Talk:City and South London Railway

Great stuff!

Just read this article after seeing it on the main page. What a thoroughly interesting read -- nice work by all involved! – ukexpat (talk) 02:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Protection

Any particular reason why the article wasn't move-protected? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

yes, it should have been locked as soon as it was obvious an idiot was messing it up.Liverpool-8-boy (talk) 21:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

first major railway to use electric traction

The lead sentence for this railway that opened in 1890 currently reads:

The City and South London Railway (C&SLR) was the first deep-level underground "tube" railway in the world, and the first major railway to use electric traction.

What is a "tube" railway? It is new to me. It looks like something dreamed up to claim some first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.91.123 (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

but it might be worthwhile to note that the Berlin tram had an electric line operating by 1881 (the railway started in 1865 comprised mostly of horse trams, but was in 1881 and is still today a major electric traction railway), the Capital City Street Railway was an electric tram in operation in Montgomery Alabama by April 15, 1886, and the Richmond Union Passenger Railway began regular operation in Richmond, Virginia by February 2, 1888. Perhaps the lead should be reworded to mention that it was "one of the first major railways to use electric traction" or "the first major British railway to use electric traction" instead. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 23:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't the first electric tramway by a Russian, in now present day Finland?79.65.29.228 (talk) 13:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

That would be Miller's line mentioned below.--DavidCane (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

It's certainly true that these tram systems were earlier users of electric traction, but I think the distinction does need to be made between railways and trams. I'll think about how best to deal with this - probably in a footnote.--DavidCane (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

There is also a claim that Miller's line was electrified (at least for experimental runs) as early as in 1875 by Fyodor Pirotsky. It too was regarded as a tram and not a railway. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Tramways and railways are different. Maybe a link from one to the other is in order.79.65.91.123 (talk) 05:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

The C&SLR's main achievements were to prove that extensive tunnelling was feasible for city-based transit; and furthermore that electric traction was the way to do it. The significance of this is currently stated as: The technologies of deep tube tunnelling and electric traction pioneered and proved by the C&SLR shaped the direction of subsequent underground railways built in London. (Emphasis added.) This understates the influence, which eventually extended to almost all very large cities in the industrialized world. Oaklandguy (talk) 18:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Don't forget the distinction that tramways utilise single units (or propulsion unit + trailer) whereas a railway has trains. Useddenim (talk) 01:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Volk's Electric Railway

Curiosity more than anything led me to take the train from London to Brighton a couple of days ago and investigate Volk's Electric Railway. According to their website [1]],

"Opened in 1883, Volk's Electric Railway is the 'world's oldest operating electric railway'."

I wonder what editors of the CSLR article make of that. best, Sunil060902 (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

There's no doubt that Volk's line was operational before the C&SLR (that's why this article says "first major railway to use electric traction" in the lead), but Volk's line is narrow gauge and quite short, so it did not really meet the standard of a "proper" railway.--DavidCane (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

But what constitutes a "proper railway"? Just want a NOR source. Might it be better to say CSLR was "first standard gauge railway to use electric traction"? best, Sunil060902 (talk) 22:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Edward Hopkinson

Noting that Hopkinson is not mention in this article, but should be (is noted elsewhere ie London_Underground_electric_locomotives#City_.26_South_London_Railway

He was the designer of the locomotives and electrical generating system eg [2]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City and South London Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070815041850/http://homepage.ntlworld.com/clivebillson/tube/tube.html#The%20Real%20Underground%20Map to http://homepage.ntlworld.com/clivebillson/tube/tube.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:43, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Accidental addition

@Redrose64: City and South London Railway#Haulage and infrastructure. Cable car (railway) was meant to be added at City and South London Railway#See also. Peter Horn User talk 15:17, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't qualify there, since it's already linked in the phrase "... owned the rights to the Hallidie cable-car system first invented ...", see WP:SEEALSO 'As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body'. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:22, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Agreed. Peter Horn User talk 17:22, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Article is incorrect.

Quote 'The City and South London Railway (C&SLR) was the first deep-level underground "tube" railway in the world'.

Not true. The C&SLR first opened in 1890. The Tower Subway beat it by twenty years (1870). It qualifies as a deep level tube railway because the tunnel was 50 to 60 feet below ground level and was bored in the same manner as the C&SLR using a tunnelling shield. It may have operated for less than a year, but it did operate. It was cable hauled (as the C&SLR) was intended to be. What the article can legitimately claim is, 'The City and South London Railway (C&SLR) was the first deep-level electric underground "tube" railway in the world'. Or even, 'The City and South London Railway (C&SLR) was the first deep-level standard gauge underground "tube" railway in the world' (the tower subway was narrow gauge). Or even a combination of both. DocFergus (talk) 12:15, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

The Tower subway was more like an elevator laid flat. Cables hauled a car from one side of the river to the other. 2A01:4B00:BB18:A600:E738:4C0D:38F4:6829 (talk) 19:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

World's oldest - dispute

I want to clarify something regarding the opening paragraph as the central section of the Mersey Railway is advertised as the first 'deep-level' railway in the world and, according to its own article, opened in 1886 (although that source says 1898 - which of them is correct?). It's not a 'Tube' though as it's double-tracked in that section. | 🔬🚆 |   Telo | TP   | 22:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@ADTelo: The number of tracks does not determine a tube railway, it is the shape of the tunnel. This article says

... was the first deep-level underground "tube" railway in the world,^[1]

The word "tube" is the significant qualifier, and that note clarifies it. The Mersey Railway tunnels are not cylindrical. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

"tube" is insignificant. A tunnel is a tunnel. No matter what construction method is used. This is scraping the barrel to get a first. Pretty sad really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:1095:253f:1:2:49f9:b59b (talk) 22:53, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

The Mersey Rail tunnel was bored with a TBM in the early 1880s. It is cylindrical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:1095:253f:1:2:49f9:b59b (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

a) It wasn't, TBMs weren't developed until the 1950s, the "drum diggers" used for the construction of the Victoria line being amongst the first true TBMs. Prior to then, simpler tunnelling shields such as those designed by Barlow or Greathead had been used.

b) It's not, this image shows a section through the Mersey Railway tunnel, which clearly isn't circular, an essential qualification for being cylindrical. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

If you two had bothered to even look at Wiki before typing.....most is there Tunnel boring machine . It was a Beamont TBM, operated by compressed air. Google also bring it as well. Frederick Beaumont the inventor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:1095:253f:1:2:49f9:b59b (talk) 22:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I suggest that you read the article that you linked. Beaumont's machine was used for driving a ventilation tunnel, which being 7 feet in diameter could not have carried the railway itself. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

You wrote TBMs were introduced in the 1950s, with no obvious knowledge of Beaumont's TBM. You were 70 years out. The Mersey Railway tunnel had a TBM for half of the vent shaft and also a pilot for part of the main tunnel, then expanded by hand/blast. The main tunnel is circular. The tunnel was at the leading edge of tunnelling at the time, with different approaches adopted during work progression. The design of the tunnel, drainage & ventilation tunnels and vertical shafts, was changed as work progressed. The experience gained on the Mersey Rail tunnel was used for all subsequent tunnelling.

Beaumont's TBM was enlarged then used successfully for the first abandoned Channel tunnel. The British Army stopped the construction for defence reasons.

C&SLR's only first

That was, it was the first "electric locomotive" hauled underground railway in the world. No other firsts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:1095:253f:1:2:49f9:b59b (talk) 20:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

A significant first though for 1890. And all stations were underground as well. No one took the lead from it apart from using electric traction, which was already in the planning for the 1893 Liverpool Overhead before the C&SL had to move to electric from the original cable design. The Liverpool Overhead was a trail blazer that most followed in a few ways. First to use EMUs with 3rd rail pickups and coloured signal lights. 2A01:4B00:BB18:A600:E738:4C0D:38F4:6829 (talk) 19:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)