MikeOxon

Some people do both - e.g. Mikkel's Farthing blog and his Workbench thread. I chose a blog because it forms a diary that I find useful as a personal record as well as, hopefully, being of interest to some others. Threads do tend to wander around 'off topic' and, while more entertaining for many people are, possibly, less useful to the original 'owner'.

'points to a minimum' is certainly music to my ears! Bradford has some wonderful old buildings and a steep hillside to form a backdrop. I won't have room for much scenery and rather like the idea of showing how places that have long-since been swallowed up in Greater London were still small villages in the first half of the 19th century

A quick Google search indicated several 3D print options. In order to be used to lift a locomotive, it will have to be a rather substantial tree. There is a 3D model online of an 800 year-old Wych Elm in Scotland which has succumbed to Elm Disease but not before it had been scanned for the model. It looks as though it could have been up to the job.

I think an Elm tree might be a bit too big for my little printer! After Dutch Elm Disease, it's going to be hard to find a prototype to work from.

Thank you Chris. I have some Stadden figures somewhere that I bought ages ago and never got around to painting - there's a lot of stuff like that in my various boxes! I'm going to have to do a lot of research, to find out what a railway really looked like in the first half of the 19th century - photos were rather rare then. I must search around this site too - @Schooner's thread is one that springs to mind. Maritime topics are not something I know much about - I've never been too keen on boats! I'm currently spending a lot of time trying to find out more about that first stretch of the GWR between Paddington and Maidenhead, so don't expect rapid progress on the modelling front, unless I'm distracted by some other strange piece of rolling stock that I just HAVE to model 🙂 Mike

Phew! for a moment I thought one of us had flipped 🤪

Thank you William - that's exactly the sort of comment I was hoping for. It's a long time since I've designed any sort of layout, so any thoughts are very welcome. There's a lot to think about 🙂

On one or two occasions, I have received comments along the lines of “we want a layout”. From the beginning of my exploration of the broad gauge, it has been my intention to produce some sort of layout or diorama to display the various models of rolling stock that I’ve constructed. Of course I already have a small layout carrying both narrow and standard gauge routes, based in Oxfordshire, towards the end of the 19th century. This layout continues to provide entertainment to my grand-children and I do not intend to replace it with a broad gauge version. Unfortunately, broad gauge railways in 4mm scale require considerably more space than a traditional 00 gauge layout, so I shall be restricted to something rather simple . At the beginning of this blog, I described how my exploration of family history led to my exploring the area around Bullo Pill and the Forest of Dean. I also found a very thorough Accident Report on a collision in November 1868, which provided detailed descriptions of the make-up of both the mail train and the cattle train that were involved in the accident. While I did not intend to model the accident itself, I did use these descriptions to recreate two trains of the mid 19th century period. My first thought was to lay out a simple section of track representing the cutting close to Cockshoot Bridge, where the accident occurred but soon began to realise that this would not make a very interesting scene. Simple diorama plan During the period when I was building the models for these two trains, I discovered the possibilities opened up by 3D printing . The restrictions imposed by Covid gave me plenty of time to practice my 3D modelling skills, using 'Fusion 360' software, and I was soon enjoying the excitement of creating models of prototypes that I had previously placed firmly in the ‘too difficult’ box. Mail train Cattle train Gradually, I began to realise that virtually any type of early 19th-century rolling stock was within my grasp, given the limited dimensions of the actual vehicle at that period. I got somewhat carried away and started churning out models of all sorts of prototype – whatever caught my fancy at the time! An advantage of creating small models by 3D printing is that once designed, they take very little time to print, such that I soon found myself with quite an extensive collection of models covering prototytpes that operated from the earliest days of the GWR. Although more of these prototypes than I initially expected did appear in the Bullo Pill and Forest of Dean areas, it was clear that I was also creating stock more appropriate for other areas, such as the South Devon railway and the original stretch of the GWR between Paddington and Maidenhead. This left me with much food for thought, when I came to think of how to create a scene that could be representative of all these areas. As a first step I assembled a few representative trains from the various models that I have made so far. My first model train shown below is based on contemporary illustrations by J.C. Bourne of Bath and Bristol Temple Meads stations. The very short wheelbase carriages (6 feet on 7’ gauge) did not survive very long and were ‘ordered off the line’ following a Board Meeting on 12th July 1838! ‘Argus’ (Firefly-class) with 1840s passenger train, comprising: luggage truck, closed 2nd, open 2nd, posting carriage, horse box, carriage truck When I first made a model of ‘Aurora’, I thought of these 4-4-0ST engines as primarily South Devon engines. Later, I discovered that several engines of this class were employed on trains working into the Forest of Dean from Bullo Pill, so they tied in with my earlier plans! To my surprise, no fewer than 11 of the ‘Bogie-class’ engines were deployed there between 1854 and 1861. My ‘removals’ train, shown below, was inspired by an article in the Broad Gauge Society journal ‘Broadsheet’ No.26, p10 , which featured the Bristol firm of Knee Brothers and their first recorded use of a Pantechnicon being transported by rail in 1847. ‘Aurora’ 4-4-0ST with Furniture removal train, comprising Henson patent Van, pantechnicon,brake van, horse box, luggage van I was very surprised to discover that engines of the ‘Sir Watkin’ class, original built as condensing engines for the Metropolitan Railway, served for a short time at Bullo Pill. I only know this because my wife’s great-grandfather was fined £1 on 26th April 1870 for “passing the danger signal running ‘Sir Watkin’ into collision with ‘Bulkeley”. I found that there had been another accident on the Forest of Dean line in 1863, when a train of 70 wagons broke free and led to a ‘pile up’, said to be 15 wagons high, which took 5 days to clear! After that, trains were limited to 45 trucks, although these were reported to be ‘12 tonners’. My collection of 12 ton wagon models was built when I was struggling with a problem of ‘stringing’ with my Prusa 3D printer, so they form a motley collection, including some poorly-printed models. ‘Sir Watkin’ with Bullo Pill coal train with seven 12 ton wagons My last group of models comprises three of the engines ordered to Brunel’s impossible specifications. 'Vulcan' was the first engine to be steamed on the GWR, having been delivered by barge to West Drayton in 1837. I confess that these are my favourite models and are currently displayed on a case on a shelf in the living room, where their gleaming brass-work always attracts attention. As Brunel once wrote “we have a splendid engine of Stephenson's, it would be a beautiful ornament in the most elegant drawing room.” Brunel’s engines: ‘Aeolus’ (rebuilt), ‘Vulcan’, and ‘Eagle’ In addition to all these, I also have made a model of a piston carriage as used on the South Devon Railway: South Devon Atmospheric Railway piston carriage and train So, what to do with all these models? One common factor in the early operations of the GWR is their close association with canals and docks. At the London end, materials for construction of the new railway were brought by the Grand Union Canal to depot set up at West Drayton, the place where Daniel Gooch first started his work for the GWR. Notably, the first engine ‘Vulcan’ was unloaded from a barge there through the use of lifting tackle and a convenient Elm Tree! Later, coal was delivered by sea and canal from Newcastle to coke ovens established between the canal and railway at West Drayton. Similarly, the small dock at Bullo Pill was used for the export of coal brought down by railway from the Forest of Dean. The first major civil engineering work on the GWR was the viaduct at Hanwell, named after Lord Wharncliffe, who had chaired the committee leading the GWR Bills on their passage through Parliament. Wharncliffe Viaduct - by P.G.Champion 8th July 2007- Own work, CC BY 2.0 uk, Other characteristic features of the early railway were the Brunel-designed stations, the round-house engine shed at Paddington, and the prolific use of wagon turntables for the movement of rolling stock at stations by manual labour and horses. I have an idea that it might be possible to illustrate these various features in a ‘generic’ diorama designed to capture the ‘character’ of the broad gauge... not forgetting, of course, that Elm Tree 🙂 The 1879 OS map of the area around Bullo Pill dock contains many of the features that I would like to represent. I could modify the ‘dock’ into a generic canal basin and rotate the main line running North-South over a viaduct on the left hand side of the map to run across the top as a backdrop to the scene. Extract from OS 25” maps surveyed 1879 CC-BY license as shown I’d be interested in any suggestions my readers might want to make about how this could become an interesting scene covering a wide range of potential presentations. Mike

In the July 1837 issue of Herapath's Railway Magazine, there is a statement regarding the GWR (p.22) that "On the entire works at present under contract, there are from 6,200 to.6,300 persons constantly employed, and about 460 horses. There are also four locomotive and two stationary engines, for drawing the waggons, and working the inclined planes." I do appreciate that I have a valued readership, from whom I derive considerable encouragement, but the last couple of posts received less comment than usual, so I thought I may be getting too esoteric even for my faithful followers. 😃 I have been exploring some fairly deep rabbit-holes and hope to emerge with some more practical ideas once i have absorbed all the new information.

Part of the point of photographic grey was the dull matt finish, to eliminate reflections. The engine at New Street seem to have more of a 'sheen' than I would have expected from matt grey.

The rolling stock built when the days of the broad gauge were numbered was designed to be convertible but I don't think it was done in normal operations. The difference in loading gauge was another problem when transferring from broad to narrow gauge.

indeed, and that's the problem here - so little data! I'll keep digging

Thank you for your kind remarks, William (Lacathedrale). I felt that I was becoming obsessed with minor details of no relevance to anyone! After a career in research, I like to chase any anomaly I find 🙂 As L.P. Hartley wrote — 'The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.'. Mike

Thank you for commenting, Mikkel - I was beginning to think I had strayed beyond even your wide-ranging interests! Edward Lane clearly came from a strongly artistic family. It is a pity that his notebooks and drawings, lodged in the Science Museum, are not more readily available in digital form. It would seem that he drew quite a number of engines and other rolling stock, many of which I have not seen. His father was much more widely known, with a Wikipedia article and several images on the web, including a later portrait of Princess Victoria: Mike

Well, that's good news!! It helps me to continue my research when I know others find it of interest. It always surprises me to realise how rapidly information about earlier times is 'lost'. We tend to assume we live in an 'information age' where everything is instantly available but that is far from the case. I have read Robert Harris' book 'Second Sleep', which provides a plausible reminder of how easily our civilisation could 'disappear', just like many others before it. Mike

I have written about Henson's patent, as applied on the broad gauge GWR, in my blog at https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/25862-broad-gauge-covered-van/ Mike

In my last few posts, I’ve been delving into the almost lost world of the early days of the GWR broad gauge. I notice that my previous post aroused little comment so, perhaps, I have moved rather too far from what most people think of as ‘railway modelling’ - but I do like using models as a way of improving our understanding of these early engines. I do appreciate the various 'likes' that many of you have given me. Before I move back into more familiar territory, there is one more piece of history to record, regarding an engine that may not have existed at all – at least not in the form in which it was described. Francis Whishaw on the GWR One of the earliest books to survey the British railway scene was Francis Whishaw’s “The Railways of Great Britain and Ireland” of which the 2nd edition, with additional plates, was published 1842. He wrote “THE Great Western Railway is by far the most gigantic work of the kind, not only in Great Britain, not only in Europe, but, we venture to say, in the whole world. Mr. Brunel, not satisfied with the beaten track pursued by those who had gone before him, determined on carrying out this important work on entirely new principles; and, notwithstanding the numerous adversaries he has had to contend with from every quarter, has thus far been eminently successful in his favourite project, and will, no doubt, ere another summer shall have passed away, pronounce this mighty work to be completed throughout.” I should add, though, that Whishaw did go on to criticise the great increase in the costs incurred, over the original Parliamentary estimate … something with which we are all too familiar! Concerning locomotives, Whishaw left us with a puzzle, when he wrote :“we have ... classified these machines according to their magnitude, and the gauge of way to which they severally belong. Thus the six-wheel engines for the seven-feet gauge, as those on the Great Western Railway, belong to class A ; ...An engine belonging to class A is shewn in elevation in Plate 1, the frontispiece. and sections and details of an engine belonging to this class are exhibited in Plates 7, 8, and 9.” Whereas Plate 1 shows a locomotive of the ‘Firefly’ class, the engine shown in Plates 7, 8, and 9 does not correspond to any engine known to have worked on the GWR!: Whishaw Plate 7 Whishaw Plate 8 Whishaw does not specifically state that this is a GWR engine, although that assumption has been made by many later writers and is reasonable, considering that no other British railway used a 7 foot gauge.. The image has also sometimes been referred to as being a member of the ‘Firefly’ class, which it superficially resembles, at first glance. I have also noticed that there are many similarities between these drawings and the example of Stephenson’s ‘Patentee’ engine, illustrated in Tredgold’s ‘The Steam Engine, Vol II’, Plate LXXXXIX (99), published 1838. To demonstrate this, I overlaid the two drawings to the same scale, as shown below: Comparison between Whishaw’s Plate 7 and Stephenson’s ‘Patentee’ Creating a 3D Model I decided to create a 3D model based on Whishaw Plates 7 and 8, shown above. As usual, I imported the two images as ‘canvases’ into ‘Fusion 360’. I used the various sketching tools in this software to create drawings, which I could then extrude to create the main components of the engine. I also copied details of the frames and axle guides from the drawing of the ‘Patentee’ engine in Tredgold’s book.. Examples of Components extruded from Whishaw plates Once I had extruded all the necessary components, including use of the ‘revolve tool’ for the chimney, safety valve, and manhole cover, I assembled them together, within the Fusion 360 software, and created a ‘rendered’ 3D image: My 3D model created from Plates in Whishaw. Comparing Models When viewing the images of the Whishaw engine in isolation, it is not difficult to conclude that this image has similarities with the GWR ‘Firefly’ class. That idea is quickly disposed of, however, when I bring together the above model with the model of ‘Argus’, a member of the Firefly-class that I created in 2021.. Note that both these models were created to the scales indicated on the original drawings. My 3D models of the Whishaw engine and Firefly-class ‘Argus’ brought together Once the two models are placed together, the profound differences between their overall dimensions is immediately apparent! Notice too, the much lighter frames and smaller driving wheels of Whishaw’s engine. Similar Engines There was a Stephenson 2-2-2 of the ‘Patentee’ type, named ‘Harvey Combe’, which was built n 1835 and was used by Messrs. Cubitt, the contractors, during construction of the London and Birmingham Railway near Berkhampstead. The scene was captured by the artist J.C.Bourne, as shown above in my header image: According to an article in ‘The Engineer’ by J.G.H. Warren, dated 24th Sep.,1926, Nicholas Wood, in a “Report to the Directors of the Great Western Railway,” December 10th, 1838, gave results of experiments on the ‘Harvey Combe’ of the London and Birmingham Railway, to compare with contemporary experiments with the North Star of the Great Western Railway. I have not read Wood’s report in full but it suggests the possibility, at least, that similar engines might have been used by contractors engaged in construction of the GWR. It does seem to me that an engine similar to that shown in Whishaw would have been far more suitable for that task than the large-wheeled engines specified by Brunel, as the initial engines for the GWR. Perhaps, then, the engine shown in Whishaw’s book represents a ‘missing link’ between the engines built by Stephenson for the London and Birmingham railway and an engine or engines used during the construction of the broad gauge GWR? Mike

The economics were very different - in general, labour was cheap. High grade steels for tools and the like were extremely expensive. Holes were usually punched rather than drilled. It seems almost incredible to us that all those curved frames and cut-outs were done by hand! Re-working them by hand was much cheaper than buying new materials.

Back in 2014, I started a thread about these early absorbed engines. Sadly it has now been archived and I cannot restore the images that were lost in the 'great extinction'. There was a link that may be of interest: "I found that there are extensive records of all the locomotives built by the Vulcan foundry on the web at http://www.enuii.org/vulcan_foundry/ These records includes lists of locomotives deliveries by years, in which the S&H engines appear. According to Ahrons, one of these engines could still be seen "lying in a heap of scrap behind Swindon Works in 1886". "Some of these early engines survived well into the 20th century, usually after having been re-built several times. The last engine from the OW&W seems to have been around until 1921, by which time it had acquired a more conventional GWR appearance, as 0-6-0 No.58." At the time, I felt that trying to model one of these engines was beyond my ability but they may now go onto my list for 3D printing! Mike

The tangles continue ... just as I had decided that Lane's visual interpretation was more 'correct', I came across a drawing signed by Robert Stephenson of an un-named engine, dated June 12th, 1840. This has rather wide barrelled safety-valve casings that I had thought looked 'un-realistic'.on the Bird drawing of 'Evening Star'. There are so many variations in these early engines that I doubt whether we can ever be sure about the appearance of an individual engine. Drawing signed Robert Stephenson, June 12th, 1840 This drawing shows several interesting features, including the full-elliptic springs on the carrying wheels and the internal steam circuit. Also, the water feed loops back to the side of the firebox. Mike

I'm sure they would have painted your carriages very nicely! Mike

When I was in China for the solar eclipse in 2009, the TV vans were marked as shown below: Mike

In my previous post, I wrote that I needed to make a model of one of the longer-boilered ‘Stars’, to see if it made a better comparison with the photograph taken at Cheltenham shed around 1850. According to the RCTS booklet Part Two, two ‘Stars’ were built with boilers that were 2 feet longer than the others – these were ‘Rising Star’ and ‘Bright Star’. We are very fortunate that E.T. Lane not only made several sketches of ‘Rising Star’, including end-elevations, but also produced a finished and very detailed drawing of the same engine. E.T. Lane I have made considerable use of sketches by E.T. Lane in my blog posts, so I thought I should find out a little more about him. It proved to be a far from easy search but I eventually found information on the ‘Ancestry’ website. Edward Theophilus Lane, to give his full name, was one of two sons of the engraver and lithographer Richard James Lane. Both sons died young. Richard James Lane, was born at Berkeley Castle in 1800, He became a Royal Academician and, in 1829, he drew a well-known portrait of the young Princess Victoria, later to become Queen. In lithography, he is reputed to have attained a delicacy and refinement which have never been surpassed. In addition, Edward’s grandmother was a niece of the celebrated painter Gainsborough, so there was a history of artistic talent running in the family. With that background, it is hardly surprising that Edward should have developed his own artistic talent, with which he chose to provide us with a remarkable series of sketches and drawings of engines and other rolling stock at Swindon, up to his early death at the age of 20. In addition to sketch books, he left 41 sketches of locomotives, carriages, and wagons on separate sheets. It seems likely that he succumbed to one of the many epidemics that plagued ‘New Swindon’ in those years, including outbreaks of cholera and smallpox. He must have returned home to London, where he was buried at St. Pancras in 1850. His elegant drawing of ‘Rising Star’ stands as a fine example of his art: Finished drawing of ‘Rising Star’ by Edward Lane, dated April 25, 1849 My 3D-model of Rising Star I created my model by modifying the drawings of ‘Evening Star’, described in my previous post. I lengthened the frames by inserting an additional 8 mm (scale 2 feet) between the leading and driving wheels and, similarly, I extended the boiler length by 2 feet. I created a new firebox. which had a reported case length of 5 feet, as opposed to 4’ 10” on ‘Evening Star’. I also created a new ‘haycock’ top, to the profile shown in the Lane drawing. On the sketches by Lane, the smokebox is shown as 1” longer than ‘Evening Star’, while the trailing wheels have only 14 spokes compared with 16 spokes on the leading wheels. (this last is a characteristic shared with his sketch of ‘Vulcan’ and applied to my model of that engine. My 3D-model created by reference to Lane’s drawing These various minor differences demonstrate the way in which each of these early engines was ‘hand made’, with various small discrepancies between one engine and the next, apart from any significant design changes. As I pointed out in my earlier post ‘From the Stars to Firefly’, the great innovation by Gooch was to ensure that all his Firefly-class engines were built to standard templates, so that components were interchangeable between different members of the class. My 3D-model of Rising Star My two models of ‘Evening Star’ and ‘Rising Star’, rendered in ‘Fusion 360’, appear together below. These are not ‘finished’ models but are intended simply to show the more obvious differences between members of the same class. Neither Lane’s drawing nor his sketches of ‘Rising Star’ show a manhole cover on the ‘haycock’, so I have not included one in my model, although I strongly suspect that one was, in fact, present on the prototype. My 3D-models of ‘Evening Star’ (left) and ‘Rising Star’ My next ‘test’ is to see how my model of ‘Rising Star’ compares with the engine in the photograph taken at Cheltenham: My model of ‘Rising Star’ compared with Cheltenham photo Of course the match is not perfect. It is, in fact, rather difficult to adjust all the display parameters, so that the ‘Fusion 360’ model has the same perspective as the photograph. I do believe though that the longer boiler matches the photo rather well and that the firebox is more appropriate than the one on Lane’s sketch of ‘Evening Star’. Without more information about the photograph, which is probably lost in the mists of time, I can’t take matters any further. Expanding the Galaxy There is another finished drawing by Edward Lane of the last of the Stars, ‘Royal Star’, delivered in November 1841, four years after the first of the class – the famous ‘North Star’ – and some time after many of Gooch’s own Firefly-class had entered service. ‘Royal Star’ reverted to the shorter (8’) boiler used on ‘Evening Star’ and the most obvious difference from the earlier engine lay in the shape of the firebox casing. This was shorter (4’ 6” length) and taller, with wood-lagged sides in the shape of a ‘Gothic arch’ up to the high-mounted safety valve casing. I made a ‘haycock’ top some years ago by a rather convoluted method. With more knowledge of the tools in ‘Fusion 360’, I tried a simpler method but it was soon obvious that adding the wooden lagging to the curved sides of the ‘Gothic’ box was going to be a new modelling challenge! To create the Gothic box, I first made a cuboid box and then drew the ‘Gothic’ profile on one side. I then used the ‘push-pull’ tool in Fusion 360 to produce the ‘Gothic’ arch in one direction. After that, I rotated the box though 90 degrees and repeated the ‘push pull’, to create the second, orthogonal arched profile. A diagram helps: Creating ‘Gothic’ Firebox in Fusion 360 That proved to be a very straightforward method but adding the planked lagging needed more thought. I eventually found a solution from watching this video on YouTube.. For this solution, I created a new body by extruding from the inner outline I had already sketched, as shown in the diagrams above. I then slid this body through the firebox body – fortunately, this is allowed in the virtual world, where bodies pass freely through one another! Next, I had to cut the arched faces of this new body to match the profile of the firebox itself. Again, a diagram helps: Creating the Lagging on Firebox Sides The finishing touch was to represent the planks of the wooden lagging To do this, I made a single horizontal slot near the bottom of a lagged side. I then used the ‘pattern on path’ command in ‘Fusion 360‘ to repeat this feature upwards, along a path following the profile of the side of the firebox. This procedure almost magically created the feature that I wanted. My 3D-model of a Gothic Firebox for Royal Star All that remained was for me to place this firebox into my model of ‘Royal Star’, which was mainly just a copy of ‘Evening Star’: My 3D-model of Royal Star Later Re-builds Most of the ‘Stars’ were converted into Tank engines during the 1850s. The conversion included replacement of the leading 4’ diameter wheels by pairs of 3’ 6” diameter wheels and lengthening of the boiler to 10 feet, where this had not already been done. Since I now had the ‘bit between the teeth’, I thought I would illustrate this later development by modifying my model of ‘Rising Star’, which already had a 10’ boiler. The re-design was generally straight-forward: just adding a saddle-tank and bunker. These parts were similar to those I have previously designed for my model of ‘Leo’. The most difficult modification was to redesign the front end of the frames to accommodate the paired wheels. It didn’t take very long, however, before I had a 3D-model, which I have named ‘Red Star’ My 3D-model of ‘Red Star’ One again, I should point out that these are not ‘finished’ models but are only intended to indicate the different characteristics of the various members of the ‘Star-class’. I hope I have shown that not all GWR engines look the same! My Galaxy of Stars There’s a lot more work needed before any of these become printable models but that means I have plenty of material to keep me going through the coming winter months 🙂 Mike

I’ve referred before to the problems that arise from using published drawings as the basis for creating 3D models of early locomotives. The usual dictum of “find a photograph of your selected prototype” simply doesn’t apply to the years before photography became established. That leads to the next problem – so much of the information we read about early locomotives comes from books that were written decades after the time to which they refer. Even Gooch’s own ‘diary’ is considered suspect, since the pages about the early years were clearly written much later. It’s by no means a new problem either – Sekon, in his book ‘The Evolution of the Steam Locomotive’, published in 1898, made the following comment: “Readers may wonder why such obviously inaccurate statements should be published. One can only conjecture. Many lists of early locomotives have during the past few years been published. These should, however, be accepted with the very greatest caution.”. Matters have got considerably worse with the passage of much more time! We are very fortunate to have the sketch books and drawings made by the young apprentice at Swindon in the 1840s, Edward Lane, who sadly died at the age of 20. In his short life, he made an invaluable record for posterity of first-hand views of early Broad Gauge locomotives and other rolling stock. Even though many of his illustration are only rough sketches, they present a ‘from life’ impression and many of them are annotated with measurements and additional sketches of small details. Much later, early in the 20th century, another set of illustrations was produced by G.F. Bird and these appeared in a special supplement to ‘The Engineer’ magazine. Later still, after WW2, the RCTS produced a booklet covering the Broad Gauge Engines of the GWR as Part Two of a series on GWR Locomotives. On page B3, the booklet comments that “Bird's line drawings, the early ones mainly derived from the sketches and drawings made by E. T. Lane at Swindon in 1848/9, still remain a classic. They are the only known illustrations of many of the early engines and some are used yet again in this volume”. We must not, however, forget the caution sounded by Sekon back in 1892 and, from my own experience, Bird appears to have misinterpreted some of the information contained in Lane’s sketches. In replying to comment in my previous post about Leo-class engines, I wrote that “Another example I have found is the case of 'Evening Star', where Lane shows appropriate-looking safety valve covers but with figures above them that seem to indicate a much larger diameter. Bird has drawn extremely fat covers, presumably based on his reading but, to me, they do not look 'right'.” Comparison of sketch by Lane and later drawing by Bird I reported that “One day, I must study this engine in more detail”, so here goes! Modelling ‘Evening Star’ In the case of the ‘Stars’, we are especially fortunate to have a couple of very early photographs of three Broad Gauge locomotives outside Cheltenham shed, possibly as early as 1848. One of the engines is alleged to be ‘Polar Star’, although I have not found a good reference to the source of that attribution. Early Photographs taken in Cheltenham c.1848 According to the RCTS Part Two, ‘Evening Star’ was similar to ‘Polar Star’, so the photographs shown above are a useful point of reference. I also wanted a larger version of the Bird drawing than that shown in ‘The Engineer’ supplement published 16th December 1910, which included charts showing various Broad Gauge engines. This led me to another of the pitfalls that are frequently encountered with published drawings! I turned to Arman’s ‘Broad Gauge engines of the GWR, Part1’, published 2018, where on p.82, there is a reproduction of Bird’s drawing from the Locomotive Magazine 1901. It is immediately obvious (from the elliptical wheels) that this reproduction is compressed in the vertical direction. These distortions always have to be watched out for! Returning to the Lane sketch, I decided to create a sketch in Fusion 360, using Lane’s written dimensions. The result, shown below, looks to be proportioned similarly to the Bird drawing. My Sketch based on Lane’s Dimensions Although some Lane sketches appear to be accurately proportioned, this one clearly is not. Even some of his written dimensions appear to be incorrect. For example, the overall length of the boiler between smokebox and firebox is clearly marked as 7’ 9” (31mm in 4mm scale) but there are three figures written below, apparently referring to the boiler rings, that do not add up to this total – they are “2.3”, “4.3”, “3.2”. Perhaps the central figure refers to the boiler diameter over the cladding? At this point, I must state that I have not made any pilgrimages to Kew or York, to study original drawings. I note that there is a lot of detailed information about dimensions of the various ‘Stars’ in the RCTS booklet but I do not know the original sources. Therefore, please exercise the caution advised by Sekon, when reading the following paragraphs concerning my own speculation. Now I return to the matter of the safety valve casings. The ‘Polar Star’ photos do not show any fitted on the boiler of ‘Polar Star’, so these photos are of no help. The only guide I have is that Lane’s ‘from life’ sketch shows tall, narrow casings, similar to those on the ‘North Star’ replica in Swindon Museum, rather than the odd-looking fat tubes in Bird’s drawing. I have been looking at other Lane sketches for clues and found one of ‘Hesperus’, a ‘Sun-class’ engine, with a carefully drawn casing but, unfortunately, without any dimensions being shown. To my eyes, it looks like a better-drawn version of the casings shown on the rough sketch of ‘Evening Star’. The plinth is wider than the main column and I suggest could be the source of the “1” dimension, marked on the ‘Evening Star’ sketch. Perhaps, I am just adding more ‘errors’ by my speculations but I am influenced by the ‘jizz’ of Lane’s sketch. So I have continued to create a 3D-model in Fusion 360, drawing on the information contained in the photographs and the Bird drawing, as well as the Lane sketch, to re-create the frames and the haycock top of the firebox. The RCTS Part Two states that the firebox casing on ‘Evening Star’ was 4’ 10” long, which agrees exactly with Lane’s dimension, so I am content to use this figure. My 3D-model of ‘Evening Star’ created in Fusion 360 Now, though, I come up against a major discrepancy between the Lane drawing of ‘Evening Star’ and the supposedly similar ‘Polar Star’, alleged to be the engine in the Cheltenham photograph. In Lane’s sketch, the joint between the rectangular firebox and the ‘haycock’ top is well below the level of the boiler top, whereas the photograph shows a much taller rectangular box with a more ‘squashed’ haycock top. In the caption to the Cheltenham photographs on p.84 of Arman’s book ‘Broad Gauge Engines of the GWR, Part One’, he asserts that “Polar Star had its frames and boiler lengthened by 2’ 0” by 1849, so we can date the photograph as prior to that work being carried out”. I am not at all sure about that. I oriented my model in Fusion 360 as closely as I could to one of the Cheltenham photographs and the comparison shows that the boiler appears significantly longer in the photo, ahead of the driving wheels, than in my model: My 3D-model of ‘Evening Star with photograph of ‘Polar Star’ As a further test, following a method I have used on other photographs, I used the ‘perspective’ control in 'Photoshop' to allow comparison between the diameter of the driving wheel (known to be 7’) and the length of the boiler in the photograph of ‘Polar Star’ ‘Cheltenham Photo’ with Perspective Adjustment Knowing the diameter of the driving wheel was 7 feet, this comparison indicates the boiler length was (330/230) x 7 feet, i.e. 10 feet. This supports my suggestion that, at the time of the photograph, the frames and boiler of the ‘Star’ had been lengthened by 2 feet from the original 8 foot boiler length. The design of the firebox also matches Lane’s sketch of ‘Rising Star’ which was built with the longer boiler. It now looks as though I shall have to make a model of ‘Rising Star’ to take this investigation further! Mike

I think it looks better reversed and doing that puts the driver on the left.