Joseph Locke - Lancaster and Carlisle Railway

Lancaster and Carlisle Railway

A significant difference between the surveying methods of George Stephenson and Joseph Locke was that, because Stephenson had started his career at a time when locomotives had little power to overcome excessive gradients, he avoided such gradients at all costs, often adding many miles to the line of the route, whereas Locke had more confidence in the ability of modern locomotives to climb these gradients. An example of this was the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway, which had to cope with the barrier of the Lake District mountains. In 1839 Stephenson proposed a circuitous route that avoided the Lake District by going all the way round Morecambe Bay and West Cumberland, claiming: 'This is the only practicable line from Liverpool to Carlisle. The making of a railway across Shap Fell is out of the question.' The directors rejected his route and chose the one proposed by Joseph Locke, one that used steep gradients and passed over Shap Fell. The line was completed by Locke and was a success.

The difference of opinion between Locke and George Stephenson over the choice of route for the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway illustrates a difference in philosophy between the two men regarding the way to build a railway. Both George and Robert Stephenson were prepared to go to great lengths to avoid steep gradients that would tax the locomotives of the day, even if this meant choosing a circuitous route that added on extra miles. Locke, on the other hand, believed that they underestimated the power of the latest locomotives and that the shortest practicable route should be chosen, even if it involved some steep gradients. His reasoning was that by avoiding long routes and tunneling, the line could be finished more quickly, with less capital costs, and could start earning revenue sooner. This became known as the 'up and over' school of engineering. Locke took a similar approach in planning the Caledonian Railway, from Carlisle to Glasgow. In both railways he introduced gradients of 1 in 75, which severely taxed fully laden locomotives. Even as more powerful locomotives were introduced, the trains that they pulled became heavier. It may therefore be the case that Locke, although his arguments carried the day, was not entirely right in his reasoning.