Talk:Newmarket and Chesterford Railway

Proposed name change for article-- drop "Company"
Can we change the name of this article to drop "Company" from the title? Not much links to it, so it shouldn't be that hard or controversial to change.

I don't know formally how to make a proposal so for now I will just set down a

Reason for change: The railway itself and its operating company are two different things. The title is excessively long. Analogies with other railway articles (e.g. London and North Eastern Railway, Great Western Railway, Eastern Counties Railway ad nauseam) show that rarely is "Company" used in the title of the article.

While the article can and should of course mention the company, it need not be in the title.

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 16:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved from User Talk- Railway diagrams
I've moved this from User Talk, what started as a user talk has become more of an article talk SimonTrew (talk) 18:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC).

If you want to try and create a route diagram for the Chesterford & Newmarket Railway, you need to read this page first. It's best to create your own sandbox to work on it in peace without doing any damage elsewhere. Once diagram is completed to your satisfaction you can just copy & paste it into the article. If you need help creating a sandbox let me know. This page has all the symbols you'll need. Mjroots (talk) 17:10, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually it's already been done by Rich257. But I think he has got it a bit wrong-- the line from Six Mile Bottom to Newmarket is the Ipswich Ely line. So I will have a go at editing it!


 * I did see after I posted well yeah it is like a big jigsaw puzzle really. Scary too many pieces.

Diagram looks fine to me! No need to copy, I can manage between two pages. Mjroots (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I've just reverted that edit. The diagram was correct how it was. Best, Mjroots (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I've added Dullingham in. I am still a little unclear where the branch from the old and new lines is, especially with a bit of confusion as what is Warren Hill. On http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/n/newmarket_warren_hill/index.shtml it says it was moved but it's a bit hard to make out which one was named which-- the more south-westerly station is the current Newmarket station and Warren hill is beyond it (more north-westerly). So I am not sure if the diagram is correct really. It's been fun learning to edit it (brain racking too). SimonTrew (talk) 18:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Diagram is probably better without Dullingham until it is confirmed where railway left the currenlty open line (before/after Dullingham?). The open line needs to be in/out on same side, as currently the diagram suggests that the close line was north of the open one, which was not the case. I've redrawn a couple of other diagrams to include links to the line and article. Mjroots (talk) 18:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Well since it says that the section between Six Mile Bottom (aka 6MB) and Chesterford was closed, by implication that between Newmarket and 6MB remained open, which would include Dullingham. I think best to leave it on there for now. As far as I can tell, the new/old station "branch" was very close to Newmarket itself i.e. when the line was extended. Subterranea says "North of Warren Hill Station, there was a triangular junction that allowed trains to run either to Ely or Ipswich" so I assume:


 * The current line from 6MB to Newmarket is essentially the original routing.
 * What you have marked as Warren Hill is what became the current Newmarket station
 * What you have marked as Newmarket (Terminus) is what *was* the old Warren Hill.


 * From Google Earth you can see that the tunnel is north of the existing Newmarket station and south of what was the old Warren Hill. In fact there does not need to be a branch here for Newmarket/Ipswich to Ely line at all; it's the same line it's just it was continued (by the Eastern Railway Company, I assume) to Bury St Edmunds. So just a dotted continuation beyond Newmarket? You can see where the triangular junction is (including what must be the taken up third side of it) on satellite pictures at 52.2626N 0.4187E.


 * (Added later: Of course I meant aerial photos, was not trying to be specific as to how they were taken.) SimonTrew (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That would seem to make sense to me. Shall I knock up a diagram in my sandbox and see what you think? I think this would avoid the difficulty of left/right on the Ipswich/Ely line as well. What I really want to do is show that the old newmarket station as terminus is just a short stub and the main line (ipswich to ely line) is still in use between 6MB, Newmarket and beyond.


 * Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, checking Jowett's, there are three junctions North of Newmarket - Warren Hill, Snailwell and Chippenham Jcns. From what you say and what I have read on Sub. Brit., the new station was alongside the old. I'll have a go at the diagram in my sandbox and see what I can come up with. By all means copy this to the article's talk page, it will be better there. Mjroots (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah I had a go at trying to model the Newmarket area myself but am still not entirely happy with it. All of those junctions are north of Newmarket and so not on the N&CR-- much as I appreciate you adding them, is it necessary? I would just put Newmarket as the end station then an upward (dotted?) continuation to Ipswich to Ely Line (Cambridge branch). SimonTrew (talk) 18:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I should add, just for the removal of doubt as we have enough already, the "old" Newmarket station buildings (shown at Newmarket railway station are right next door to the current platform; they must simply have sold off the buildings to make a bit of cash and moved the platform 200 yards or so down the line. The new station is just a single platform with a bus shelter on it and a small bit of paid parking, of course a ticket machine. I believe it is unmanned. (Dullingham is manned as it has manually operated crossing gates. That chap must have one of the easiest jobs in the world since although he sits in the signal box I don't think he actually has to operate any signals, just open and close the gates, and the service is hardly frequent. Friendly chap though). SimonTrew (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Redrawn diagram
Does this look better? Mjroots (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That's cool, I think that really sums it up very nicely indeed. SimonTrew (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Was Warren Hill north of the tunnel? If so, I can redraw the diagram. Mjroots (talk) 19:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh dear I have got two pages editing at the same time now I am not sure which has "taken". Warren Hill, AFAICT, was both. It got renamed. I suggest maybe we put the current Newmarket railway station (which is south of the tunnel) as "Newmarket" and the one north of the tunnel as "Warren Hill", then use the fifth column to put dates as "Was named Warren Hill 18xx-19xx" or whatever with the dates. I am sure you know better than me what the convention is for that kind of thing. SimonTrew (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I agree, need to move Newmarket station and Warren Hill. Give me a few more minutes to redraw it. Mjroots (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I must admit I am still a little confused as to when the names were switched but I am sure you get the gist. Something like this:

According to Jowett's, the nearest junction to Newmarket was Warren Hill Junction. So I think the diagram should be something like this. Mjroots (talk) 19:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like we're pretty much in agreement then! Just the station naming we have to sort out. I am not a rail nut just happened to have lived around there. SimonTrew (talk) 19:31, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

My only worry is whether Warren Hill was north of the tunnel or not. From what I can find, I'd say that it probably was, but I'm not 100% sure. Will add redrawn diagram to article as it's easy to swap station and tunnel if needed. Mjroots (talk) 19:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah that is a bit of a worry I only have the Sub Brit article to go on, and its OS map. The two stations Newmarket are pretty much on opposite sides of the hill separated by the tunnel. I think the station itself is in the right place (north of the tunnel) just what its name was, and it seems it may have changed over time.


 * I don't quite understand the bit in the Newmarket (Suffolk) railway station article saying that Warren Hill was built for racing traffic from London. The current station is closer to the racecourses than Warren Hill would have been. Either that is a miscopy or the current Newmarket station must have taken a different name. That is a puzzle since you're not going to drive a tunnel under a hill simply to put a station in a more incovenient location for the racecourse. Something is fishy there. They must have driven the tunnel to extend the line to Bury etc.


 * Similarly do we need the (High Level) redlink? I don't know where this has come from-- not from me or you. As far as I understand, (High Level) is meant to indicate like when there are two stations say an underground and overground station pretty much at the same place. I can't see Newmarket qualifies for this, or was ever called this. Suggest remove it.


 * I guess this leads into then having to make some expansion to the Eastern Counties Railway.


 * I wonder why they took up the third arm of that triangle-- would be very useful. You can see from the satellite pictures that it takes a corner out of a field, I wonder if Network Rail still have the wayleave on it. Cambridge-Ely direct would still be faster, I guess really it's only Dullingham and Newmarket that suffer by not having this (and having to go to Cambridge or Bury St Edmunds and then back again). SimonTrew (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Newmarket to Ipswich passed through Warren Hill Jcn and then Chippenham Jcn. Newmarket to Ely via Fordham passed through Warren Hill and then Snailwell Jcn. Don't know if this is of use or not. The diagram for the Ipswich to Ely line need redrawing yet again, but I'll tackle that tomorrow. Mjroots (talk) 19:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I added the High Level link - see [http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/n/newmarket/index.shtml Sub. Brit article]. There were two stations parallel to each other. Mjroots (talk) 19:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It's looking really nice. Thanks for all your help. SimonTrew (talk) 20:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Having studied the Sub. Brit. page carefully, I've come up with this diagram, which shows the new (1902) Newmarket station as described there, and the old LL/HL stations, plus Warren Hill (new) station. Will need a new icon creating before I can finally tweak it.


 * I've put the High Level on the side. Since this is better than what is currently on the article, I think I'll add it. I guess you were probably (in a good way) too picky to add your own until you got the icon (which is probably nicer), but I think this is topologically correct (same as yours). Ideally I'd like an interconnection between the two, but I like the way it keeps the main line straight rather than having to bow. SimonTrew (talk) 21:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Continuity symbols
I see on other diagrams dashed lines are used for continuation symbols, not the arrows we are using here. What is the convention? SimonTrew (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Warren Hill
OK I think I have understood this now. I have tidied up the Newmarket article a bit, in particular to add links to this article in the infobox, and to try to clear up the confusion between "Old" and "New" stations.

As far as I can manage to divulge&mdash; and I have tried to clarify in that article&mdash; the seemingly pointless creation of Warren Hill station was for trains from northerly destinations. I presume, therefore, that rather than disembarking at the more convenient Newmarket station, they would disembark at Warren Hill and have a stroll down the High Street on the way to the racecourse; I could see this working if there were special race day tickets specifically for Warren Hill. Since Warren Hill is beyond the triangular junction (if coming from the Ely direction), presumably the train would continue to Newmarket station anyway, but perhaps it balanced the load a bit.

Of course this is pure speculation but it does make sense for why building a "racecourse" station that is further from the racecourse than the existing one. I'm not saying that what I have put above is correct, just that it means we have not *definitely got it wrong* with the placement of a "race day" station farther from the racecourse than the existing station. Obviously this needs more research. SimonTrew (talk) 20:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice new reference-- Newmarket Racecourses history
I found a nice reference at Newmarket Racecourses site:

This confirms that Warren Hill was built to encourage northern traffic, and also mentions the building of a new station to cater for southern traffic, and special fares (gives an example of I think 6/6d from London). I will add the references to the Newmarket railway station site (and probably copy this bit into the talk there) but I thought it was worth adding here too. SimonTrew (talk) 23:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

As I suspected, the stations were built specifically for racegoers and special fares offered. I am not sure how to incorporate this into the article, or indeed which article to put it in (probably Newmarket station is best).

There are some nice pics on that site too. They are courtesy of Newmarket Archive or some such. I guess that means they are not under a commons license, which is a pity. SimonTrew (talk) 23:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No, hang on. Those pics are from the turn of the last century. They must be PD then? I've downloaded them but can't put them on commons cos it has been having a cigarette break for the last couple of hours. SimonTrew (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

More refs
I went to the Cambridge Central Library today and there are a couple of good refs on this, including maps etc and acts of parliament. Unfortunately not to borrow. From memory, the closure of the section from Gt Chesterford to Six Mile Bottom was made by parliamentary Act with an extremely long name in 1858. The length of the name of the Act was such I would suspect nowadays it would be a Statutory Instrument or some such, and I imagine passed through Parliament with little dispute i.e. rubber stamped, but had to do so under the proceedings of the time. Of course this is all guesswork.

In the Cambridgeshire Collection, which is housed at the Cambridge Folk Museum, there is a whole book on the N&CR, and I will try to get hold of it. The small section in the book I read in the Library indicates there was quite a political war between N&CR, the Royston-Hitchin line (sic) later the Great Northern which wanted to extend to Cambridge but Cambridge didn't want it much, and the ECR were worried it would branch roughly from Royston to Gt Chesterford on a route that I imagine is roughly the same as the nowadays A505 road. Gets quite interesting for what I imagined was a rather potboiling branch line; two large players wanted to capture the Cambridge (and Beyond) to London traffic and battled over this short section.

Si Trew (talk) 01:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Abington Station contradiction
The article says that there was no "Abington" Station but the schematic map contradicts this (and links to a separate page) - Which is correct? (or have I misunderstood?)

Gilgamesh4 (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I have checked the March 1850 timetable for the line - no mention of an Abington station. As you say its on the map but there's not much to go on the Abington station page. Could it be the sources are wrong (I don't own them so cannot check)?. I have aslo checked the Great Eastern Journal referenced in the article - nothing there. regards Davidvaughanwells (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)