With regard to the article by Roger Winnen on the austerity tank at the Bodmin and Wenford can I point out that it's name is not "Antwept". In fact it doesn't and never did have a name in NCB service at Treorchy, being referred to as "NCB" due to the lettering on the tank. ( All of the other locos at this site had names). It is Bagnall works No 2766 which was numbered 75178 in War Dept Service. The lettering on the cab is "Antwerp". These identifications were applied to the WD locos before they were shipped abroad. In fact it went to Calais. The "Antwerp" label was only applied because the loco was being painted in a WD livery at the BWR and we happened to have a set of transfers left over from a similar job on another austerity, Swiftsure , that had gone to Antwerp in its WD days. Philip Hawke
Many thanks indeed Philip for putting me on the right track for Bagnell 75178
Regards for now, Guy Vincent
There were examples of four gates worked by wheel on a single-line crossing, especially where the road was much wider than the railway (such as Barnstaple Town), and then the gates overlapped when across the rails and moved essentially in two sets, one after the other. Conversely, there were many examples of crossings over double-track lines which had four gates, yet were still worked by hand (eg Eggesford, Edington Junction etc). Some – like Tipton St Johns – were hand-operated originally, but converted to wheel operation later.
Just to confuse the issue, it was not unknown for level-crossings on signal-box diagrams to be drawn with a ‘standard symbol’ of four gates, regardless of whatever actually existed on the ground. A good example here was at Wadebridge East – when I visited the station years after the railway had closed I spent a lot of time trying to find the non-existent road that would have gone over that crossing, only to realise eventually that actually it must have been little more than a footpath/track with a large wicket-type gate on each side of the line!
Regards Chris Osment