Old, unidentified photo

[Malcolm]

This came to me last night from the states. No location. No photographer. Just a date.
I thought I'd put it here as it seems to me that it shows a Midland Railway station (the loco in foreground). It looks vaguely like a Yorkshire scene, but the loco next to the water tank looks like it has a NER cab.
Never mind. Nice photo, and I may just keep it for it's age and the rolling stock it shows.

Malcolm

[Ferrybridge Flyer]

Looks nice and busy.Be interesting to compare it with a photo of it now.

[third-rail]

are the two veicles at the end of the coaches brake vans i thought they were two open goods wagons at first

[Trestrol]

are the two veicles at the end of the coaches brake vans i thought they were two open goods wagons at first

Definatly brake vans similar to the M&gn one pictured in the latest Steam Railway they have tool boxes on the end

[Bill Bedford]

are the two veicles at the end of the coaches brake vans i thought they were two open goods wagons at first

No, they are horse boxes. The extensions at the ends are fodder boxes See Dow and Lacey Midland Railway Carriages for drawings.

The coach behind the horse boxes has a lookout on the roof. The wagon in the foreground has a a sheet with the letters L?CDR. The locos are a mixture of outside framed 0-6-0s and 2-4-0s which could have belonged to almost any company in the 1860-70s. However the use of white discs on the locos suggests one of the southern companies.

[jwealleans]

I posted this as a query on RMWeb and latterly received the following:

The same photo appears on p121 of Southern Wagons vol. 3, where it is identified as Dover Priory on the LCDR and dated to 1876 (probably). There is a selection of LCDR single bolster wagons in the foreground and a sheeted wagon that clearly shows the lettering and layout of LCD sheets.

[Malcolm]

jwealleans,

Thank you so much for your help. And for you other guys out there.....Thank you, too.
You are all superstars and an invaluable help for all your knowledge.

I know it's not good resolution and LNER, but I think I'll keep this image. I like it....and well it is 133 years old.

Once again, many many thanks for everyone's help.

Malcolm