BR Boundary Changes

[Gloster]

I always understood that at least one factor was the still massive amount of coal traffic in the north-east. I would think that a second factor was that if it was all one region, it really would have had an enormous total mileage.

 

[Transilien]

Why was the Anglia Region created in the first place? By the late 80s BR was well underway with sectorisation and to create another region that will be replaced soon in the future just seems pointless.

 

[WAB]

Never quite understood why they created the NE region given the LMS was the largest of the Big Four - but yet they split the second largest constituent part up rather than the largest. Does anyone know why?

I'm sure I read in Bonavia that they could never quite agree how to divvy up such a large and complicated region whilst maintaining effective management. A Doncaster split on the ER would appear far simpler a proposition.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Never quite understood why they created the NE region given the LMS was the largest of the Big Four - but yet they split the second largest constituent part up rather than the largest. Does anyone know why?

Didn't the LNER operate with two divisions in England (former NER and the rest) anyway, so making them separate regions was easier than disentangling the complex entanglement of the Midland and LNWR. The LNER, until the renumberings of the 1940s, even numbered its locomotives in sepaerate series depending on where they operated, which is why the Gresley Pacifics' numbers were an odd mixture of (mainly) 25xx and 44xx, rerspectively in the former NER and GNR blocks.