News:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Fort Pitt, Chatham.  (Read 68045 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline smiffy

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 872
  • Appreciation 58
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #162 on: September 15, 2017, 02:15:16 »
Thanks, now I know :)

Offline MartinR

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Appreciation 1
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #161 on: September 14, 2017, 21:13:40 »
According to http://www.parksandgardens.org/places-and-people/site/1863/history, "The park was purchased and presented to the city in 1914 by Councillor Howard Jackson."

Offline smiffy

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 872
  • Appreciation 58
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #160 on: September 14, 2017, 16:14:44 »
That's an interesting view from what is now known as Jackson's Fields (I'm unsure as to when it was so named and who Jackson was).

However, from the location of the photographer, the unidentified tower is more likely to be the object indicated here by the arrow.

Offline jimawilliams

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
  • Appreciation 5
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #159 on: September 13, 2017, 23:33:43 »
It is possible that the "mystery tower" is shown  on the horizon just to the left of the fort, in this photograph. 

Sourced and used with approval from Facebook page All About Rochester Kent.
"Change is the only constant"

Offline smiffy

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 872
  • Appreciation 58
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #158 on: April 19, 2017, 23:07:09 »
This photo of the eastern flank of Fort Pitt (now the site of the school tennis courts) is stated on the Medway images site as being from around 1930, although I believe that it can't actually be much later than about 1900.

Offline otis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • Appreciation 11
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #157 on: December 28, 2016, 18:31:00 »
Now I know what a shot tower is! Love to think that they may have provided invalid soldiers with an industrious purpose of making munitions.

I fear the answer may be something unexpected but mundane.
"there was more hit than miss about this arbitrary bombardment"

Offline conan

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 941
  • Appreciation 72
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #156 on: December 27, 2016, 20:13:40 »
Could it be the truncated base of a shot tower?
To remain ignorant of what happened before you were born is to remain a child......Cicero

Offline otis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • Appreciation 11
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #155 on: December 27, 2016, 16:59:34 »
I do find these mysteries compulsive!

I think it is unlikely to be a sewer vent. Firstly, I was looking at Kyn's fort plan on reply #60. It looks like that the works behind the enfilading fire wall ( the proper name escapes me ), do not seem to extend underground to anywhere near the spot for the vent. Secondly, sewer vents I have seen seem to be around the width of a drainpipe, and are often appear similar to large lampposts at ground level. This thing is huge.

I was looking at Smiffy's latest picture with the side view. Though it is blurred, am seeing a substantive two stage structure. Bottom half possibly brick with the upper stage a fraction wider. Looks to me a lot like a water tower. I am struggling to explain why they would put a water tower outside of the fort, when there are so many higher spots on the fort roof, where that could have been sited.

The site of this structure should be telling. It seems to be right outside the fort main gate. It stands alongside both the approach road and a secondary footpath that runs up around the Casemate. Just the spot for something practical and essential?
"there was more hit than miss about this arbitrary bombardment"

Offline kyn

  • Administrator
  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7447
  • Appreciation 419
    • Sheppey History
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #154 on: December 20, 2016, 19:54:02 »
A sewer vent is possible, they had/have Victorian ones surviving in Dover.  Initially the basement of the casemates beside this was where all the waste went, but was shovelled out once full.  Would make sense that they still needed vents and may have put one in if a sewer was added here at a later date.

Still would show as a vent on plans though!


Offline smiffy

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 872
  • Appreciation 58
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #152 on: December 20, 2016, 15:05:19 »
If it was still there in the 1920's I can only assume it was demolished in the 1930's along with the blockhouse. Whatever this was, there is probably a closer picture or a record of it somewhere. For anyone to actually remember seeing it (perhaps one of the Technical school girls) they would probably have to be about ninety or more by now.

Offline kyn

  • Administrator
  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7447
  • Appreciation 419
    • Sheppey History
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #151 on: December 20, 2016, 10:00:53 »
There are plans earlier in the thread that shows the railway tunnel's position away from the fort.

I did wonder if this could have been a water tower but these are usually marked on a plan and none of the plans I have show this, they often show a well too but none are marked.

Offline jimawilliams

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
  • Appreciation 5
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #150 on: December 19, 2016, 21:34:29 »
A couple of interesting considerations.

I came across "Minutes of Evidence Given Before the Select Committee on Railway Bills The North Kent Lines 1845." 
Page 190 pays reference to the then  proposed tunnel/s under Fort Pitt.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=iLg5AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA183&lpg=PA183&dq=vignoles+kent&source=bl&ots=UxRzoU6VLW&sig=xq7XHn-vgwNMKjHgGgfJG071_3E&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjY0N_8jYHRAhWHjpQKHcHOBs8Q6AEIGzAA#v=snippet&q=two%20tunnells&f=false

The image from Google Earth shows approximate location of the existing tunnel (red line) and structure in question (yellow cross).
"Change is the only constant"

Offline Stewie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • Appreciation 16
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #149 on: December 18, 2016, 21:40:03 »
Hi Keith

I would agree with you about the length of tunnel and the requirement for an air vent, Fort Pitt Tunnel is not long but is curved. Now my discipline is signalling and not civil engineering, so I may be wrong, but my understanding is that most air shafts started life as an access shaft to a inner point of the tunnel to enable it to be constructed faster, the curve may be relevant in this case. That said, the few times I walked through this tunnel in the 80's I never noticed signs of an air vent and the structure in the picture does not seem to be on the alignment anyway.
One other thing, I read a book about railways through the Medway Towns once but cannot remember the title. This book stated that the London, Chatham & Dover railway considered building a branch line to Chatham Dockyard from Chatham station with points in Fort Pitt tunnel. This application was opposed by the military because they considered that this work would undermine the foundations of Fort Pitt, so is the alignment on Google maps accurate?

As an aside, there is a terrific article on building Victorian railway tunnel on the 'Forgotten Relics of an Enterprising Age' website demonstrating the techniques. I have included a link here:
 
http://www.forgottenrelics.co.uk/tunnelvision/index.html

:-)

KeithJG

  • Guest
Re: Fort Pitt, Chatham.
« Reply #148 on: December 18, 2016, 16:58:59 »
Surely that tunnel is too short  to need a vent?

 

BloQcs design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.11 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines