Breaking News - Talyllyn no.3?!

[Nickinwestwales]

Further to the notes on de-coupling drivers,I have a ghost of a memory that one or more of the Weston Clevedon & Portishead`s early 0-6-0`s ran in 2-4-0 form,the same memory suggests this was because of the tight curvature of the exchange siding at Clevedon (and possibly the gas works sdg also).

Once the line opened to Portishead and made an easier connection there,the need was removed and subsequent locos were left alone.

Sadly,the relevant volume is somewhere in the owl haunted wastes of the East wing so for now this must remain speculation....

 

JOHN -R.E. your note on V.o.R valve gear,-My reading suggests that when Swindon took charge,both engines (plus the wee Bagnall) had been thrashed up and down the valley for 20 odd years and were well ready for a good coat of looking at.

 

Now heres an idea to shoot down in flames-I`m no engineer so please accept this is just wool-gathering-Now-the V.o.R engines are exceptionally wide for the gauge...8` on 2` track-I wonder if the combination of a route with some pretty stiff grades and tight curves,plus all that extra overhanging bulk up on top ( with all the various lateral stresses on curves ) plus the hammer from those big fat cylinders caused some twisting in the frames-I imagine the suspension would cope but it could well tweak the valve gear out of alignment...pure guess work

 

ATB

 

Nick

 

 

[rockershovel]

I'd be inclined to feel that the valve gear problems were simple bad detail design in what was, after all, a virtually experimental design from a maker with no previous experience, at a time when all sorts of strange experiments were current. Dolgoch's valve gear was proverbially odd, the Joy valve gear on the L&B Manning Wardles has recently been found ( per the Lyd project ) to be badly flawed, the Hackworth valve gear used by Kerr Stuart had its oddities ..

[John_Hughes]

According to Russell No.9 (GWR 1213 ex No2) was a rebuild as the original frames & wheels were supposedly used although the boiler, cylinders, valves & valve gear were all new and it still exists. RCTS part 10 pages K77-8 corroborates this. (1212 was only slightly modified but scrapped in 1932 after being on the sales list.)

7 & 8 were built new to more or less the same specification.

 

Keith

 

I agree that this has always been the conventional wisdom, but I think Green's magisterial work on the VoR really does explode it, pointing out that the way in which the alleged rebuilding had actually been a cover for new construction shows the power of a CME in those days - a cover that was so effective that it fooled both the GWR and BR historians and auditors completely, and only more recently has it been possible to trawl through the archives in detail to work out just what had happened.

 

Green points out there is simply no part of the original locomotives that would have fitted any of the new ones, which seems to settle the matter beyond doubt. One wonders how many more alleged rebuildings were actually completely new construction, and what else was covered up so effectively back in the 1920s and before.

 

(Of course, the cylinders on all three locomotives probably were 'rebuilds' inasmuch as they were allegedly either cast using the patterns for the steam railmotors or possibly even actual railmotor cylinders, several of which were withdrawn at the same time. A few years ago I had the joy of doing this trick in reverse, using etches intended for the VoR engines to make cylinders for a model railmotor; it does work!)

[Ohmisterporter]

Green points out there is simply no part of the original locomotives that would have fitted any of the new ones, which seems to settle the matter beyond doubt. One wonders how many more alleged rebuildings were actually completely new construction, and what else was covered up so effectively back in the 1920s and before.

 

Isn't there a rule that says rebuilds are covered out of revenue and new construction is paid for out of profits? Something like that is sticking in my mind and just won't come to the front.

 

Geoff.

[jamie92208]

Isn't there a rule that says rebuilds are covered out of revenue and new construction is paid for out of profits? Something like that is sticking in my mind and just won't come to the front.

 

Geoff.

 

That's exactly what it was all about. Rebuilds were paid for out of the revenue budget, whiuch was usually under the control of the CME. New build was a capital project that often needed board approval. Two examples that i know of were:-

a) The Midland's 483 class 4-4-0's which were allegedly rebuilt from several series of smaller and older 4-4-0's.

B) The Patriots which were also 'rebuilt' from the Claughtons. On the first 2 they reused the wheel centre's and a few other detail parts I think the reversing handled was one bit. After that they were new but for accounting purposes were still classed as rebuilds and took the numbers of the Claughtons.

 

Hence the term 'accountancy rebuilds'.

 

Numbers of course only came into being when the accountants wanted to keep track of what capital had been spent on.

 

Jamie

[br2975]

According to Russell No.9 (GWR 1213 ex No2) was a rebuild as the original frames & wheels were supposedly used although the boiler, cylinders, valves & valve gear were all new and it still exists. RCTS part 10 pages K77-8 corroborates this. (1212 was only slightly modified but scrapped in 1932 after being on the sales list.)

 

I'm led to believe this sort of thing was a financial 'tax dodge' and was quite common over the years ..... similar to buying new stock, and scrapping an equivalent weight/value in old rolling stock !!!

 

Don't ask me how it works, after all I banked with Lloyds, so what would I know about finance !

 

Brian R

[John_Hughes]

Apparently the orders for the 'new' VoR locos were made one-at-a-time, thus ensuring that the expenditure for any item was below the limit at which the Board would get involved, and possibly ask awkward questions.

 

The GWR Board does seem to have had a habit of paying close attention to what was going on; even the weekly returns for individual stations were potentially 'for the attention of the Board' so a stationmaster who let things slip could find himself in very hot water indeed, while on the other hand someone who did a thoroughly good job in building up the traffic could receive a commendation and perhaps a promotion.

 

What no-one wanted to get was one of those 'Please explain...' postcards!

[Corbs]

I'm sorry to dredge up a 7 year old thread, but did anyone happen to save a copy of the image from the original post? It has long since vanished.

[Andrew Young]

The proposed KS 0-6-0 design? The drawing is reproduced in Martin Fuller's book on Talyllyn locos.

 

Cheers,

Andrew

[Corbs]

Thanks Andrew, would that be 'Talyllyn and Corris Steam Locomotives: Pre Preservation and Manufacturers Volume 1'?

I'll order a copy.

[Andrew Young]

That's the one. What scale are you looking at? In 7mm scale, reckon it'd fit quite nicely on the Electrotren 0-6-0 chassis.

 

Cheers,

Andrew

[Corbs]

If I did a model it would likely be 009, but I'm a sucker for 'might have beens' in any case.

My 009 project is very Talyllyn inspired, and I've just read and re-read 'Railway Adventure' and 'The Chronicles of Pendre Sidings' so this seems the perfect accompaniment. 

[Ohmisterporter]

Thanks Andrew, would that be 'Talyllyn and Corris Steam Locomotives: Pre Preservation and Manufacturers Volume 1'?

I'll order a copy.

 

Volume 2 is now available if you are interested. Good reviews for it too. 

[009 micro modeller]

Incidentally were any measurements taken from Rheidol locos for the cylinders on the rebuilt steam railmotor?

[John_Hughes]

Incidentally were any measurements taken from Rheidol locos for the cylinders on the rebuilt steam railmotor?

 

My understanding - which could well be wrong - is that the cylinders on the Rheidol locos were cast from the original railmotor patterns, though some accounts state that they were actual railmotor cylinders that had been repurposed. Given the arcane nature of the book-keeping at Swindon, I doubt if we'll ever know the truth about this.

 

I presume the old wooden patterns no longer exist - whatever happened to maintaining a decent pattern-loft? - so would have to be remade from the drawings. Whether having a shufti at the Rheidol engines would help, I rather doubt. But yes, it would be very nice to know!