Talk:Lambourn Valley Railway

Routemap tweaks

As requested, I have adjusted the following:

• Line ends 'frayed' using 'LUECKE' symbol
• Other railway line link names in italics (this is personal preference, but I think it helps to distinguish stations from lines.)
• Highlighted the junction station (Newbury), helps to 'lift' the name above the surrounding images/text.
• Moved most of the names from the 'notes' section into the 'station names' section (by removing a '|').

Also note that it is usual practice, on these pages, to provide a list of links to the settlements served. Elsewhere on the page, and particularly on the routemap, other links should point to the station article. Where no separate station article exists, feel free to create a redirect back to the page where you will be describing it. The redirect may then be added to the appropriate 'stations opened in <year>' and 'stations closed in <year>' categories, and noted as 'printworthy. (See Braunton railway station from the Ilfracombe Branch Line for an example of this).

Further enhancements could use the new {{RoutemapRoute}} template to indicate the direction of travel on the various lines, but the upgraded version has not been finalised yet.

Hope this helps

EdJogg 00:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

New {{RoutemapRoute}} template available for use. See template page for instructions.

EdJogg 17:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The route map shows two stations at Newbury, when in fact the Lambourn branch terminated in a bay platform at Newbury station. -- Sangwine (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Trains after 1905

Auto-trailers 7 & 8, not used with auto-fitted locos. Lewis 1991 p.111; Lewis 1995 p.338 --Redrose64 (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Light or Heavy?

Redrose64, you assert that LVR was not a light railway. Well, it certainly wasn't very heavy. I believe it was authorised under a light railway order wasn't it? I may be wrong but ISTR reading it somewhere. Unfortunately, I can't remember where. Anyway, for certain, it has been dismantled (very much so) and I'm pretty sure the length was about 12-13 miles so I'll revert those. Can someone confirm the light/heavy status? --Roly (talk) 20:07, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

This is not where I saw it before but these 2 sites seem to imply a LRO: http://www.britishrailways.info/LIGHT%20RAILWAYS%20SUMMARY.htm

LIGHT RAILWAYS: standard gauge

Light railways were built with economy in view and to lower engineering standards than others. The following serves as a check list of those companies that were established by means of a Light Railway Order. ... Lambourn Valley (G.W.R.) ...

http://www.lambournvalleyrailway.co.uk/pages/Lambourn/lambourn.htm

On March the 31st 1898 the Board of Trade inspection of The Lambourn Valley railway took place. The inspecting officer Col Yorke, declared that subject to a speed limit of 25 miles an hour and axle loadings not exceeding 8 tons, opening of the railway was approved. The private opening was set for Saturday April the 2nd 1898 and the full public opening for the following Monday the 4th of April. --Roly (talk) 20:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I didn't assert that the LVR was not a light railway - what I said was that it was not light rail, which is not the same thing at all. The LVR was indeed built under a Light Railway Order, pursuant to the Light Railways Act 1896 - but that makes it a Light railway, which is not at all the same as Light rail, which is the term that you used. A Light railway is a form of Heavy rail. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, a very subtle difference that I wasn't aware of! Is there some way of clarifying this in the text?--Roly (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)