[Pearson’s ‘small’ 4-2-4T]

2 hours ago, ChrisN said:

I find it interesting that they went for bogies but retained a single driving wheel.  It would be interesting to know their thinking.  Still, the Pearson one is quite beautiful in its own way.

At the time it was the norm for express engines to be 'single wheelers' - probably because really accurate alignment of coupled wheels for fast running was still difficult.  The GWR persisted with 'singles' later than most and built rather too many late in the 19th century.

[William Dean’s Express Tank Revisited]

On 14/04/2024 at 17:46, ChrisN said:

Great work Mike.  I assume your original one has bogies that pivot, or does it just sit there looking pretty?

My original model has conventional bogie arrangements, with the Tenshodo drive unit in the rear one.  It even copes with my small radius curves!.

 

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Four]

3 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

Is this going to be printed too?

I shall have to make some simplifications but I expect to print this as a 'mantlepiece' ornament.

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Two]

22 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

One wonders what was the basis for the 1910 The Engineer drawings. E.L. Ahrons had been a Swindon apprentice in the 1880s, so may well have had access to first-hand information about these engines.

The history of these engines has received extensive coverage in various issues of the BGS journal 'Broadsheet'.  My fellow BGS member, Douglas S Johnson, built a model the hard way, using brass and nickel silver, and wrote a full description over two issues of the 'Broadsheet' in 2020. 

 

Concerning drawings, he wrote: "There is some dispute over the validity of some of the ‘original’ drawings - see ‘Nemesis’ in [Broadsheet] 54.30. This is understandable, as some ‘as-built’ drawings were issued by Swindon for the centenary exhibition, while others are B&ER drawings dated August 1852 — April 1857, together seeming to be the basis for the drawings printed in ‘The Engineer“ of December 1910. There may be no good reason to doubt the accuracy of these drawings, despite their various dates and provenance, as being a near true representation of how the locomotives first ran, or were intended to run.The photographs show some things otherwise. as should be expected given the rapid pace of development in that period."

 

Douglas generously showed me copies of several of the early drawings, which were a great help to me in understanding some of the details of these engines.

 

Mike

[County loco build 4-4-2T]

A fascinating (and useful) 'walk though' the stages of assembling a kit model. Thank you.

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Two]

52 minutes ago, Northroader said:

the tyres don’t look especially wide.

On he drawing of the suspension from 'The Engineer', the tyre width is marked as 6" (15.24 cm)

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Two]

18 minutes ago, brunelfan said:

 Your cross section drawings have clearly demonstrated the deficiencies in this method!

I agree, it is very hard to produce anything other than an 'outline' from those drawings.  Beware, I have also found several inaccuracies in those drawings, many of which emanate from 'The Locomotive Magazine'.

 

I also find it difficult to interpret more detailed drawings, mainly in trying to work out how various parts were orientated in three dimensions.  The underside is proving particularly difficult.

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Two]

29 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

I wonder how many other models actually replicate how the prototype was built?

Thank you Chris - that's exactly what I am trying to do.  I've started looking at the underside and it seems to have been an extraordinary assemblage of brackets with no proper frames at all.

 

2 minutes ago, Dave John said:

I too am finding this fascinating. Effectively a structural boiler. The heat losses must have been significant with all those yokes rivetted on. 

Quite a few early engines had 'structural' boilers.  The 'Firefly' replica at Didcot had to include additional framing, to meet current regulations

[Pearson 4-2-4T – Part Two]

1 hour ago, Lacathedrale said:

Regarding your sketch of the boiler plate and yoke - are you able to expand a little on how you sort the alignment out in the axis that's not visible in the sketch? i.e. you are sketching a front profile and this is likely to end up at the very front or rear of your engine, based on where the model origin is. Do you do an offset extrusion? an 'Align' ? Do you create an offset plane?

I simply move and rotate the parts I have made and align them against my reference 'canvas'.  I have hidden the rest of the model for clarity [NB  I've added this clarification to the main text]:

 

 

I rarely do any measurements or create offset planes unless I have to 🙂

 

 

[Pearson’s 4-2-4T – Part One]

33 minutes ago, brunelfan said:

I will add further when I return home from US.

I look forward to seeing what you've been doing since our previous correspondence

 

Mike

[Pearson’s 4-2-4T – Part One]

3 hours ago, Dave John said:

Should be an interesting build. I'm intrigued  by the yoke arrangement. Were the two pots for a rubber suspension as well ? 

'interesting', as in "may you live in interesting times"🙂 

 

Trying to form a good 'picture' in my mind from the various drawings I have is taxing me at present - it's hard to interpret some of the oddities.

 

Those pots over the driving wheel are indeed rubber suspension - they are on both sides of each wheel and I'm still puzzling over how it all worked.

[Pearson’s 4-2-4T – Part One]

Perhaps Pearson felt that he could try out a few ideas on a branch-line engine without the risk of too much exposure if some things didn't work out. 

 

The more extraordinary features were removed when the engines were re-built.  Ahrons wrote: "In 1868-73, after an average life of about sixteen years, all the eight original Rothwell engines were scrapped, a fact which shows that they left something to be desired. Four new engines in which practically nothing of the originals remained, were built at Bristol in their place." 

 

The date on The Engineer illustration I showed is incorrect for the original engines (as shown), which actually dated from 1853.

[Pearson’s 4-2-4T – Part One]

6 minutes ago, Annie said:

I hadn't realised that the bogies had independent India rubber springs.  It certainly makes for a very neat and tidy arrangement.

I need to add the 'pots' for them behind the wheels, as on this drawing:

 

I keep finding new things as I pore over various drawings.  These engines really were peculiar.

 

[Pearson’s 4-2-4T – Part One]

8 hours ago, Annie said:

Now this is a pleasant surprise.  Well done and thank you Mike for turning your attention towards Pearson's magnificent well tanks.

I'd dropped hints that I was thinking in this direction when I commented on your blog. It's going to be a tough build but the bogie has served to get me going.

[William Dean's Express Tank]

One fact that seems to have escaped mention is that when Dean built this 'narrow' gauge 4-2-4T, seen by David Joy in July 1882, there was a former B&ER broad gauge 4-2-4T still running in original tank engine form as GWR 2005 (formerly B&ER No.12)

 

This adds strength to the argument that Dean was exploring whether the broad gauge design could be carried over to the 'narrow' gauge.

 

According to RCTS Part Two, No.12 had a total wheelbase of 25' 1" and 7' 6" diameter driving wheels.  As GWR No 2005 this engine was not withdrawn until December 1885.  There is a photograph in the BGS Magazine BROADSHEET vol.48 (Autumn 2002)

 

 

 

[West Drayton Coke Ovens 1839]

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

I never know what's next on your blog Mike, ...

Neither do I, Mikkel.  Since I became interested in the pioneering period, I find so much information has been lost that I seize onto whatever snippets I find.

 

In this case, I've had a persistent cold, so working out how to create that dome kept me occupied - not always to the benefit of my headache.

[Paddington Station 1840]

3 hours ago, Northroader said:

What we now call Taplow was originally the Western terminus for Maidenhead, before the bridge over the Thames was completed. The goods shed is contemporary with the one at Paddington, sharing the same design, but the Paddington one is larger.

The history of the first end of the line, before the Maidenhed Bridge was completed is rather murky.  The various drawings in the National Rail Archive, mentioned by @David Bigcheeseplant, add to the confusion, since some show schemes that were never built in the form shown, or only existed for a very short time while the railway as being constructed. 

 

There is a useful article in the 'British Railway Journal - Special G.W.R. Edition' by Paul Karau, Mike Clark & Matthew Wells, entitled  'THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY AT MAIDENHEAD', which examines the various discrepancies.

 

It seems that the first terminus was a timber-built structure, perched high on a new embankment, with two platforms connected at first by an overall roof/train shed.  The above article suggests that the overall roof-cum-stock shed at Maidenhead (Riverside) was dismantled and moved to the Twyford depot shortly before the line was opened to that point on 1st July 1839, where it was again used for stock storage. 

 

Because the terminus was on a high embankment, facilities for loading private carriages onto open wagons were situated close to where the current Taplow station is located. There were also stables there until 1841, when they were removed, in connection with alterations to the brick coach house and stables at Paddington.

 

It is clear that all the facilities were in a state of flux during this very early period when the GWR only stretched as far as Maidenhead and everyone was on a steep 'learning curve'.

 

Mike

 

[Paddington Engine House 1840]

In the original post I mentioned that "One item, listed in the accounts, is ‘stables’ but these are not marked on any of the drawings that I have."  I recently noticed the following in British Railway Journal, GWR Special edition no.1, in an article by Paul Karau et al about Maidenhead Station:

 

"There were also stables [at Maidenhead] until 1841 when, according to the company's minutes for 7th July, in connection with alterations to the brick coach house and stables at Paddington was authorised for 'removing the stables from Maidenhead'."

 

If 'coach house' corresponds to 'Carriage Shed', then the various plans I have of the Paddington layout indicate that changes to the carriage shed were made at an early date, with an extension at the Western end.  I shall keep searching for more information about the 'stables' but this information suggests that they were associated with the carriage shed.

[About time too!]

These look wonderful and well worth the time spent on them 🙂

 

11 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Which makes me wonder why six wheels were chosen in the first place. Better riding?

The GWR seem to have adopted 6 wheels from the earliest broad gauge days, even for some types of wagon.  After the initial problems they had with poor riding on Brunel's first design of track, I suspect they were anxious to obtain the smoothest ride possible.  The centre wheels were removed from several carriages later in the 19th century.

 

Do you use any special techniques to enable these 6-wheelers to negotiate curves and points?

[A Pantechnicon for Farthing]

On 04/03/2024 at 07:35, Mikkel said:

I think the printed sides work particularly well if there is a natural "frame" around them to conceal the edges, as here where the van is paneled. 

I have switched to using inkjet-printable vinyl, as it is much thinner than paper so the edges are much less of a problem.

 

Regarding fonts, I find 'Garamond' is useful for 'period' lettering.

 

Mike

[A Pantechnicon for Farthing]

42 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Here are some shots with different numbers of horses, it seems to have varied with the needs an capacity:

One thing I noticed was how narrow the wheel rims were on all the wagons in the photographs.  A sign of the improvement in roads since the earlier (1844) Knee's Pantechnicon that I modelled, on which the felloes of its wheels were recorded as being 9" wide.

[A Pantechnicon for Farthing]

4 hours ago, ullypug said:

Excellent modelling Mikkel.

It took a slightly dark tone there for a minute, a properly Scandinavian melancholy with shades of Edgar Allen Poe…

 

Entombing people is nothing compared with the dark deeds in this post   😮

[Paddington Engine House 1840]

25 minutes ago, Adam88 said:

the magnificent Mount Clare roundhouse in Baltimore

That really does look magnificent.  The B&O railway museum looks well worth a visit, if in the area.

 

Mike

[A Pantechnicon for Farthing]

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

... My lettering on that point was inspired by the example seen on this website: 

 

https://www.avwoodworks.co.uk/imagery_content/horse_drawn_wagons.html

 

Historical photos show variants with a single horse, two horses and four. All depending on the van and load size I assume. This one being quite large should perhaps ideally have had four, as you suggest. But luckily UNBRIDLED didn't press that point futher 🙂

 

I notice that one of the photos on that website link shows a traction engine.  Perhaps you should spare the horses and add one of these on the streets of Farthing

[Paddington Engine House 1840]

8 hours ago, crompton said:

Is the engine shed and turntable pit  the same one that was rediscovered when they were doing the Cross Rail works?

I agree with Annie that the rediscoveries were from a later period. The 'temporary' structures that I modelled were pretty comprehensively destroyed when the 'new' terminus was built in the 1850s.  It wasn't an 'evolutionary' development but a complete re-creation of the entire site.