Creating a believable freelance pre-Group company

[CKPR]

On 29/01/2021 at 13:36, Johnson044 said:

...and the Maryport and Carlisle is a perfect precedent for a freelance company- big enough to fall into the secondary main line category, rather than that of light railway,

Aside from the fact that it was one of the local lines in west Cumberland and had running powers to my home town of Cockermouth, part of the attraction of the M&CR for me is that it alway seemed  akin to a US short line. It  actually ran between the two places in its title, interchanged traffic with various larger railways and maintained  a delightfully idiosyncratic collection of  home grown and bought in locomotives, no two of which were the same (bar the last two No. 29 and No.30) and most of which were rebuilt at least once by the M&C's own works at Maryport.    

Edited February 12, 2021 by CKPR

[ianathompson]

 

I am just reading  the recently published Nick Deacon's Hull & Barnsley Volume 2.

This is the type of railway that I assumed that people were talking about when considering freelanced pre-Grouping companies..

It certainly had distinctive motive power with its domeless boilers.

It also had a number of potential modelling scenarios for those interested.

These include the unopened Doncaster passenger station and the proposals to extend to Huddersfield.

 

What defines a freelanced railway?

I assume that if you built the Huddersfield/Bradford etc, branch of the H&B that this would not constitute a freelanced railway.

Does changing its name to the Hull & West Riding meet the criterion?

(You could even have a branch to Dewsbury to become the seventeenth station in the town!

Said facetiously as someone raised in Batley!)

 

I suppose it boils down to how big a company you want to portray.

If you model such a railway I assume that you will select a small part of it on the premise that it is part of a much larger company.

If you adopt this strategy then you will need a large number of locomotives from a restricted number of classes.

Unconventionality is unlikely to be a defining factor for such a fleet.

 

Johnson044 mentioned the Barry Railway 0-8-0s.

I must admit that I was unaware of these but they look to be a fairly conventional design for a heavy freight loco of the period.

Their 0-8-2Ts deviate further away form the norm but are a logical extension of the prevailing 0-6-2Ts in the Welsh coalfields.

 

If you opt to model a small impecunious backwater concern running on a shoestring then I suppose that there are more options available.

I would suggest that the MSWJ fell into this category. 

A quick glance at the chapter headings in the Wild Swan book suggests that there were three locos in a "class" of one.

It resembled a model railway in that it had 31 locos in twelve classes!

 

The Single Fairlie was a bizarre machine for the period in that not only was it articulated but it used Walschaert's valve gear. 

It was in service for less than ten years and the staff found it diffcult to maintain, partly because the valve gear was so far away from the norm at that time.

 

I suppose, as ever, that 'you pay your money and you take your choice'.

I did note in the locomotives section of my website that one valid criticism of my own layout would be that each loco is an individual rather than a member of of a small number of classes.

Freelancing, as I have observed therein, many times, is a double edged sword.

You are free to build whatever you want but you have to try to moderate your desires if you want to obtain a credible result.

 

Ian T

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by ianathompson

[Regularity]

Listen, I model the East & West Junction Railway (when I do any actual modelling) and I have already had arguments at exhibitions with “know it alls” who think that I have either made it up completely, or have confused it with the East and West Yorkshire Union Railway.
The latter point was made in Leamington: apart from a tiny bit of Oxfordshire in the middle, Warwickshire accounted for the West part of the railway, with the East bit being Northamptonshire. So, a local minor line, unlike the not very local minor line I was told I was actually modelling.

Then there was the guy who saw my interlaced sleepers, not timbers, on the pointwork on Sulgrave Manor and informed me that the exhibition guide had a misprint, and it should have said NBR, not N&BJR. Despite informing him that I had written the guide, and that this was a supposed branch of the Northampton and Banbury Junction Railway, he insisted it was really NBR because of the sleepered pointwork: “Which was a feature of the NBR.” My statement that ALL Scottish companies, plus several English ones, at some point used sleepered turnouts, and that I had photographs of such track on the N&BJR, he was adamant that I was wrong, and that it North British Railway...

I miss exhibitions!

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, ianathompson said:

Unconventionality is unlikely to be a defining factor for such a fleet.

Not 100% in agreement here. 
In the case of the Hull Barnsley & West Riding Junction Railway and Dock Company (HB&WRJR&DCo.) as it was known for its first 20 years, the original locos were designed - with his Board’s permission - by Matthew Kirtley of the LCDR, and many can be seen as modifications/modernisations of the basic designs of William Martley who preceded him, for example the 2-4-0s were essentially inside framed 6’ driving wheel versions of the 6’6” outside framed designs of Martley: these were built by Beyer, Peacock, and EWJR number 13 was a direct copy of this, with the substitution of a Belpaire firebox.

Other smaller railways, for example the Cambrian Railways (and many of its constituents) and the Furness bought off-the -shelf designs from Sharp, Stewart and Co, and the EWJR bought new from BP.
Particular locomotive superintendents would frequently return to their preferred supplier, lacking the resources to engage in detailed locomotive design. Second hand purchases, on the other hand, meant that a motley assortment might also turn up! (The EWJR bought 3 DX goods, but they all differed from each other: one vacuum fitted, one with H-spoke drivers. One was “standard”.)

[Edwardian]

Freelancing, prominent in US outline, where Roads bought standard equipment from private builders, is with British outline generally confined to narrow gauge or Light Railway type lines.

 

The idea of modelling a more major minor line, let alone a larger pre-Grouping company, is generally eschewed.  I think that lines, such as Simon mentions above, which can boast the attributes of a 'mainline' company, albeit sometimes a relatively modest one, are the perfect model for a freelance line, with a preponderance of equipment bought in from private builders or second hand. 

 

Hence the West Norfolk Railway, which is designed to represent with reasonable fidelity such a minor pre-Grouping company, just not a real one. 

 

Other examples, relevant to my project, would be the Eastern & Midland and the Lynn & Fakenham.  If you can imagine a history in which those two lines amalgamated, but without the framework of joint ownership by the GNR and the MR, you would have a line very much of the character of the WNR; a line that was beginning to adopt standard classes of locomotives supplied by outside builders. 

[whart57]

And the London and Surrey, as mentioned in earlier instalments

[ianathompson]

21 hours ago, Regularity said:

Not 100% in agreement here. 

 

I will admit that i am no expert on Edwardian railways, but like most modellers, I would like to think that I have a reasonable working knowledge of what to generally expect.

As an ignoramus on the finer points I would suggest the following type of line up was common.

Goods trains 0-6-0 or 0-6-2T or maybe 0-8-0 where heavy minerals were carried.

Express passenger 4-4-0.

Local passenger 2-4-0 or 2-4-0T, 0-4-4T or 2-4-2T.

 

These are generailities but that is what I would expect as a self confessed outsider.

There might be all kinds of technicaltities that would render the locomotives unusual but they would generally go over the head of an ignoramus such as myself.

Irrespective of the details of the locos I would have thought that moving away from this template, for a larger company, might be 'pushing the envelope'.

 

Obviously there were exceptions to this rule of thumb.

In fact my pre-Grouping company of choice, the Great North of Scotland, was somewhat bizarre in regarding 4-4-0s as almost the only type needed, no matter what the duty.

 

For a smaller railway  things could justifiably move further away from the above template.

Having recently obtained  both volumes of Taylor's Stratford upon Avon & Midland Junction Railway, which I have not got around to reading just yet, I went looking for the photo of No 13.

To put it mildly,I was somewhat surprised when I flicked through vol 1 to see the E&WJR's loco fleet, particularly the Buddicoms, the double Fairlie and that very same single Failrlie tank.

On the other side of the coin, without having delved too far into the text, most of them seem to have been ephemeral and the E&WJR was a short line.

 

I got drawn into this discussion by Johnson044 making a comparison between narrow gauge and standard gauge freelance modelling.

My previous replies were aimed at establishing the reasons for the greater variety of locos on NG model railways and the willingness of NG modellers to create freelance layouts.

As I happily admit I am no expert on the Edwardian railway (nor on NG lines either for that matter) and I am unlikely to attempt to create a SG pre-Grouping company.

 

I don't mind what people choose to model on their own railway.

After all Rule 1 applies.

I do think however that a freelanced railway needs a coherent background if it wishes to be successful.

If there is no discernible reason for moving away from the rough outline that most modellers would expect then credibility suffers.

 

My views about the GNoSR and the justification for the AFK can be found by clicking on the website home page, and following the directions there, for any one interested.

A word of warning for the casual visitor.

The Little World is a long document making reference to many more maps than might be expected for a railway sited between Narnian and Ruritania.

 

Ian T

[Edwardian]

28 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

 

I will admit that i am no expert on Edwardian railways, but like most modellers, I would like to think that I have a reasonable working knowledge of what to generally expect.

As an ignoramus on the finer points I would suggest the following type of line up was common.

Goods trains 0-6-0 or 0-6-2T or maybe 0-8-0 where heavy minerals were carried.

Express passenger 4-4-0.

Local passenger 2-4-0 or 2-4-0T, 0-4-4T or 2-4-2T.

 

Yes, and also ...

 

Goods and mixed traffic classes could be 0-4-2s (e.g. LSWR A12 - express goods), or small-wheeled 4-4-0s (e.g. LSWR Class 380).

 

The 2-4-0 is a perfectly respectable express passenger configuration going into the 1900s, (e.g. LNWR Precedent, GER T19).  

 

Branch passenger would include 0-4-2Ts.  Any small superannuated tender engines could work branches; the idea of a 'tank engine only' branchline is perhaps the result of much GWR/WR influence.

 

28 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

These are generailities but that is what I would expect as a self confessed outsider.

There might be all kinds of technicaltities that would render the locomotives unusual but they would generally go over the head of an ignoramus such as myself.

Irrespective of the details of the locos I would have thought that moving away from this template, for a larger company, might be 'pushing the envelope'.

 

Yes. Smaller types for more modest lines.

 

For example, WNR in 1905:

 

- WNR mainline passenger traffic relies mainly upon 2-4-0s for passenger work.  These are small to medium in size.  A few small 4-4-0s also. The smallest 2-4-0s and 4-4-0 rate as mixed traffic.

 

- Aside from the aforementioned mixed traffic types, mainline goods are generally in the hands of 0-6-0s.

 

- Branch passenger engines are 0-4-2T, 0-6-0T and 2-2-2T.  Branch goods engines, where different, 0-6-0Ts..

 

 

28 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

Obviously there were exceptions to this rule of thumb.

In fact my pre-Grouping company of choice, the Great North of Scotland, was somewhat bizarre in regarding 4-4-0s as almost the only type needed, no matter what the duty.

 

For a smaller railway  things could justifiably move further away from the above template.

Having recently obtained  both volumes of Taylor's Stratford upon Avon & Midland Junction Railway, which I have not got around to reading just yet, I went looking for the photo of No 13.

To put it mildly,I was somewhat surprised when I flicked through vol 1 to see the E&WJR's loco fleet, particularly the Buddicoms, the double Fairlie and that very same single Failrlie tank.

On the other side of the coin, without having delved too far into the text, most of them seem to have been ephemeral and the E&WJR was a short line.

 

I got drawn into this discussion by Johnson044 making a comparison between narrow gauge and standard gauge freelance modelling.

My previous replies were aimed at establishing the reasons for the greater variety of locos on NG model railways and the willingness of NG modellers to create freelance layouts.

As I happily admit I am no expert on the Edwardian railway (nor on NG lines either for that matter) and I am unlikely to attempt to create a SG pre-Grouping company.

 

I don't mind what people choose to model on their own railway.

After all Rule 1 applies.

I do think however that a freelanced railway needs a coherent background if it wishes to be successful.

 

Yes.  There is a difference between 'freelance' in the sense of 'Rule No.1' and 'freelance' as I understand it; that which the topic title desctibes

 

28 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

If there is no discernible reason for moving away from the rough outline that most modellers would expect then credibility suffers.

 

Yes, the charm of the whimsical is strong, but take too many liberties and result will not convince.

 

28 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

My views about the GNoSR and the justification for the AFK can be found by clicking on the website home page, and following the directions there, for any one interested.

A word of warning for the casual visitor.

The Little World is a long document making reference to many more maps than might be expected for a railway sited between Narnian and Ruritania.

 

Ian T

 

[CKPR]

7 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Goods and mixed traffic classes could be 0-4-2s...The 2-4-0 is a perfectly respectable express passenger configuration going into the 1900s...Branch passenger would include 0-4-2Ts. 

Which pretty much describes the M&CR with 0-6-0s for all other mixed-traffic, mineral and goods duties and a singleton 0-4-4T.

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by CKPR

[Regularity]

9 hours ago, ianathompson said:

On the other side of the coin, without having delved too far into the text, most of them seem to have been ephemeral and the E&WJR was a short line.

They were short-lived: the EWJR couldn’t afford much, so any rental opportunity, no matter how bizarre, would be welcomed with open arms - the cheaper the better! As for short, that depends, but the journeys were slow and it probably felt longer...

[whart57]

On the Southern lines the 0-4-4T was common as a branch line engine in the years before and after WW1. This was an enlargement of the 0-4-2T that appeared in the 1870s and 1880s for suburban passenger work and the first ones ended up out in the sticks when they were replaced on the more demanding tasks.

 

That said almost anything that passed the axle loading limitation could turn up on some bucolic backwater. There is a picture of an SER B class 4-4-0 with two six wheelers at Dungeness, a station as remote as any from population. Ten years earlier that B would have been at the head of the London-Paris Boat Trains.

 

My own preference for a freelance line, well a British one, would be set in an earlier period, the 1870s say, when the earlier singles and outside framed 2-4-0s were still common. Sadly the Cramptons were either scrapped or drastically rebuilt by then

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, whart57 said:

On the Southern lines the 0-4-4T was common as a branch line engine in the years before and after WW1. This was an enlargement of the 0-4-2T that appeared in the 1870s and 1880s for suburban passenger work and the first ones ended up out in the sticks when they were replaced on the more demanding tasks.

 

That said almost anything that passed the axle loading limitation could turn up on some bucolic backwater. There is a picture of an SER B class 4-4-0 with two six wheelers at Dungeness, a station as remote as any from population. Ten years earlier that B would have been at the head of the London-Paris Boat Trains.

 

My own preference for a freelance line, well a British one, would be set in an earlier period, the 1870s say, when the earlier singles and outside framed 2-4-0s were still common. Sadly the Cramptons were either scrapped or drastically rebuilt by then

 

If you go back to the Thirties, Forties and Fifties, you find yourself in a position similar to US outline modellers; a lot of equipment supplied to standard designs by the likes of Robert Stephenson and E B Wilson.  How many companies ran Jenny Linds, for instance?

[whart57]

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

If you go back to the Thirties, Forties and Fifties, you find yourself in a position similar to US outline modellers; a lot of equipment supplied to standard designs by the likes of Robert Stephenson and E B Wilson.  How many companies ran Jenny Linds, for instance?

 

The loco I am building for my London and Surrey train is an off the shelf Sharp Stewart design. The fictional history is that it was bought c.1850 and is still in use in my mid 1870s period.

[Johnson044]

The off the shelf designs can look startlingly different in a new livery- if history is re-written very slightly then a loco intended for one company could be bought by another because the company that placed the original order got into financial trouble. The Cambrian ordered a number of small 4-4-0's from Sharp Stewart but some went to the Furness -I've assumed that my own fictitious company got them instead- so here's a green one! Bought her very early stage part-built and a bit mangled. I kept the cab, chimney, footplate and much of the tender as a good starting point. The rest developed during the first lockdown. I must get her finished.

[Hando]

My interactive map of my fictional railway: The Isles of Scilly Railway

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/d/embed?mid=1VwlyRNUQlhPno_2FO_V1uotr9W95jeFc

 

 

 

 

It may appear absurd for there to have been such a diverse system of railways over such short distances on these tiny islands, but I have been writing an alternate history up to rationalise reasoning for why such lines were constructed.

 

To put it short, the shareholders, generally overeager islanders (most of whom had no business experience), overinvested in the schemes. This whilst allowing the railways to be constructed and open, also meant that the lines always underperformed following their opening; running at a loss as costs outweighed benefits. These problems forced the companies to amalgamate with each other in order to survive, especially since mainland railways were hesitant to invest in them and were definately not mad enough to buy them outright.

 

The railways were initially operated by two Manning Wardle F class locos (owned by the St Mary's Railway) and one Hudswell Clarke Aire Class (owned by the North Ennor Railway), with Metropolitan Carriage and Wagon Company 4-wheel carriages, the same design as those used on the Whitehaven Cleator and Egremont railway. The St Mary's Railway and Tramway company had been a horse-drawn concern prior to the introduction of steam traction, using tramcars built by Starbuck and Co of Birkenhead.

At the end of the 19th century, the three railway companies of the archipelago had eventually amalgamated into the Isles of Scilly Railway: the St. Mary's Railway (formed from a previous merger of the SMRT and HTHV&SMMR), the North Ennor Railway and the Isles of Scilly Railways and Harbour Company.

The St Mary's Railway had dominated its neighbours for years and practically owned the IOSR&HC. The purchase of ex-LBSCR Terriers caused the elderly Manning Wardles to be banished to the metals of St. Martin's. Following the acquisition of the North Ennor Railway by the St. Mary's Railway Company, the Hudswell Clarke Duke of Cornwall was sold to the Tresco Granite Company for operation as their sole locomotive. The newly-formed Isles of Scilly Railways soon found themselves under the direction of Colonel Stephens, who introduced his classic Ford railcars.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Hando

[PGN]

On 01/02/2021 at 15:07, Regularity said:

Listen, I model the East & West Junction Railway (when I do any actual modelling) and I have already had arguments at exhibitions with “know it alls” who think that I have either made it up completely ...

 

If they think you made THAT one up, what on earth would they make of some of the other SMJ constituent companies? I am thinking here, obviously, of the delightfully-named Easton Neston Mineral and Towcester, Roade & Olney Junction Railway.

 

This one is particularly dear to my heart, of course, because it is the only British railway company ever to have featured Olney in its name ... and I am a member of the Olney MRC!

[CKPR]

1 hour ago, Hando said:

The Isles of Scilly Railway

Ahh, another version of the railways of Lyonnaise.

[Caley Jim]

2 hours ago, Hando said:

My interactive map of my fictional railway: The Isles of Scilly Railway

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/d/embed?mid=1VwlyRNUQlhPno_2FO_V1uotr9W95jeFc

I was greeted with an 'Access denied' message when I clicked on the link.  

 

Jim

Edited February 6, 2021 by Caley Jim

[Hando]

11 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

I was greeted with an 'Access denied' message when I clicked on the link.  

 

Jim

Don't worry, it should work now. I think I've made the map accessible to everyone now.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Hando

[PGN]

Hando ... are they going to introduce a motorail service? OCTs with golf buggies ... 

 

[whart57]

14 hours ago, Hando said:

My interactive map of my fictional railway: The Isles of Scilly Railway

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/d/embed?mid=1VwlyRNUQlhPno_2FO_V1uotr9W95jeFc

 

It may appear absurd for there to have been such a diverse system of railways over such short distances on these tiny islands, but I have been writing an alternate history up to rationalise reasoning for why such lines were constructed.

 

 

Hmm, there are parts of central London not as well served by rail transport.

 

That said there were railways on Guernsey and Alderney, two of the smaller Channel Islands, so while I would not believe your dense network of lines I could believe a line linking the Old Town with the harbour and the Garrison walls. It could be standard gauge, the lines on Guernsey and Alderney were, but a Terrier would be overkill as far as pulling power was concerned. I'd be inclined to go for something like a Manning Wardle 0-4-0ST like this.

 

 

Slaters do a kit in 7mm scale.

 

Another possibility would be Wantage Tramway's Shannon

 

 

I don't know if anyone does a kit of this.

 

Done as a small 7mm scale layout, with handlaid track necessary to show what would be undoubtedly a very light rail profile, with locos like that and a handful of ancient wagons and carriages, you might get away with it.

 

Or you could apply the first rule of model railways of course.

[Hando]

21 hours ago, whart57 said:

 

Hmm, there are parts of central London not as well served by rail transport.

 

That said there were railways on Guernsey and Alderney, two of the smaller Channel Islands, so while I would not believe your dense network of lines I could believe a line linking the Old Town with the harbour and the Garrison walls. It could be standard gauge, the lines on Guernsey and Alderney were, but a Terrier would be overkill as far as pulling power was concerned. I'd be inclined to go for something like a Manning Wardle 0-4-0ST like this.

 

 

Slaters do a kit in 7mm scale.

 

Another possibility would be Wantage Tramway's Shannon

 

 

I don't know if anyone does a kit of this.

 

Done as a small 7mm scale layout, with handlaid track necessary to show what would be undoubtedly a very light rail profile, with locos like that and a handful of ancient wagons and carriages, you might get away with it.

 

Or you could apply the first rule of model railways of course.

 

You have me to a tee!

 

I have been preparing to build a micro layout of the "prototype" recently and I was going to buy that Slater's kit of a Manning Wardle F class in particular. I have already mentioned that the first steam railway on St Mary's was initially operated by two F class locos (I chose them because of the Slater's kit).

Heavily inspired by the work of Jim Read (https://ogaugemicro.blogspot.com/), I am going to build my own lightweight track using bog-standard oo gauge code 100 rails. As for sleepers, I will use coffee stirrers as done by @F-UnitMad, as demonstrated in this question thread:

 

In regards to the Terriers, my excuse is that the [combined] St. Mary's Railway bought one or two sold as surplus by the LBSCR at the end of the 19th century. This is the reason why the Isle of Wight Central Railway and Colonel Stephens' Light Railways (and even one contractor's company) had their own A1s prior to the grouping, as Brighton had short-sightedly disposed of many of the members the class when they became obsolete as suburban locos following the introduction of new and improved classes.

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Hando

[Johnson044]

Hando- I know geographically they are miles away but your Scillonian railways remind me so much of two Yorkshire lines- the Aberford Railway, which relied for the most part on some small MW saddle tanks (think they were class H, so a little bigger) - and used them for a regular passenger service- and I also wondered if, given their maritime climate and nautical history whether the islanders ever experimented with sail power? The Slaters F class has had mixed reviews- mainly, I think, connected with the original design, which had a Faulhaber motor and intricate gear train, which was prone to accumulating muck and difficult to assemble. I get the impression that the later kits, which will take a Branchlines motor and gearbox are much better. I got hold of a second hand one, part built, with the original motor / gearbox combo but I guess I got a good one as so far she's behaving herself. 

[Johnson044]

That's the Spurn Head railway btw!

 

[whart57]

It is said that sail power was also used on the short lived Hampton Tramway and on the Herne Bay Pier tramway. Hard irrefutable evidence is lacking though.

 

Would you model it using a leaf blower for power though?