mind, and I'm sure others will add to this:-

Ryde-Shanklin
Bere Alston-Gunnislake
Mark's Tey-Sudbury
Bletchley-Bedford (there's some argument as to whether Oxford-Cambridge closure was a Beeching proposal, but it was certainly being considered at the time)

In each of the above part of the proposed closure was reprieved by the Minister of Transport on specific "Hardship" grounds. These lines soon went on to receive PSO grants from the late 60s.

I may be wrong here, but I think the entire East Suffolk Line was proposed for closure and subsequently reprieved. (it would have been considered a duplicate route to Lowestoft!!?) Perhaps someone can confirm?

 

[brianfraser]

Apparently Beeching wanted to close the branch to North Berwick off the ECML. A campaign to save the line surprisingly succeeded. But it was a false dawn, weeks later the glorious Waverly route from Edinburgh to Carlisle was shut down.

 

[yorksrob]

Just out of curiosity, is there a list anywhere of lines that Beeching proposed for closure but never actually got closed and are still open as National Rail routes today? Would be interesting to see how popular some of those routes are now

Off the top of my head:

Ashford - Hastings (suffers complaints that the 2 car DMU's aren't long enough)
East Suffolk (Had to have an extra loop installed at Beccles to allow more trains)
Middlesborough - Whitby (Over 95% full seating capacity last time I travelled on it)
St Erth - St Ives (more like a rush hour commuter train on summer Saturdays)
Truro - Falmouth (new loop installed recently to allow increased traffic)
Settle - Carlisle (nuff said)
Buxton - Wherever it joins the main line (busy commuter service)
Spalding - Skegness (DMU's too short)

 

[billio]

Just out of curiosity, is there a list anywhere of lines that Beeching proposed for closure but never actually got closed and are still open as National Rail routes today? Would be interesting to see how popular some of those routes are now

Bury to Manchester Victoria via Radcliffe Central, survived as a national rail route, but now Metrolink and well used.

It was interesting that this was proposed in the first round of closures, but not the Rochdale - Bury - Bolton line which closed in 1970.

 

[Mvann]

I believe spalding - Skegness was kept open because the roads to Skegness couldn't cope with the holiday traffic.

 

[steamybrian]

Just out of curiosity, is there a list anywhere of lines that Beeching proposed for closure but never actually got closed and are still open as National Rail routes today? Would be interesting to see how popular some of those routes are now

There are a surprising number that escaped the Beeching Axe in addition to those already mentioned-

All the Far north lines north of Inverness...!
Ayr- Stranraer
Liverpool- Southport.. a busy commuter line
Watford- St Albans Abbey- now electrified
Richmond- Broad Street (North London Line) although services now run to
Stratford with a much increased frequency of service.
Machynlleth- Pwhelli- busy holiday route saved due to inadequate roads, etc
Llandudno Jn-Blaenau Ffestiniog
Central Wales line Llanelli- Shrewsbury
Witham-Braintree... now electrified
Marks Tey-Sudbury
Romford-Upminster..now electrified

 

[Gareth Marston]

There are a surprising number that escaped the Beeching Axe in addition to those already mentioned-

All the Far north lines north of Inverness...!
Liverpool- Southport.. a busy commuter line
Watford- St Albans Abbey- now electrified
Richmond- Broad Street (North London Line) although services now run to
Stratford with a much increased frequency of service.
Machynlleth- Pwhelli- busy holiday route saved due to inadequate roads, etc
Central Wales line Llanelli- Shrewsbury

Cambrian Coast - the protesters actually proved hardship in the 1972 hearing. A lot of schoolchildren use the line to this day and it goes over estuary's on bridges whereas the local roads take inland detours to ancient bridges upstream. The clincher was when Crossville were asked how heavy there buses were and the council representative the weight limit on the Penmaenpool bridge was over which BRB thought the replacement bus could go. BRB had looked on a map in London and didn't realise it could only take cars! The bridge capable of taking buses was another 4 miles upstream on the Mawddach Estauary- a 14 miles detour compared to the Barmouth Bridge.

The report gives 10 lines selected for closure on Pages 100/101 as examples. Not a single one fits with the "you need 10000 passengers a week to break even" it basis's its closures on and the report assumes 86% of all contributory revenue will stay on the railway when a line is closed. I would say given what actually happened some line closures actually lost BR money...

 

[ainsworth74]

Does anyone here know how/why the Whitby branch managed to survive the axe? It's always struck me as being something of an oddity.

 

[swcovas]

Just out of curiosity, is there a list anywhere of lines that Beeching proposed for closure but never actually got closed and are still open as National Rail routes today? Would be interesting to see how popular some of those routes are now

In Wales:

The Coryton Branch in Cardiff
Wrexham - Bidston

Not mentioned in the report but closed in the Beeching era was Neyland-Johnston in Pembrokeshire which closed in Sept 64. Neyland, until 1963 had all the facilities of a main line terminus and in a village of just over 1,000 people. A few years before closure there were still 4 daily trains to Paddington!

 

[yorksrob]

Does anyone here know how/why the Whitby branch managed to survive the axe? It's always struck me as being something of an oddity.

I believe it was due to the difficulty of providing a bus service to the intermediate villages.

Incidentally, when I travelled on the branch, the majority of passengers were travelling end to end - which rather illustrates just how restrictive and inadequate even the provision for "hardship" was, since were it not for the lack of an adequate road, all of these travellers to Whitby would have been without a service.

 

[al green]

I don't know of a complete list, but one or two come to mind, and I'm sure others will add to this:-

Ryde-Shanklin
Bere Alston-Gunnislake
Mark's Tey-Sudbury
Bletchley-Bedford (there's some argument as to whether Oxford-Cambridge closure was a Beeching proposal, but it was certainly being considered at the time)

Wrong. Oxford-Cambridge was not recommended for closure by Beeching. Barbara Castle, Labour transport minister, got so enthusiastic about closing lines that she closed ones not even recommended by Beeching, including most of Oxford-Cambridge.

 

[brianfraser]

It is often said that building over the trackbed of closed lines was a short-sighted strategy.

But a more cynical ploy was the removal of iron and steel bridges by BR itself, ostensibly for scrap. There are many examples of stone pillars and abutments remaining but a gap where a metal midsection was in place.

Did BR actually realise a profit on scrap metal after paying the removal costs. Or was it a sneaky way to ensure that re-opening these routes would be a difficult and costly process?

 

[HSTEd]

It is often said that building over the trackbed of closed lines was a short-sighted strategy.

But a more cynical ploy was the removal of iron and steel bridges by BR itself, ostensibly for scrap. There are many examples of stone pillars and abutments remaining but a gap where a metal midsection was in place.

Did BR actually realise a profit on scrap metal after paying the removal costs. Or was it a sneaky way to ensure that re-opening this routes would be a difficult and costly process?

There are also the long term maintenance and safety costs that BR would be forced to pay if the bridge remained intact.

You don't have to prevent a steel bridge section falling onto a road or similar if you simply remove and scrap said section.

 

[tbtc]

was it a sneaky way to ensure that re-opening these routes would be a difficult and costly process?

This is one thing I struggle with - the conspiracy theories that British Rail wanted to act like the Romans alledgedly plowing Carthage and sowing salt into the soil rather than risk any railways be re-opened.

 

[brianfraser]

This is one thing I struggle with - the conspiracy theories that British Rail wanted to act like the Romans alledgedly plowing Carthage and sowing salt into the soil rather than risk any railways be re-opened.

Although it is a little strange why rail bridges over roads, which would bear no load after closure and may well have stood for 100 years, were swiftly removed while many overbridges were left untouched despite being subjected to a daily pounding from traffic.

 

[Gwenllian2001]

In Wales:

The Coryton Branch in Cardiff
Wrexham - Bidston

Not mentioned in the report but closed in the Beeching era was Neyland-Johnston in Pembrokeshire which closed in Sept 64. Neyland, until 1963 had all the facilities of a main line terminus and in a village of just over 1,000 people. A few years before closure there were still 4 daily trains to Paddington!

All of which show the inconsistencies which were obvious at the time, without the need for hindsight.

The Coryton Branch had a very sketchy service and was to all intents and purposes peak hours only, yet it survived the cull. On the other hand the Riverside Branch to Cardiff Clarence Road, which had through services to and from Barry; The Vale of Glamorgan and Penarth was chopped despite carrying many more passengers than the Coryton Line. I was surprised when I first worked the Booking Offices, in the Barry area, at the number of people travelling to Clarence Road, many of them being Weekly and Season Ticket holders. After closure some changed their destination to Grangetown, not too far to walk but, subject to Welsh weather, not ideal; others gave up and took to the road, never to return to rail. The branch did have one peculiarity in that ticketing included a 'Private Settlement' but this had no bearing on the closure because the fares were weighted, by a couple of coppers, to take that into account. It made no sense and was probably busier then than the Coryton Branch is even today. This was no rural backwater but just an extra mile of railway serving a smart and recently rebuilt station. Had it survived it would be busier than ever as it went right to the heart of the Docklands redevelopment

Neyland was an oddity and Brunel's original choice for a port in west Wales but it never really developed. Sadly, the fine bronze statue of Brunel, commemorating the town's railway past, was stolen by metal thieves a few months ago.

 

[swcovas]

All of which show the inconsistencies which were obvious at the time, without the need for hindsight.

The Coryton Branch had a very sketchy service and was to all intents and purposes peak hours only, yet it survived the cull. On the other hand the Riverside Branch to Cardiff Clarence Road, which had through services to and from Barry; The Vale of Glamorgan and Penarth was chopped despite carrying many more passengers than the Coryton Line. I was surprised when I first worked the Booking Offices, in the Barry area, at the number of people travelling to Clarence Road, many of them being Weekly and Season Ticket holders. After closure some changed their destination to Grangetown, not too far to walk but, subject to Welsh weather, not ideal; others gave up and took to the road, never to return to rail. The branch did have one peculiarity in that ticketing included a 'Private Settlement' but this had no bearing on the closure because the fares were weighted, by a couple of coppers, to take that into account. It made no sense and was probably busier then than the Coryton Branch is even today. This was no rural backwater but just an extra mile of railway serving a smart and recently rebuilt station. Had it survived it would be busier than ever as it went right to the heart of the Docklands redevelopment

Neyland was an oddity and Brunel's original choice for a port in west Wales but it never really developed. Sadly, the fine bronze statue of Brunel, commemorating the town's railway past, was stolen by metal thieves a few months ago.

As you say Clarence Rd today would so so busy with access from points west of Central. It would complement rather than compete with Cardiff Bay station. Never to be seen again.

I believe Neyland survived as long as it did because of the facilities there to service Milford which had very little but still handled a lot of fish and othe freight. I guess someone suddenly realised that this was going to contract anyway so Neyland got the chop.

Always surprised that the Penarth-Cadoxton route was never included for closure and survived til '69. Any thoughts as to why?

 

[Tiny Tim]

This is one thing I struggle with - the conspiracy theories that British Rail wanted to act like the Romans alledgedly plowing Carthage and sowing salt into the soil rather than risk any railways be re-opened.

I wouldn't endorse any theories about BR having a hidden agenda to destroy closed lines, but they did seem to go through a period where any reminder of the past was a target. Steam excursions were particularly discouraged, and water stanchions hastily removed. It's as if BR was ashamed of it's own history. Perhaps they wanted to appear more modern, but there isn't anything particularly high tech about wholesale demolition. I doubt that the scrap value of bridge sections was particularly high, and the trackbed was sold for a pittance. Larger pieces of land, such as stations and goods yards may have been more valuable, but the policy seems to have been to demolish first and look for a buyer later. Here in Devizes the station was swiftly demolished, and the site left empty for many years before a partial alternative use was found, as an underused car park. The rest of the station site didn't disappear under houses until the 1990s. The trackbed at the bottom of my garden was bought by a local scrap dealer, who consequently re-sold it in slices to the houses that backed onto it. BR didn't make much out of that deal. We never bought our 'slice', it was a steep-sided cutting, and more suitable for mountaineers than gardeners.

 

[Greenback]

I wouldn't endorse any theories about BR having a hidden agenda to destroy closed lines, but they did seem to go through a period where any reminder of the past was a target. Steam excursions were particularly discouraged, and water stanchions hastily removed. It's as if BR was ashamed of it's own history. Perhaps they wanted to appear more modern, but there isn't anything particularly high tech about wholesale demolition. I doubt that the scrap value of bridge sections was particularly high, and the trackbed was sold for a pittance. Larger pieces of land, such as stations and goods yards may have been more valuable, but the policy seems to have been to demolish first and look for a buyer later. Here in Devizes the station was swiftly demolished, and the site left empty for many years before a partial alternative use was found, as an underused car park. The rest of the station site didn't disappear under houses until the 1990s. The trackbed at the bottom of my garden was bought by a local scrap dealer, who consequently re-sold it in slices to the houses that backed onto it. BR didn't make much out of that deal. We never bought our 'slice', it was a steep-sided cutting, and more suitable for mountaineers than gardeners.

I have a theory about this, though I can't produce any evience to back it up!

I think that following Beeching, there was a mindset both within government and BR that it was really living on borrowed time.

The feeling ran until at least the late 1970's, and the feeling was that the network would slowly wither away, with lines and routes becoming more and more run down and unecessary as the population continued to embrace car ownership.

(Clearly little thought was given to longevity and ehalth issues amongst the elderly in those days, clearly people were expected to drive until they died at around 70!).

Anyway, one of the ways that BR tried to counter this vision of the future was to try and eliminate any signs it was 'living in the past'. Nowadays we look on it as being ashamed of its heritage, but I think it wa smore borne out of fear of the future.

Put bluntly, if BR had retained water towers, bridge sections and disused stations, not only would this have cost money, but would have left the organisation open to accusations of being irrelevant, living in a bygone age, and wasting taxpayers money on rusting relics of the Empire.

When you also consider the way that, during the 1960's and 1970's old housing was also wiped off the map in many areas to be replaced by hideous, futuristic concrete tower blocks that would not last three decades, it's not surprising that BR acted the way it did.

I'm not saying they got it all right, far from it, but I can understand the motives and pressures the industry was under at that time.

 

[Welshman]

Anyway, one of the ways that BR tried to counter this vision of the future was to try and eliminate any signs it was 'living in the past'. Nowadays we look on it as being ashamed of its heritage, but I think it wa smore borne out of fear of the future.

Put bluntly, if BR had retained water towers, bridge sections and disused stations, not only would this have cost money, but would have left the organisation open to accusations of being irrelevant, living in a bygone age, and wasting taxpayers money on rusting relics of the Empire.

When you also consider the way that, during the 1960's and 1970's old housing was also wiped off the map in many areas to be replaced by hideous, futuristic concrete tower blocks that would not last three decades, it's not surprising that BR acted the way it did.

I'm not saying they got it all right, far from it, but I can understand the motives and pressures the industry was under at that time.

I agree with much of what you are saying.

Think of the way in which the Doric Arch was demolished at Euston to create a "modern futuristic station" or the way in which the King's Cross frontage was allowed to become cluttered in the 70s to create a more modern image - a policy which is now going to be reversed to allow the spendour of Cubitt's original design to be admired.

And how fortunate that the magnificent frontage of Huddersfield station was saved from demolition in the same period, and has now been restored and cleaned-up, and that the policy now seems to be restoration where possible, and not wholesale demolition.

 

[Greenback]

I agree with much of what you are saying.

Think of the way in which the Doric Arch was demolished at Euston to create a "modern futuristic station" or the way in which the King's Cross frontage was allowed to become cluttered in the 70s to create a more modern image - a policy which is now going to be reversed to allow the spendour of Cubitt's original design to be admired.

And how fortunate that the magnificent frontage of Huddersfield station was saved from demolition in the same period, and has now been restored and cleaned-up, and that the policy now seems to be restoration where possible, and not wholesale demolition.

Indeed. Some sort of collective madness seemed to have gripped those in positions of responsibility during the 1960's and early 1970's. With the hindisght we have now, we can see that a lot of damage was done during those times. Most of which has had to be reversed at signifcant cost.