Jump to content
RMweb
 

Spot the Differences


MikeOxon

277 views

The history books tell us that ‘North Star’ was one of two engines, originally built by Stephenson’s for the 5’ 6” gauge New Orleans railway. That order was cancelled and these engines – works nos.149 and150 - were snapped up by the GWR, desperately in need of reliable engines.

 

Several changes were needed to adapt these engines to Brunel’s 7 foot gauge. A sketch showing these changes was made in 1837, as shown below:

 

IMG_3126800x600.jpg.f6e67b31e544e3221abd9c36081403e9.jpg

Copy of original drawing of Stephenson engines nos. 149 and 150

 

The first delivery (actually works no.150), was made by barge to Maidenhead on 28th November 1837. This was the famous ‘North Star’

 

Some modifications to the firebox were requested by Brunel for the second engine, named ‘Morning Star’, which retained its original 6’ 6” diameter driving wheels and had the safety valves in a single casing behind the dome. Apparently a drawing was made by E.T.Lane but Arman, in his book: 'The Broad Gauge Engines of the GWR, Part One', considered it too faint for publication.

 

I have not seen this drawing so have had to use the later version produced by G.F.Bird for the Locomotive Magazine in 1901. On past experience, I have some scepticism concerning the accuracy of these drawings but a comparison of the dimensions with my model of North Star showed that they were very similar.

 

MorningStar800x600.jpg.165d9e476f8cd675f9edc9aabbbd5364.jpg

Drawing by G.F.Bird for the Locomotive Magazine in 1901

 

On the assumption that all the major components were the same, I had to do very little work to alter my 3D model of ‘North Star’ to the appearance of ‘Morning Star’

 

I re-scaled the wheels and splashers by 93% in the X and Z directions, deleted the two safety valve covers, and created a new single cover by my usual method of applying the ‘revolve’ tool to a sketch of the profile.

 

The result was is shown below:

 

3D-modelMorningStar.jpg.00ed16df94af4f10699478b77cf80e0f.jpg

My model of ‘Morning Star’, adapted from ‘North Star’

 

When I first looked at that 1837 drawing of the modifications, I was confused by the overlapping of the plan and elevation. For a few moments I thought that the ends of the axles were the safety valve covers on North Star! Could a young draftsman have thought the same?

 

Mike

  • Like 8
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3

6 Comments


Recommended Comments

  • RMweb Gold

Great, one more to the list.  Very interesting.

Link to comment

Modifying designs in CAD is not quite as simple as swapping number plates on an RTR model but it is an easy way of creating a 'family' of similar engines.  I'm pleased you find it interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, MikeOxon said:

Modifying designs in CAD is not quite as simple as swapping number plates on an RTR model but it is an easy way of creating a 'family' of similar engines.  I'm pleased you find it interesting.

 

Mike,

Yes, it is not an area I know very much about, so to see a whole class of locomotives appear is fascinating.  I wonder how they would have developed if parliament had not gone in favour of standard gauge.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
42 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

 

Mike,

Yes, it is not an area I know very much about, so to see a whole class of locomotives appear is fascinating.  I wonder how they would have developed if parliament had not gone in favour of standard gauge.

Although the broad gauge (BG) was appropriate for its original routes, Brunel himself recommended standard gauge for the curved routes in the Welsh Valleys.  In practice, Brunel's BG did not offer many advantages because the loading gauge was too small.  American railways demonstrated that much larger vehicles could operate on standard gauge, providing the clearances allowed for them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Mikkel

Posted (edited)

"When I first looked at that 1837 drawing of the modifications, I was confused by the overlapping of the plan and elevation. For a few moments I thought that the ends of the axles were the safety valve covers on North Star! Could a young draftsman have thought the same?"

 

This thought stuck with me, Mike. It's intriguing. But thinking about it, where would the differences in shape  between the axle ends and drawn safety valve covers have come from? An attempt to make sense of what he was seeing? Or did someone else modify the drawing later?

 

Edited by Mikkel
  • Like 1
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

This thought stuck with me, Mike. It's intriguing. But thinking about it, where would the differences in shape  between the axle ends and drawn safety valve covers have come from? An attempt to make sense of what he was seeing? Or did someone else modify the drawing later?

 

I doubt that this really happened but it did confuse me for a few moments 🙂

 

On the other hand, why aren't the safety valves shown when the chimney and dome are?

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...