The Waterloo tunnel is only very short. From the Hodson St cutting to the Docks is the Waterloo Tunnel and from that point back to Edge Hill it is the Victoria Tunnel. All one tunnel with two names along its length.
Printable View
The Waterloo tunnel is only very short. From the Hodson St cutting to the Docks is the Waterloo Tunnel and from that point back to Edge Hill it is the Victoria Tunnel. All one tunnel with two names along its length.
I wonder why they done this?
wow these photos are so rare how you get them who is the copyright for them? what are we looking at exactly? is it the docks end of the waterloo tunnel its hard to reconise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirob
That is the dock end. It is 1971 and the tunnel closed in 1972, so not the last train, although it is clear the tunnel is not used much as there is lots of grass growing.Quote:
Originally Posted by oritelad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirob
They look like the pictures from the so called 'we have steam trains under Liverpool still 'ready' incase all electricity is taken from our hands and the local council can escape'!...
HiQuote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
History of the line which includes date of last train to Riverside (not last train through the tunnel for which I dont have a date)
21/7/1845 Act L&M railway to Waterloo
1/8/1849 Opened Edge Hill to Waterloo for Goods only
27/7/1893 Act MDHB lines to Waterloo
12/6/1895 Opened Edge Hill to Riverside for passenger traffic
30/9/1963 Waterloo Goods Station closed
25/2/1971 Last passenger train to Riverside
1/3/1971 line closed to passenger traffic and out of use beyond Waterloo Road level crossing
12/2/1972 line closed beyond Waterloo yard
19/11/1972 line cut 558yds inside Victoria tunnel to leave headshunt at Edge Hill end.
Mike Turner
They are from my collection of local railway plans and photo's aquired from many sources over the years.Quote:
Originally Posted by jc_everton
Mike Turner
Just to add to the discussion about the cost of a station, I know that when the new mail centre in Leeds was being built - right next to the railway line - I asked why they had not provided a siding for the mail rail trains (as then were). I was told that Royal Mail had been quoted £6m for a turn out. Its not just a matter of sticking in a set of points, you have to redo the signalling for many miles in each direction. So if that was the price ten years ago, I hate to think what it would cost now.
John
In 1971 an industrial steam loco was restored in Princes Dock MD&HB shed. It was steamed and ran over all accessable dock lines, including an unofficial foray into Waterloo goods yard! Date is July 1971. The MD&HB diesel from Princes Dock used the tunnel shortly afterwards, transfering to the Brunswick.Quote:
Originally Posted by oritelad
None of these pictures have ever been seen before. The copyright is mine, but you can copy them
Great pic. Costco is now near this site. You can see the Graham Gratrix factory on the right with Logan Towers behind it.
Sirob, what does this mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirob
The arch the train is running under is listed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirob
Graham Gratrix was not a factory. They were heating and plumbing merchants. I bought the odd heating boiler there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ged
There were lines all over the Dock Rd from goods depots across the road into the dock estate. Is the train moving from the Waterloo tunnel across the road in that photo?
I was driving along the dock road last year, up near the Seaforth end when we had to stop for a freight train that was mega long, it seemed like we were there for about 15 mins.
Waterways: I'm guessing that it is coming from the tunnel to the docks because there are flats to the right of the picture, suggesting that the photographer was looking north when he took it.
Ged: What time of day would that have been? I have actually been meaning to ask, what times do they run? Would I be right in saying that there are around 20 train journeys a day? I'm sure I read it somewhere in a MerseyRail document.
On the OldLiverpoolRailways.tk forum, someone suggested that the Aintree-Bootle Line should be used for freight to alleviate the heavy traffic experienced along the A5036 to Switch Island. I am not sure if the eastern end of the line (where Aintree Racecourse station) is feasible to reopen but there is plenty of land around Aintree Station to open a goods yard. Perhaps some might say "Would it be worth it? For such a small distance", but if the freight was moving north then why not double the track on the Ormskirk - Preston Line and get the freight moving north by train?
Some more pics;
Waterloo tunnel mouth, signal box on extreme right
Last movement on 28 July 1971 of MD&hb loco from Princes Dock to Brunswick via Edge Hill under its own power! I was on it and the gearbox got rather hot!
Sirob, terrific pics indeed!! One pic has an overhead wire gantry in front of the tunnel, while the rest do not.
Last usage of the tunnel was 1972. I like the Lancia or Alpha car in the pic too.
jc_everton. That was about 11am as i'd had to take paperwork to the docks before a noon cut off. Whilst you might drive down there hoping to see one of these monsters, we were in a rush and it wasn't welcomed :)
However, it was a sight to behold, like back in what I imagine the old days might have been a bit like ;)
More great pics Sirob.
Here is one idea for the re-use of the tunnels at Edge lane, part of our 21c Liverpool work (www.21cliverpool.co.uk)
[youtube]AAo-kQoyxh0[/youtube]
http://onfinite.com/libraries/1291374/9f3.jpg
http://onfinite.com/libraries/1291375/9f3.jpg
http://onfinite.com/libraries/1274967/e13.jpg
http://onfinite.com/libraries/1274968/e13.jpg
Interesting graphics in the proposals, but is this something you will put forward to the City Council? Do you have any more information on this project? It's nice to see the proposals from a Design perspective. The network needs vision and these graphics help bring the project to life.
Nice graphics. Edge Hill needs a decent station there as it is an essential hub. This outer city centre hub doesn't use the Wapping Tunnel, although that tunnel should be used eventually. So any station at Edge Hill has to be designed to suit a through loop (if the loop is built of course as it is all theory now). The Wapping tunnel can never be a part of a through loop, but not using such an asset is criminal.Quote:
Originally Posted by jc_everton
Nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ged
The gantry picture is at Edge Hill tunnel mouth, the others at Waterloo yard and the diesel is crossing the Dock Road.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
Nice work, looks very smart.Quote:
Originally Posted by scouseyuppie
but does this take into account any of the history of Edge hill station, and the fact that the station buildings there are listed structures?
Ill be honest, after studying the history of Liverpools railways for many years and the reasons why they where closed., i cant see the wapping and waterloo tunnels re opened, the wapping tunnel was known for bad water ingress problems, with the result that the LMS and British railways used special built brake vans for sanding the rails.
theres also the fact that you can easily change trains in the city centre and get a train from lime street to Edge hill already, theres one things that the railways hate, and that is doubling up on routes, a main reason why lots where closed in the 1960s.
Mike
Mike, when looking at an underground train system matters are very different. Main line routes are very different to local metro systems and should never be viewed the same. Edge Hill as a part of an underground loop is feasible. There is no need to double up on local rail systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike delamar
Water ingress into the Wapping tunnel can be curded by rendering the offending parts. The tunnel was not lined, just bored through solid soft rock. Only at the ends was it lined with brick.
The Waterloo tunnel can be fully used and it is hard to ignore this tunnel as it emerges at the Liverpool Waters scheme at Central Docks. The outer city centre loop I highlighted would fully use this tunnel.
The Wapping tunnel can at least be used in parts. IT is foolish not to use these tunnels as they both run right under the city centre bypassing the lot. That is great asset in any major city anywhere in the world. New stations can be cut out where necessary in both tunnels.
Ged, I had a look. Not inspired by the vision on that site - never was. There are more objective and creative thinkers on this site.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ged
Just read over that 'Outer Loop' discussion on the skyscraper forum - some very interesting posts and arguments - lots of passion about the subject, which is good. However the whole 'Bay City' - 'Waterways' link was rather comical, it started to turn into an online soap opera!
Lots of ideas on what should (or shouldn't) be done - some from a regeneration perspective, some from a value-for-money perspective. Good stuff.
My 'Urban Planning' view on the topic is that although the outer loop is great in theory, the restoration of the Waterloo tunnel should be the priority. And it is something that does not get one mention on any current MerseyTravel document. I'd love to see evidence of MT 'looking into the tunnels' as so many people would have you believe.
I think all the schemes should be integrated slowly and carfeully. I don't see any risks with the Waterloo tunnel linking up with the Northern Line, enabling direct access from Southport, Ormskirk and Kirkby (and possibly Ford if the NMB reopened) to Byrom St, Liverpool Uni/Hosp, Edge Hill, south Liverpool and ultimately Liverpool South Parkway. No risk whatsoever.
Options are increased, existing infrastructure is being maximised, and 2 key parts of Liverpool City Centre are now accessible by rail. This all complies with MerseyTravel's Rail Strategy, along with many other of their objectives, such as the need to ease over-crowding at Liverpool Central. OK, Byrom St is closer to Moorfields, but if you're a student or worker in the Liverpool Uni area, travelling to Central and walking up Mt Pleasant is a total pain in the arse. Not good enough.
The Wapping tunnel, in my eyes can be used as a sort of siding, or a turn-around point, where the many trains travelling into Central can terminate and side (?), as my proposals would see a significant increase in the amount of trains running into Liverpool. Just a thought, but maybe the tunnel can be better utilised in future years if Liverpool City Centre continues to grow, both economically and physically (eg if more people move into the city to live, work, study etc).
The two schemes that MT are considering are the North Mersey Branch and the Edge Hill to Bootle Branch (the North Liverpool Extension Line? Or was that the name of the Norris Green section of the CLC Line?).
I think these are realistic and again, not very risky. Certainly not the NLE, which would enable parts of the outer city (much more deprived than say, Aigburth, I hasten to add) to access the City Centre by rail - a much better and quicker alternative to the bus.
The Outer Loop is mere speculation, and I've seen how busy St. Michaels can get for myself, so I do not believe it is a waste of space. The area around the Outer Loop is actually well served by bus - if bus service was poor then there would be a much greater public backing for a new rail service.
Yes, transport has a massive role to play in the regeneration of any area, but you cannot just assume that a deprived area will transform into a Chelsea area just because of a new rail service. We must not forget that Liverpool is nowhere near as big as a London or a New York, and for many inner city areas in Liverpool, a bus service will suffice. Half the reason I hate buses is because I find them very uncomfortable, but this is mainly due to poor road surfacing - hence a bumpy ride. But if I want to get from say Aigburth to City Centre, a 10 min bumpy ride isn't bad enough to warrant a whole new rail line. However, a 30 min bumpy ride from say, Netherton to City Centre isn't ideal, and as the NMB line is simply lying there dormant, the case for the NMB is much more realistic.
The whole site is a soap opera. It is clique of the same people who all generally agree on the same points and are obsessed with exceptionally high buildings to the point of being blind to any sort of reality - well it is about skyscrapers.Quote:
Originally Posted by jc_everton
The outer city centre loop would alleviate overcrowding.Quote:
Options are increased, existing infrastructure is being maximised, and 2 key parts of Liverpool City Centre are now accessible by rail. This all complies with MerseyTravel's Rail Strategy, along with many other of their objectives, such as the need to ease over-crowding at Liverpool Central.
It is a hell of a leg up. The idea is to get people back into the centre and the immediate inner city areas. Gentrifying these areas is ideal and rapid transport infrastructure is appealing to developers. Heighsmoor Height at one end Of Lodge Lane is being gentrified, yet yards away is an area that is clearly decrepit. They want to move into Lodge Lane, but they need a reason to.Quote:
Yes, transport has a massive role to play in the regeneration of any area, but you cannot just assume that a deprived area will transform into a Chelsea area just because of a new rail service. We must not forget that Liverpool is nowhere near as big as a London or a New York,
For now it might. It is where the city wants to be in 5, 10 years time - having vision. And to get there using existing rapid transport infrastructure is a major lever in that big jump.Quote:
and for many inner city areas in Liverpool, a bus service will suffice.
dont get me wrong, im pro rail, and a massive railway enthusiast and would love to see the tunnels used. but have learned to think how the people who would spend the money would think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
sometimes have to let head rule heart.
If someone lives in Edge hill, they can go to the station now and there is a good quick rail service to the city centre, and a very good underground system specially designed in the 70s that could take them then to either the wirral, south liverpool, or north liverpool.
the ex london and north western railway Bootle branch which is still used today for freight to the docks lost its passenger service and station in the late 1940s, and the ex Cheshire lines north Liverpool line which is now a cycle path lost its passenger service in the 1960s.
main reason is that if you live in areas like tuebrook or Knotty ash, people did not want to get on a train which would take them around the world to get into town, and so took the bus or tram.
I still think this would apply today.
Mike