The Heybridge Railway, 1889 to 1913

[Richard Gawler]

Final details before painting.


The door handles, buffers, coupling hook and vacuum pipes are all from the kit.

I used the lathe to bore the holes in the buffer stocks, and to dress the buffer heads. I tried to double up the door handles to make them look a bit more robust but I dropped the first pair onto the carpet. Even with only four doors to equip I could see I was going to run out of handles so these are single thickness parts from the kit.


The buffer heads are resting loose here for the photograph. The castings for the axleboxes and springs are neat and well-made but I will leave these off for now. So I can remove the wheels and their axles during painting.


'Blackwater' doesn't have a train brake and the van is unfitted too, but I can see the sort of look I want for my railway in here.

 

[Richard Gawler]

“Heybridge, an Essex Idyll”

(The Heybridge Railway, 1889 to 1912)​

Foreword​

The model railways I enjoy the most are the models of “might have been” schemes and I have now found enough ideas to start building one of my own. I am beginning with the trains, the layout can follow later.

This is the story of the Heybridge and Langford Light Railway as it might have been in rural Essex, serving the industries and populations of Heybridge and Heybridge Basin during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The chapter of “Historical Background” in Part 1 of this account is true; the rest is fiction.


The supposed route of the railway beside the navigation, photographed in the 1930s

Contents​

1. The story of the Railway

2. Traffic and Traction

3: Closure and Legacy

4: Representing the Railway in a Model

Appendices (these are under development and very detailed, so available on request)
Appendix 1 Timeline
Appendix 2 Traffic and Traction
Appendix 3 Train Formations
Appendix 4 The Technology of the MW K Class Locomotive

 

[Richard Gawler]

Part 1: The Story of the Railway​

Historical Background​

Beginnings​

Heybridge is a large village and civil parish near the estuary of the River Blackwater in Essex. The settlement here grew and prospered during the 18th and 19th centuries, due largely to the presence of a navigable waterway (the Chelmer and Blackwater Navigation) and the success of a firm of agricultural engineers, E H Bentall.

Records from the 1670s show a suggestion to turn the River Chelmer into a navigable waterway from Chelmsford to Maldon, but the people of Maldon opposed the plan and it was dropped. About a century later, a fresh scheme was proposed, and this met with support from people living in and around Chelmsford (where benefits would be felt) but again fierce opposition from the Maldonians who knew the owners of the waterway would take away their incomes from the tolls, harbour dues and wharfage fees. In response, the Chelmer and Blackwater Navigation was built to Heybridge Basin, missing out Maldon altogether.

By the 1840s there was a prospect of a railway between Maldon and Witham, and the tradesmen of Heybridge sent in a petition that the railway should go to Chelmsford rather than to Witham. One of the signatories was E H Bentall, and it is interesting to observe that, while the merchants of Heybridge owed their existence to the navigation, they had no scruples whatsoever in seeking an association with a railway which would put the navigation out of business overnight.

Much of the support for a line from Maldon to Witham came from Braintree; the businesses of Braintree would benefit from the easy import of coal, coke, iron, oil cake, tar, slates and other raw materials. After losing the navigation the Maldonians were keen to not miss out again, and this explains why a dock was built beside the station at Maldon. The direct line to Chelmsford was never built.

The Maldon, Witham and Braintree Railway Company obtained parliamentary sanction for a new railway including a line from Witham to Maldon via Langford; Heybridge was not in their sights. The Eastern Counties Railway took over the project and opened the new railway from Maldon to Braintree in 1848.

The Navigation​

The Chelmer and Blackwater Navigation was completed in 1797 when it reached Springfield basin in Chelmsford. The navigation brought coal from North East England and timber from Scandinavia to Chelmsford, and also carried flour from the mills at Langford and Paper Mill Lock.

The navigation was responsible for the creation of the settlement at Heybridge Basin, and helped Heybridge itself to grow; and carried commercial traffic while Chelmsford transitioned from being a small market town on the London to Norwich road into the prosperous County Town.

The Bentall Company​

The Bentall company of agricultural engineers moved from Goldhanger to Heybridge in the early 19th century. They chose Heybridge because they could use the navigation to bring in bulky raw materials like iron and coke, and to export their finished products. In common with other ironfounders, the company found a steady demand for general castings as well as agricultural implements, and these too left the works by way of the navigation.

Heybridge had already developed after the arrival of the navigation, and the subsequent expansion of the Bentall company changed the settlement from being an agricultural village with ten farms to a ‘factory town’ manufacturing agricultural machinery.

The Foundry​

During the early 19th century, William Bentall established a foundry in Heybridge. General castings as well as agricultural implements were in steady demand: grates, range backs, doorscrapers, grave markers and barge wheels; and any parts for other tradesman which he was commissioned to manufacture. The largest castings weighed 10 tons.

The foundry received its pig iron by sea, shipped from the North East of England. Pig iron was stored in wharfs along the side of the navigation, typically a thousand tons was held in stock.

The Tramway​

The Bentall works had an internal tramway system which connected many of the buildings together.

The Bentall Car​

In 1904, E H Bentall embarked on a well-intended but ultimately disastrous venture into the fledgling motor industry. Edward Ernest bought one of the first two cars and became the first person in Heybridge to own a motor car.

E H Bentall went into full production of their car in 1905, with their foundry producing most of the components. The agent for selling the cars was Glovers of Witham.

The engine was a four-cylinder, 2,418 cc bi-block design giving the car a maximum speed of 28 mph. The engine was over-square (a design with a relatively large cylinder bore and a short stroke), and sadly the British government began to tax cars according to the diameter of their cylinders. This meant the tax was lower on cars with a longer stroke and a smaller bore, such as the Ford mono-block engine, and the Bentall car became impossible to sell. E H Bentall had invested £60,000 in tooling for their car (a sum equivalent to about £7m in 2021) and they had to make drastic savings. They stopped producing the car in 1912, after building about 100 cars.

(E&OE)

The Heybridge and Langford Light Railway Company​

My story begins on a December evening in 1887, when the directors of E H Bentall found themselves enjoying a few beers with the owners of the navigation in the Heybridge Inn. By now, the scant regard shown by E H Bentall to the navigation before the coming of the Maldon railway had been gracefully forgotten, and indeed the two companies now worked side by side. The navigation brought fuel and raw materials to Bentalls, and carried away the agricultural products for export.

Heybridge was thriving, but both parties feared being ‘left behind’ now the railways had established themselves throughout Great Britain. The nearest railhead was at Maldon (the terminus of the Great Eastern branch from Witham), most of a mile away and reached by way of a rutted and unmaintained road; and the navigation, whilst extending most of twelve miles to Chelmsford, lacked a direct interchange with a railway.

The provision of a short railway from Heybridge Basin through Heybridge to join the Great Eastern Railway near Langford was an affordable and practical link, needing no significant earthworks or bridges. In fact, the route of the line was almost ready-made across open fields. Two level crossings would be needed: one to let the railway cross the road beside Wave Bridge (1), and a second across the farm track leading to Wickham Bishops near the northern end of Holloway Road.

The railway would provide a new means of communication and help the economy of the region to grow. The railhead at Heybridge Basin would let the basin compete with the dock at Maldon, with new coastal traffic bringing freight for Witham and Braintree and beyond. The basin would also allow transhipment of specialised wagonload freight too small to justify an entire barge. The idea appealed to Bentalls very much, they were becoming frustrated by the delays and damage caused by wheel and axle fractures during transit along the road to Maldon station.

Both companies wanted to attract more workers, and a rail link would let them tap into the growing population of Witham. Logically, the railway would also attract completely new businesses to Heybridge, in particular the commercial harvesting of salt. After some careful deliberation and of course some more beers, the Heybridge and Langford Light Railway Company was duly formed. The shareholders comprised Bentalls and the navigation; and also the Earl of Langford, a local landowner who rather fancied a private station along the route.

The railway would be built as a light railway as defined by the Regulation of the Railways Act of 1868, and in January 1888 the company submitted a formal Notice of Application to the Board of Trade. The primary reason for the Notice of Application was to obtain permission to run passenger trains.

The Board of Trade received no formal objections or representations, and duly granted the company a Licence to construct and operate their branch line as a Light Railway. The maximum axle weight would be 8 tons and speeds would be no higher than 25 mph, in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 1868.

Construction and Opening of the Railway​

The construction of the railway was helped a great deal by the fact that the Earl of Langford and the navigation owned all of the land along the route. The Company decided to build their railway in two stages. The section from Heybridge to Langford would be first, and the extension to Heybridge Basin would follow after the business had gained sufficient receipts.

The company promptly engaged the services of T A Walker contractors to build the first stage of the railway, and construction started in 1888. Walker’s had substantial experience of railway work from their efforts on the Manchester Ship Canal, and brought with them a Manning Wardle K class locomotive to do the work. Hitherto unseen records show this locomotive to have been MW works number 1032, completed and supplied in 1888.

Construction was swift and the railway opened in the autumn of 1889 to connect Heybridge with the Great Eastern Railway near Langford, on their branch line from Witham to Maldon.

Map of the Heybridge Railway (external link to Google Maps)

The rails at Heybridge stopped just short of Goldhanger Road, with modest but adequate facilities provided for freight and passengers. Heybridge station provided a low platform with a simple wooden shelter, and the Company set up its offices beside the station. Langford North station served as a public interchange with the GER branch to Maldon, and as a private station for nearby Langford Hall.

From the limited accounts I have been able to find, the new railway probably opened to the public on Wednesday 3rd October 1889. This event was not reported in the local press; we can imagine it was overshadowed by the news of the long-awaited line from Maldon West to Woodham Ferrers, which had opened on the previous day.

Around 1892, the foundry built a self-contained standard-gauge railway of its own. This was inside the works of E H Bentall and I imagine it was the "tramway" recorded in more authoritative histories.

The extension of the line to Heybridge Basin followed in 1894. The railway wrote to the local council to request permission to construct the level crossing over Goldhanger Road, but did not receive a timely reply. The contractors therefore proceeded to build the crossing, improving the road in the process. The council discovered the level crossing some months later and decided that the road was now in such an improved condition they could only thank the railway company for their work.

The railway ran beside the towing path for the remaining mile to Heybridge Basin, where wagonload freight was transhipped to and from coastal vessels and, less frequently, to and from the barges using the navigation. The operations of the railway complemented those of the navigation and did not compete with them. Around this time, a bridge was erected across the navigation at Heybridge to connect the railway to the foundry inside the Bentall works.

The Heybridge and Langford Light Railway was now complete.

- -

(1) The present Colchester Road (B1022) at Wave Bridge is called Goldhanger Road or Broad Street Green Road in some historical accounts.
(2) The Ordnance Survey 6 inch map 1888 - 1913 of Heybridge shows Wave Bridge as Goldhanger Bridge but this name has not appeared in any historical accounts In have seen.

 

[Richard Gawler]

Part 2: Traffic and Traction​

Railway Locomotives​

The railway used steam haulage from the outset. The foundry operated its own locomotives and would hire these out to the railway from time to time; and in later years the GER operated through services onto the branch. The railway also hired-in a locomotive from the NER. During the heyday of the line, a keen observer could expect to see locomotives from four different operators: the railway, the GER, the NER and the foundry.

Passenger and Mail Services​

The railway ran a passenger train on its opening day, and the advertised passenger services continued until 1907.

The company possessed a third class saloon coach. I have not found any photographs or drawings of this vehicle but the popular use of the passenger train for mail and market goods suggest a mixed train with some items carried in the break van and possibly an open wagon as well.

The usual service was for the coach to make two return trips to Langford each day, Monday to Saturday, with an additional round trip on Witham market days. The GER never allowed the coach to run beyond Langford, and so passengers had to make short walk from the H&LLR platform (“Langford North”) to the GER halt nearby.

The need to use the break van for these trains was a constant nuisance and in 1894 the railway acquired a brake third coach. This was similar in appearance to the Stroudley designs for the LB&SCR. This coach became the mainstay of the railway’s passenger services, usually supplemented by the saloon on market days.

The owners of the railway possessed a private saloon of uncertain provenance. This vehicle provided accommodation for visiting dignitaries and their staff and personal belongings, as well as for the directors themselves. On fair days and other special occasions, this coach ran a shuttle service to Langford coupled to the other coaches.

By 1907 passenger receipts had dwindled to almost nothing, and the company took the decision to withdraw all public passenger services. The GER renamed their station nearby to ‘Maldon East and Heybridge’. The railway became a freight-only operation for the rest of its existence, although the GER ran special passenger trains for agricultural shows. The private saloon still appeared from time to time, typically carrying customers for E H Bentall or the Earl of Langford and his guests from Langford.

Goods Traffic​

The wagons seen on the railway included examples belonging to the GER; some private owner wagons belonging to E H Bentall and the Heybridge Salt Company and from further afield; and a very few ‘foreign’ wagons. The railway possessed a handful of wagons of its own, used for service operations and for traffic to and from Heybridge Basin.

The freight carried on the railway included the following items:

Incoming, by rail via Langford​

• High-grade coal, for iron smelting at E H Bentall
• From 1900, coke (during the 19th century the Bentall works coked its own coal)
• Lubricating oil, for E H Bentall
• Rubber products, including tyres for motor cars
• Feedstuffs, for livestock
• Bulk manure, for fruit crops
• Tar, for the building trade
• Road stone
• Bricks, from local brickworks
• Provisions, for workers who had moved here from Scotland
• Machinery, for agricultural shows
• Market produce, from Witham

Incoming, transhipped from coastal vessel at Heybridge Basin​

These commodities were for local use; the navigation carrired the bulk freight to Chelmsford.

• Timber, from Scandinavia

Incoming, transhipped from barge at Heybridge Wharf​

These commodities were for local use; the navigation carrired the bulk freight to Chelmsford.

• Coal, from the North East of England

Outgoing​

• Agricultural equipment, from E H Bentall
• General castings, from the foundry inside the Bentall works
• Salt, from the Heybridge Salt Company
• Fruit produce (seasonal)
• Hay, if the harvest had been good (seasonal)
• Market produce, to Witham
• From 1905, motor cars, built by E H Bentall and dispatched to their agent Glover’s in Witham

The railway never tried to develop a sustainable traffic in livestock; the GER at Maldon did it better. Nevertheless, individual wagons would have brought prize cattle and sheep to the agricultural show held in 1908. Two notable omissions from these lists are pig iron and lime. These were carried to E H Bentall by the navigation not the railway.

Operations​

The goods traffic on the railway was founded on wagonload freight, with wagons running throughout the length of the line on a “runs when required” basis. The interchange with the rest of the railway network was by way of an exchange siding at Langford Junction.

As far as I can make out, the railway’s own wagons were too decrepit to work beyond Langford Junction. Certainly, no historic photographs of them have emerged during my studies.

By 1897, the congestion in the exchange siding had become unbearable and the incessant shunting manoeuvres were interfering with the operation of the Maldon branch. The GER began to run through workings onto the railway, usually on non-market days, using the path otherwise used for the additional market-day only passenger services. After the regular passenger services ceased, the through workings ran up to six days a week.

 

[Richard Gawler]

Part 3: Closure and Legacy​

The railway never made a taxable profit. The line managed to break even during a few years, notably after the commencement of the salt traffic, but the company relied on subsidy and goodwill payments from local businesses and patrons throughout its life.

In 1910, the railway lost its salt traffic, and a few months later Essex County Council rebuilt Wave Bridge. The bridge works included new embankments for the approach roads on each side, cutting off the line to Heybridge Basin. The railway had no money to build earthworks of its own and reinstate the line and, with a better public road from Heybridge to Maldon, many local businesses took their custom to the GER station at Maldon.

1912 was worse. E H Bentall had supported the railway from its inception and had indeed subsidised the operation for many years, but the failure of their motor car project meant the ability to dispatch their agricultural products from a nearby railhead was now a luxury. They withdrew their funding for the railway and it was inevitable, barely two years after the loss of the salt traffic and the Heybridge Basin extension, the railway would close to all traffic in 1912.

Local folklore says, the Directors of the railway company offered the line to the Great Eastern Railway for the sum of one shilling, but they declined. The GER had no desire to operate a railway in competition with one of their own. The sheer awkwardness of the facilities at Langford Junction probably paid its part here too. Langford would always be too small to justify a second passenger station, and the existing GER halt was better placed to serve the village.

The closure of the railway required the removal of railway’s ancient rolling stock. The GER had stopped using dumb-buffered stock some years ago, and so in the spring of 1913 they brought in one of their brand-new low machinery (Lomac) wagons to remove the stock one item at a time.
The Directors had the presence of mind to remove the nameplates from ‘Blackwater’ and these relics are now in private hands. Walker’s lifted the tracks later in 1913, and the locomotive Blackwater returned to their capital stock. The locomotive works list of Manning Wardle shows the locomotive was named ‘Thornton’ and exported to Buenos Aires.

E H Bentall recovered their losses and returned to prosperity. They became a public company in 1946, opened a new foundry in 1949, and sold the business in 1961. Their Heybridge works finally closed in 1984. Their modern offices, located on the opposite side of the navigation, were rebuilt to become the Bentalls Shopping Centre. The navigation worked as a commercial waterway well into the 20th century, carrying timber until 1972. When the timber traffic ceased, the waterway became a place for recreation.


Today, we can easily imagine the route of the railway along the side of the Long Pond and beneath the shadow of the former Bentalls warehouse. In particular, there is a chain line fence beside the towing path where the navigation passes behind the Bentalls Shopping Centre and the disused paper factory. The line of this fence would mark the edge of the formation of the railway. The formation itself is therefore buried under the concrete hard standing of modern developments, but we can easily visualise the close relationship between the railway, E H Bentall and the waterway.

 

[Richard Gawler]

Part 4: Representing the Railway in a Model

​

Locomotives
We can reasonably suppose that following locomotives regularly worked the railway:

• Company locomotives No.1 'Blackwater' and No.3 'Kingfisher'
• Foundry locomotives 'Heybridge' and the crane tank 'Nellie'
• GER locomotives including a class Y14 freight locomotive

The railway also operated an ex-LB&SCR ‘Terrier’ locomotive. This was allocated number 4 but probably never carried its name ‘Heybridge’. Details of locomotive number 2 ‘River Pant’ remain sketchy.

Visitors to the line would have included those hired in while a company or foundry locomotive was undergoing an overhaul, and other GER locomotives able to work across the timber viaducts at Langford.

Passenger Coaches​

I have not found any records of the various passenger coaches and so it seems best to represent these using models of coaches typical of the times:

• A four-wheel saloon coach similar to a NER design
• A six-wheel brake composite with a large first class saloon and compartments for staff and luggage

Wagons for Goods Traffic
Contemporary photographs of British railways suggest a ratio of covered vans to open wagons of 1:5 or even 1:6, and this is probably about right for railway companies with an indigenous coal or other mineral supply within their network. The HMRS did an analysis of a few companies, and found the LSWR (with its access to several mineral producers) was around 1:5 while the GER had a ratio of around 1:3.5. [HMRS Journal January 1992]

Bearing in mind that the navigation carried the bulk coal, we might suppose that the ratio of covered vans to open wagons on the railway was closer to 1:3, and a more detailed breakdown of the wagons might look like this:

• GER wagons were the majority, perhaps 75%
• Approximately 50% of the open wagons carrying general merchandise was sheeted
• Many of the covered vans were from other railways (beyond the GER) because the traffic was be more likely to be special
• There were some ‘foreign’ wagons (from beyond the GER) but they only arrived for good reason
• Foreign wagons were not common user (this was before pooling) and were always returned empty

Wagon demurrage payments were based on how many days a foreign wagon spent on the property. The railway would frequently perform a “midnight shunt” to put these wagons into the exchange siding at Langford where they would be on another railway’s property when the next daily census was taken.

Some Snapshots of the Railway​

The Railway in 1893​

The usual locomotive on the line was of course the Manning Wardle 0-6-0 left behind by Walkers. This locomotive was found to suit the railway perfectly and was duly named ‘Blackwater’. It weighed just 19 tons (so barely 7 tons per axle, well within the eight-ton limit on the line), and handled the short trains on the line with ease.

In some contrast to this nearly-new locomotive, the company began its operations with a collection of superannuated rolling stock:

• a vintage chaldron wagon, used for the coal supplies for the yard at Heybridge before the construction of the coal staithes
• an ex-Midland Railway wagon with drop sides, used for permanent way work
• a NBR ‘Jubilee’ coal wagon, used to move coal within the confines of the railway
• the 4-wheeled saloon
• a brake van of unknown parentage, similar to one used on the Mid-Wales Railway

The company had no need to own any revenue-earning stock beyond the coach. Instead, the line saw a colourful and eclectic mix of private-owner wagons and the occasional through working from one of the major railway companies. The wagons seen most frequently were the following:

• open wagons carrying small quantities of iron ore and specialist grades of coal for E H Bentall and their foundry
• a five-plank open wagon belonging to E H Bentall, usually seen sheeted over to protect the agricultural implements inside from the weather
• a salt wagon belonging to the start-up Heybridge Salt Company
• a wagon for lime, for the local building trade
• a carriage wagon, the personal property of Edward Ernest Bentall

The railway intended to carry livestock and build a cattle dock beside its goods shed. This side of the business was never a great success, because the GER catered for livestock at Maldon.

The Railway in 1898​

• The company now owned a few revenue-earning wagons for internal services between Heybridge Basin and Heybridge, including a box van
• Through workings by the GER used a class Y14 locomotive built in 1891 or 1892
• The railway provided stabling for a private coach belonging to E H Bentall

The Railway in 1908

• Open wagons arrived carrying bought-in parts for the Bentall car, notably tyres
• A GWR ‘Hydra’ wagon was recorded on the railway, this might have been bringing machinery to E H Bentall or a ploughing engine to the agricultural show held this year
• The private coach and the saloon ran together to provide a shuttle service for the agricultural show
• Through workings by the GER used a class R24 tank locomotive

Dismantling in 1913

• a GER Lomac wagon built in 1913 was used to remove the older rolling stock no longer allowed to run on GER metals

- -


Acknowledgement
I will always be very grateful for the work of Beryl Claydon, who wrote a book on Heybridge, "In and Around Heybridge in the 19th and 20th Centuries". It is a not a scholarly book, but rather a collection of memories of people who lived there. It is also an excellent read.

 

[Osgood]

What a thorough and well-conceived back story!

Not having digested the Timeline Appendix first I assumed the issue with the Bentall car engine design and legislation was part of the made-up stuff, but some quick research proved otherwise - fascinating piece of history.

The AGE collapse was quite a calamity for the thirteen or so engineering firms involved, it was fortunate that EE was able to acquire the company shares back from the Receiver - for some other member companies the future was not so good.

 

[Richard Gawler]

There is one bit of the made-up stuff which is a bit flimsy but I gave up on the research. This is the original Wave Bridge, which took the main road across the navigation at Heybridge.


The present-day bridge was attended to, repaired, or even rebuilt, in 1910.

The landscape here is very flat and low-lying and the bridge is approached by shallow embankments. The roadway is too high to make for an easy level crossing for the railway (to the left of this photo) and too low to let the railway share a broadened towing path and pass underneath.

So I am imagining, there was a lifting bridge here, much closer to the level of the water, before 1910. This is unlikely but not too preposterous; the level of road traffic would have been a tiny fraction of what it is today. Innocence is bliss; I don't know what the original bridge looked like.

 

[Herb Garden]

Final details before painting.

View attachment 184784
The door handles, buffers, coupling hook and vacuum pipes are all from the kit.

I used the lathe to bore the holes in the buffer stocks, and to dress the buffer heads. I tried to double up the door handles to make them look a bit more robust but I dropped the first pair onto the carpet. Even with only four doors to equip I could see I was going to run out of handles so these are single thickness parts from the kit.

View attachment 184783
The buffer heads are resting loose here for the photograph. The castings for the axleboxes and springs are neat and well-made but I will leave these off for now. So I can remove the wheels and their axles during painting.

View attachment 184785
'Blackwater' doesn't have a train brake and the van is unfitted too, but I can see the sort of look I want for my railway in here.

Beautiful work Richard!!

 

[Herb Garden]

Part 4: Representing the Railway in a Model

​

Locomotives
We can reasonably suppose that following locomotives regularly worked the railway:

• Company locomotives No.1 Blackwater and No.3 Kingfisher
• Foundry locomotives No.1 (a Manning Wardle F class) and No.2 Nellie
• GER locomotives including a class Y14 freight locomotive

Visitors to the line would have included those hired in while a company or foundry locomotive was undergoing an overhaul, and other GER locomotives able to work across the timber viaducts at Langford.

Passenger Coaches​

I have not found any records of the various passenger coaches and so it seems best to represent these using models of coaches typical of the times:

• A four-wheel saloon coach similar to a NER design
• A six-wheel brake composite with a large first class saloon and compartments for staff and luggage

Wagons for Goods Traffic
Contemporary photographs of British railways suggest a ratio of covered vans to open wagons of 1:5 or even 1:6, and this is probably about right for railway companies with an indigenous coal or other mineral supply within their network. The HMRS did an analysis of a few companies, and found the LSWR (with its access to several mineral producers) was around 1:5 while the GER had a ratio of around 1:3.5. [HMRS Journal January 1992]

Bearing in mind that the navigation carried the bulk coal, we might suppose that the ratio of covered vans to open wagons on the railway was closer to 1:3, and a more detailed breakdown of the wagons might look like this:

• GER wagons were the majority, perhaps 75%
• Approximately 50% of the open wagons carrying general merchandise was sheeted
• Many of the covered vans were from other railways (beyond the GER) because the traffic was be more likely to be special
• There were some ‘foreign’ wagons (from beyond the GER) but they only arrived for good reason
• Foreign wagons were not common user (this was before pooling) and were always returned empty

Wagon demurrage payments were based on how many days a foreign wagon spent on the property. The railway would frequently perform a “midnight shunt” to put these wagons into the exchange siding at Langford where they would be on another railway’s property when the next daily census was taken.

Some Snapshots of the Railway​

The Railway in 1893​

The usual locomotive on the line was of course the Manning Wardle 0-6-0 left behind by Walkers. This locomotive was found to suit the railway perfectly and was duly named ‘Blackwater’. It weighed just 19 tons (so barely 7 tons per axle, well within the eight-ton limit on the line), and handled the short trains on the line with ease.

In some contrast to this nearly-new locomotive, the company began its operations with a collection of superannuated rolling stock:

• a vintage chaldron wagon, used for the coal supplies for the yard at Heybridge before the construction of the coal staithes
• an ex-Midland Railway wagon with drop sides, used for permanent way work
• a NBR ‘Jubilee’ coal wagon, used to move coal within the confines of the railway
• the 4-wheeled coach
• a brake van of unknown parentage, similar to one used on the Mid-Wales Railway

The company had no need to own any revenue-earning stock beyond the coach. Instead, the line saw a colourful and eclectic mix of private-owner wagons and the occasional through working from one of the major railway companies. The wagons seen most frequently were the following:

• open wagons carrying small loads of iron ore and specialist grades of coal for E H Bentall and their iron works
• a five-plank open wagon belonging to E H Bentall, usually sheeted over to protect the agricultural implements inside from the weather
• a salt wagon belonging to the start-up Heybridge Salt Company
• lime, for the local building trade
• a carriage wagon, the personal property of Edward Ernest Bentall

The railway intended to carry livestock and build a cattle dock beside its goods shed. This side of the business was never a great success, because the GER catered for livestock at Maldon.

The Railway in 1898​

• Through workings by the GER used a class Y14 locomotive built in 1891 or 1892

The Railway in 1908

• Open wagons carrying bought-in parts for the Bentall car, notably tyres
• A GWR ‘Hydra’ wagon was recorded on the ralway, this might have been bringing machinery to E H Bentall or a ploughing engine to the agricultural show held this year
• Through workings by the GER used a class R24 tank locomotive

Dismantling in 1913

• a GER Lomac wagon built in 1913 was used to remove the older rolling stock no longer allowed to run on GER metals.

- -

There are more details of the railway in the timeline attached to this post.

Well that has been a magnificent and thoroughly enjoyable read Richard! I very much look forward to the publication of the locomotion paper on the subject.

Puts your marvelous work into context of what you are planning as well looking forward to seeing more

 

[Richard Gawler]

It seems to me, that while the design of the steam locomotive had been pretty much thought through by 1864 (when Manning Wardle built their first K class), the rolling stock was still evolving. Indeed, it seems incredible that on the passenger trains of the GER, "six wheel stock remained prevalent on the secondary main line trains until after the first world war whilst the long cross country trains rarely had bogie stock until well after Grouping" (*). In the 1900s, the GWR were building fitted wagons with steel underframes while other railways were still using wagons with dumb buffers.

So - the period 1889 to 1913 fits in with local events and a personal desire to "write off" the railway before the end of the Great War, and also gives me a good choice of possible wagon and coach designs.

(*) from the web site of the GER Society at Introduction

 

[Osgood]

One of our most favourite paintings (it makes us both smile every time we look at it) is also our smallest, the painting itself being just 3" x 2.75".
The artist was Brian Cunningham and we acquired it in 1992, believing it to be newly painted.

Having taken it apart yesterday to clean the mount and glass I studied it further - the locomotive's origin had always been a puzzle and the coaches seemed too short.

I now wonder if this scene might have been painted in 1892, not 1992 (it merely shows 92), and remounted / reframed a hundred years later before it came our way.

In which case - could what we are looking at here be an accurate rendition of a Heybridge Railway train?
Could that really be EH or EE waving at the painter from his recently converted private coach?

If so, you have some more homework - the train comprises 3 x very short and very early 4 wheel coaches, what are the origins of the locomotive (it must be the Railway's or hired in as it is not a known GER type), there is an overbridge, and the line appears to have been fully signalled (unless this view is of the HR train on the GER branch, but then surely the signal posts would be timber not iron lattice....).

 

[Richard Gawler]

Thanks for this Tony, a most informative find. This first known coloured illustration of the Heybridge Railway confirms the colour of the railway’s locomotive No.3 “Kingfisher” and shows the coaches to have been painted brown and not a MSLR style maroon as I had previously imagined.

I need hardly point out, the artist has exercised some licence here, in particular by representing the spire of the church at nearby Wickham Bishops near its correct location but nestled amongst multiple hills and not perched on top of the only hill for miles around. The road bridge here is in the style of those we see on the navigation and uses a similar colour of bricks, a reasonable compromise to depict a railway with no bridges of its own.

You mention the small size of the illustration. I think it has been cut from early publicity material for the railway, and this is evidenced by its depiction of three 4-wheel coaches while records do suggest the railway had only one.

Nevertheless, an important document and I know you won’t mind me saving a copy of your photograph in my growing archive of records relating to the railway.

 

[Richard Gawler]

I cleared off the workbench earlier this week and worked my way through all of my kit-built wagons, looking to see how they are coping with the effects of time. The oldest is from September 2021. I keep them all in a display cabinet in the hobby room, and this is the room where I do my soldering with all of its concerns about corrosive atmospheres.

Well, the good news is I found beginnings of rust on just two buffer heads and no wheels. Most of the wheel treads are blackened (gun blue) but I have never oiled them. I read about oiling them somewhere on WT and they all now have the lightest smear of a light machine oil. Time will tell whether this makes the track dirty but it seems like a good idea for now while they only run for for playing trains ("test running") and on the club track and other people's layouts.

I banished the Fry's Yellow to a cupboard a while ago and I am using dilute phosphoric acid as flux for soldering. Maybe this is sensible when the room contains finished models with mild steel parts.

 

[Herb Garden]

That's an interesting thought about soldering creating a corrosive atmosphere I've never heard of that before....

I'm in a similar situation where all my models, home office, old layout and workbench are in a 8ft square room. Yep it's tight. But I've not noticed anything untoward. And I've had models in there since 2018. This might be due to using resin based flux rather than acid and extraction gear for the fumes (when I remember to turn it on that is).

The one thing I do notice is that the brass models in the room tarnish remarkably quickly.... I don't know if that's related to the environment but the material scientist in me is keen to find out....

 

[simond]

My workbench, and all the toxic, volatile, flammable and corrosive nasties, pointed things, sharps, etc. thereon is in our lounge and has been since we moved to our current abode 25 years ago come July. And before that, it was split between garage and lounge to previous house. It doesn’t seem to have caused any problems at all. It‘s as well to avoid paint spraying, or cooking superglue, however. That does tend to rouse the natives…

The children were told from a very early age never to touch anything on Daddy’s bench unless Daddy was present, and that wasn’t an issue either, they were marginally interested then, and frankly they’re still not very interested now, though I did come back one day a year or two ago to find MsD with safety glasses in place busily turning a brass component on the Unimat for something she was doing.

One day the extension will get built, and then the lounge will be boringly conventional - maybe I’ll install a motorbike.

 

[Richard Gawler]

There are five kit-built wagons with similar buffers in the display cabinet, and only two buffers on one wagon had started to rust. So this is surely from physical contamination on these buffer heads, not an atmospheric problem.

 

[Richard Gawler]

My ex-Mid Wales Railway break van has never run particularly well. It was adequate on my test track at home but it didn't cope very well on layouts where there is a minor sideways step between the rails at baseboard joints. This was because most if not all of the wheels were not square on their axles, so the B2Bs varied as the wheels went round.

So I have reworked the wheels, putting them onto new axles and arranging them in some suspension units from First Class Kits.


This photo is simply how I originally built the model. The wheels were supplied with the kit (SixteenMill kit) but not fitted on their axles and I expect most of the problem came from me being unable to press them onto the axles squarely at the time.


I now have a lathe. I cut new axles from some 1/8 inch brass rod, and bored out the wheel centres to suit. The rod measures 0.125 inch diameter, the shank of the drill bit measures 0.123 inch but I still ended up with a fit slightly looser than I really wanted. So I put some CA glue into the wheel centres and pressed the first wheels onto their axles using the tailstock spindle. Starting the motor, these wheels actually ran true.


The wheel carriers fold up from a brass etch. I pressed on the second two wheels between the face of the chuck jaws and the tailstock spindle, this wasn't quite so effective. I still have a run-out on both pairs of wheels (about 0.1 mm) but this is a lot better than whatever was there when I started.

The wheel carriers block the spaces for the springs and split pins on the coupling hooks so the hooks are now secured with epoxy glue.


Back in service.

When I push this model along the track by hand, finger tips gently pressing down on the roof, I can feel a slight eccentricity somewhere. I expect, my school metalworking teachers would be telling me to use the four-jaw chuck and set it up properly to hold the wheels for boring out the axle holes, and not the self-centring chuck. However, the wheels are more orthogonal on their axles now. I will find out the result on the next trip to the club layout.

 

[Chas Levin]

Just thinking about the tarnishing question; tarnishing occurs as a reaction to oxygen, but other things can produce similar results - acid, oil and so forth, so I'd be inclined to agree that contamination may be causing some of it. And certainly, in a situation where you have several vehicles in the same environment but only one shows tarnish, that must surely indicate contamination of those particular buffers.

 

[David Waite]

Hi Richard
What type of lathe do you have?
I just noticed dose the 3 jaw chuck on the lathe work like a drill chuck with a key?
David.