Mystery Tower

[chameleon]

Si wrote: Here's the site of Jim's mystery tower from the Godfrey 1847-1863 large scale map. Nothing there. I've always wondered about the large areas of "nothing" on this particular map. What was there? If it was open spaces, what did it look like? Fields? Dereliction? I didn't see yesterday's YEP, so can't comment on the picture of the tower. Can anyone put it up on here?     Always assumed that being named 'Leeds Stations' was a reason for the absence of much else on that sheet. There is a reservoir noted just a touch east of here on the river bank (Strange) - any conection?

[Si]

Being at the beginning of the stretch of river and canal where they are closest, and near the end of the canal, perhaps the tower pumped water from the river into the canal to keep it topped-up?Just a guess. PS The company that manufactured the railway turn-tables must have made a bloody fortune! There are nearly sixty on that map alone.    

[chemimike]

That’s great by me Jim. Only a few more that might have some interest to you Jim. They are below:The first may not be part of the railway. Was immediately before the ones that are and brickwork is similar. http://s431.photobucket.com/albums/qq38 ... jpgAnother from those partially demolished rooms – nice tileshttp://s431.photobucket.com/albums/qq38/jeemikejee/wellington%20st%20central%20station/?action=view&current=11A.jpgSomewhere else in the yardhttp://s431.photobucket.com/albums/qq38/jeemikejee/wellington%20st%20central%20station/?action=view&current=13A.jpgShowing the cast iron columns inside (presumably) the Grain warehousehttp://s431.photobucket.com/albums/qq38/jeemikejee/wellington%20st%20central%20station/?action=view&current=18A.jpgTaken later of one of the hoist towers. Certainly a different film and looks more “tidy”Anyway that’s the lot . Glad they were of interest to you

[jim]

Cardiarms, the photostream you posted really brings back memories!I agree with you, the most likely function of the riverside tower is a pumphouse, whether horizontal to work hydraulic accummulator/s up the tower or a beam engine, but any use I can think of is open to serious doubts! For instance, putting River Aire water into locomotives during the last two hundred years or so would quickly stop the railway, as all the engines would prime like ***********(squared). Effective water treatment only began to be applied in the twentieth century (and that to Leeds' public supply where locos were concerned) , so I think that use unlikely. Si, pumping water into canals to keep levels up is a long-established practice, but if that was necessary I think it would have been applied higher up the canal, not two locks short of the end of the canal.I have toyed with the idea of a hydraulic plant, but can think of no equipment in my knowledge of the history of the Wellington Stations history that would need such power. As a ( very ) long shot it could have supplied lifts in the 1863 Queens Hotel, but it would be unlikely such a large provision would be needed for a couple of lifts and could certainly be better accommodated and serviced elsewhere.So where does that leave us? Waiting for research, inspiration, or a visit from a genius! I'll keep getting splinters in my nails!

[jim]

Mike, I can't identify the first picture, but the curtains in the left-hand wing suggest residential use. The third picture is a view of the northern-most end of the NW side of the GNR Goods Shed. The objects in the near right foreground on the loading platform are portable temporary speed restriction signs.Sorry, I can't add any information to your other pictures.

[The Parksider]

jim wrote: So where does that leave us? Waiting for research, inspiration, or a visit from a genius! I'll keep getting splinters in my nails! Hopefully Grumpytramp will be along soon!

[The Parksider]

jim wrote: So---not the Bonding Warehouse, but a great picture of another part of Wellington Street Goods Yard. Absolutely not. The signage that was originally put on the tower (I'm gonna see if it's still there) definately said Bonding Warehouse, but it is only a minor error compared with knocking the first tower down.....

[jim]

Si, your comment on the proliferation of turntables requires special response.All of the small turntables between the south side of the GNR Goods warehouse and Whitehall Road ( I specifically exclude the full size loco turntable just off the Central Station platform end ) belonged to the London and North Western Railway, ruled for many years by the iron-fisted Sir Richard Moon. Under him successive mechanical engineers John Ramsbottom and F.W. Webb made the LNWRs works at Crewe a byword for self-sufficiency and economy, and they probably made their own turntables. Crewe even had its own foundries and steel-works. Whatever was made was built down to the lowest possible specification consistent with long life and practical use, and was standardised throughout the system. The wagon turntables we are looking at were only about twelve feet in diameter, very simple, and cheap to buildSo, why were there so many? If you study the map carefully, you will see that all except the six pairs immediately SW of the large Central Station turntable feeding the third Wagon Hoist are at low level. The site is very constricted, and lines serve many of the multitude of arches under both the passenger station and the high-level goods shed. They also serve the goods shed close to the river between the high level lines and Whitehall Road ( "A" Shed ).The arches served as warehousing, and many were let out to tenants. I can recall banana firms, glass firms, and drainage and sanitary ware dealers. There would certainly have been others beyond my recall. All the traffic for this warren was wound, one wagon at a time up and down the wagon hoists, and then manoeuvred by horse, capstan, and wagon table to where it was required-----and then back again!Look carefully at the 1906 map---although the LNWR lines pass within twenty feet of the GNR lines at the same level, there is no connection! Although the traffic COULD have been shunted down from the high level in train-loads, for about a hundred years some form of sheer bloody mindedness made sure it didn't happen.I don't know if the GNR and it's successor the LNER wouldn't handle the traffic, or if the LNWR and the later LMS refused to pay the charges required, but a direct connection was not put in until the early 1950s by B.R. At a stroke the wagon hoists were abandoned, and the system of capstans and horses made redundant by a heavy-duty tractor with steel buffing plate fore and aft. The wagon turntables suffered badly with broken planking under the tractor, but the yard was on it's last legs so nobody cared---except our joiners,who had to repair them!As a postscript, I never came across another capstan-system like this one. The whole lot were driven by one steam engine and a set of underground shafting and bevel gears. Turn the steam on and every capstan in the yard rotated until you turned it off! Highly dangerous -----and the frictional horsepower losses must have been phenomenal.

[BIG N]

What a fantastic collection of photos you have posted there Mike, I really like the first one which depicts a scene of abandonment and dereliction without actually showing the demolition in progress, superb and thank you for sharing those.Cardi - likewise the photo stream you linked has some superb and interesting stuff on it, not only of Leeds but of the railway scene further afield in the Yorkshire region, nice one.Jim - look at the photo stream Cardi linked and in the arial photo of the railways around Leeds you can clearly see the tower to which you refer and which is the subject of this thread.Now I have puzzeled over this shot and cannot work out what the buildings at the top end of the yard are that stand adjacent to the main line, if we knew what they were it might give us a clue as to the towers use.One possible suggestion from me though, could it have been a lifting tower of some description for either raw materials or possibly coal, either of which could have been brought in by boat ?My reason for thinking this way is that, as we know, the river Aire was navigable up to this point and the closeness of the tower to the river, coupled with what looks like a possible landing stage in the arial photo would suggest it was built close to the water for a reason.Lets not forget that the railway, and in turn, those buildings were at a higher level than the river and if materials were being brought in that way then there would be a need to tranship them up to the buildings. Loooking at it closely in the picture it appears to be of similar design to the three wagon lifts but on a smaller scale.Just a thought.

[jim]

Hi Big N, interesting comments. On the two wooden shed-like buildings, the sources I have indicate that they were both probably connected with carriage and wagon repairs.The book Leeds Termini, by Pixton and Hooper, published by Challenger U.k. at £6.99 has about seven more aerial views of Leeds' railway installations and some more from ground level which show the tower in the background, but none in close-up. I also have a book which contains the picture Cardiarms uploaded. Although I have yet to see a really detailed view, I can see no evidence of an entry-way at river level, or of an upper-floor opening consistent with a lifting device such as a crane jib, or jigger lucam. In any case, the tower's location is a little way too far from the waterside to make this practical. As a further point, it doesn't seem very practical to tranship from the river when by siting the tower some thirty feet to the left it could, if a lifting device, lift straight from the canal and thus avoid the vagaries of river navigation. This would have been a very fraught procedure in the days before motorised barges, without a towpath, and with the somewhat variable and temperamental river. In addition, lifting direct from the canal would have been the depth of Office Lock less in height!On balance, as along-serving railway engineer on lifts and cranes, amongst other weird and wonderful machinery, and as a student of Industrial Archaeology, I don't think the "lift from the river" idea holds water ( loud groans! ) and think the pumphouse theory more likely.