GWR Metro Tank 2-4-0 number 1458.

[greggieboy]

Thanks Jim C,that is probably the easier way out,but it will niggle away at me,as all the other loco's on the layout are correctly numbered for the time and area (as near as I could get,i.e Devon) so will probably renumber to 1498/9,but even then. dont know the original shed allocation for those two,so will still be using a bit of artistic licence !!!!

[JimC]

Its something I muse about occasionally though. The GWR's locomotive fleet was as small as they thought they could get away with for the services they had to run, so if as modellers we expand the number of services to be run with fictional extra lines, then it follows that we should expand the locomotive fleet in order to be able to run those services. And everything changes in our fictional world. I have a model of an imaginary running shed. Should I invent a shed code and paint it on all my locomotives? Nothing authentic about a shed with a rag tag of locomotives all based somewhere else. But if I do that should every locomotive be one that did not exist at my time period? Or is my fictional line one that was built instead of a real line, in which case I can appropriate the allocations from that line. In some ways modelling a real site is the easy option!  Or have I just had too much coffee and not enough sleep?

[The Johnster]

Rule 1; with great power comes great responsibility.  Most of us, once we go beyond the train set stage, model fictitious places and try to invent back stories to make them plausible to our own critical sense of realism and operate them with at least a nod to the 'correct' locos and stock for the location and period chosen.  In my case, I have modelled a branch line that never existed in a geographical location that does.  The tiny Nant Lechyd stream is a tributary of the Ogwr river in Mid-Glamorgan, and flows through the Dimbath Valley, Cwmdimbath, which can be found on the map off the A4061 road between the hamlets of Blackmill and Glynogwr.  My layout shows the mining village and it's BLT that never existed in reality here.

 

The railway centre of this particular universe was Tondu, loco shed and carriage depot situated to the north of Bridgend and still a station and junction on the Maesteg branch.  In my period, 1948-58, it provided motive power and passenger stock for the Bridgend-Abergwynfi, Blaengarw, Nantymoel, and Tondu-Porthcawl branches and the freight and diversionary route to Bryncethin Jc from Llanharan on the SWM ; prior to 1930 and during the war it also encompassed working the Gilfach Goch branch.  Following the closure of the Rhondda and Swansea Bay line between Cwmmer Afan and Port Talbot it provided trains for a Bridgend-Trerherbert service, with the Abergwynfi service being diverted to nearby Blaengwynfi on the R&SB route, but this post dates my period. 

 

So, for my period, that's 4 branches, 3 after 1953 when Blaengarw closed to passenger traffic and 2 post 1958 when Nantymoel also closed to passenger traffic.  The shed had an allocation of around 50 locos, it varied a little,  to provide motive power for these and such main line work as was needed.  For the sake of mathematical simplicity, let's say 10 locos for each branch and the main line (this included the Porthcawl-Cardiff 'Residential' commuter service).

 

On that basis, if my Cwmdimbath branch had existed, a further allocation of locos would have been needed to work it, a further 10 of them.  In the event, I have a stud of 14 locos, and all of them are proper Tondu denizens from the period except for a colliery Peckett and a Rule 1 BR standard 3MT from Barry that has a daily through working.  This is sufficient to run the service in the way that it was actually run.  As there was only a single platform at Bridgend available for all the Valleys branches, trains were called into it behind the previous arrival, and to save blocking the up SWML with loco's running round, the incoming loco coupled to the train ahead of it and worked that one back to whichever valley it had originated from, and only the leading loco ran around to couple to the other end of the last train in.  Therefore, different locos and stock appeared throughout the day at the up-valley termini.

 

On top of this there are boiler washouts, each loco being out of service every 3 weeks for 2 working days, and covering locos absent on works visits, so we can probably assume 7 different locos per branch per day covering passenger, pickup, and mineral trips.  This is one of the reasons I chose to model this area, loco biodiversity is considerable.  I could justify locos not on the Tondu roster at this time on the basis that at least another 7 locos would have had to have been allocated to the shed to cover the Cwmdimbath work.  To cover it, that is, not to do it, and I cannot square away with my disbelief suspension programming more than 2 extra locos, which would have to be types not too unlikely but which I would obviously prefer to be classes I do not yet have,

 

These might be eventually either the unfinished kits, a Taff A and a Rhymney R, but these could be catered for by Rule 1 through workings from Barry or Dyffryn Yard.  There are also as yet unrepresented Tondu locos; 5208, the only 5202 present in my time frame, which is of course available RTR from Hornby and could be a body swapper with 4218 (6762 and 2761 already share a Bachmann 57xx chassis), pre 1953 small prairies 4404 and 4406, and Collet 1938 31xx class large prairie 3100.  These last 3 were connected with the Porthcawl branch, and I have seen no evidence of the Tondu 44xx anywhere else; they are probably pushing the Rule 1 envelope a little to close to implausibility for me, but I have seen a photo of 3100 at Abergwynfi, which is good enough for me to postulate that it might have been an occasional visitor to Cwmdimbath, a station inspired in no small measure by Abergwynfi.

 

Similar story with passenger stock, as I acquire by renumbering, kitbashing, cut'n'shutting, and Comet builds an increasing proportion of correct Todu allocated vehicles.  General merchandise freight, and mineral, wagons were not in circuits in the area at my time, so I can and cheerfully do adopt a more freestyle 'pool' approach. but try to get things to at least give a nod to proportions; wooden to steel minerals, opens to vans, BIg 4 to BR and so on.

 

To summarise, yes, you've had too much coffee and not enough sleep.  You might be able to use some of the above jiggerypokery to justify locos; decide which real shed supplied most of those in your area, and model suitable candidates allocated to it during your period.  If it's a main line layout, Old Oak's big engines got more or less everywhere on the GW, and you've a good few to choose from.

[JimC]

What are the gradients going to be like on your Cwmdimbath branch? If they are reasonable severe then that could be a reasonable justification for a 44 on some heavier trains. 

[The Johnster]

Gradients on the Tondu Valleys branches were pretty severe at their upper ends; the final pitch at Nantymoel was 1 in 27, and the OS map shows that Cwmdimbath was in reality probably too steep for a railway to have ever been a practicable proposition.  The 44xx were used on the Porthcawl branch, however, where speeds were very low and gradients were much less of an issue.  The reason was viciously tight curvature, and two locos were used, one for passenger one for freight, each retiring to the shed at midday to be turned in order to even out flange wear.

 

44xx were allowed 15mph on the Pyle-Porthcawl section, all others subject to 5mph at South Cornelly.  Largest tender loco allowed was 43xx, but 42xx and 72xx were permitted; 42xx appeared on excursion traffic, which was considerable in summer after the dock closed; the coal sidings were used as stabling for this traffic.

 

The John Hodge/Stuart Davies books have a picture of a 44xx in the 'back siding' off the Valleys platform at Bridgend, which suggests the possibility that it might have worked a train into the mountain fastnesses, but this is not really evidence and I would not be comfortable with it, especially as I’ve already spent a lot of my Rule 1 credit on the Barry 3MT.  Very few ‘foriegn shed’ locos got past Tondu and into the hills. 

Edited March 1, 2021 by The Johnster

[wagonman]

I don't know where 1498 was, but 1499 often worked the Marlborough branch in the late '20s-'30s so was presumably shedded somewhere in the division.

 

 

[Miss Prism]

3 hours ago, wagonman said:

...1499 often worked the Marlborough branch in the late '20s-'30s so was presumably shedded somewhere in the division.

 

http://www.gwr.org.uk/water-cranes/1499-marlborough-23may1929.jpg

 

[Guy Rixon]

On 28/02/2021 at 11:35, JimC said:

Its something I muse about occasionally though. The GWR's locomotive fleet was as small as they thought they could get away with for the services they had to run, so if as modellers we expand the number of services to be run with fictional extra lines, then it follows that we should expand the locomotive fleet in order to be able to run those services. And everything changes in our fictional world. I have a model of an imaginary running shed. Should I invent a shed code and paint it on all my locomotives? Nothing authentic about a shed with a rag tag of locomotives all based somewhere else. But if I do that should every locomotive be one that did not exist at my time period? Or is my fictional line one that was built instead of a real line, in which case I can appropriate the allocations from that line. In some ways modelling a real site is the easy option!  Or have I just had too much coffee and not enough sleep?

Yep, I sympathise. How far can one go before the historical deltas are just too much?

 

I have one of those issues concerning Metros, as it happens. I want a Metro to run some passenger services on a contrafactual line in London. It has to be a condenser or it can't do the work. I'd very much like a medium Metro, firstly because they look nicer and secondly because there is no kit for the large kind; but, in 1909, all six of the remaining, condensing Metros had large tanks. Can I justify retention of some medium Metros for this extra service, or would the GWR have kept more large ones in London?

Edited March 1, 2021 by Guy Rixon

[The Johnster]

Much as you'd like a medium Metro, Guy, I would be of the view that the GW clearly preferred large Metros for condensing work after 1909, and there was probably a reason for this, so assuming your layout to be set post 1909, your locos should adhere as far as possible to the general policy, especially if there were no real examples that bucked it.  It is best to model the typical, the mundane, rather than the unusual or unlikely.  You must come to your own peace treaty with Rule 1 of course...