Regency Rails - Georgian, Williamine & Early Victorian Railways

[Fair Oak Junction]

Does anyone know the dimensions of the stone block sleepers used to carry fishbelly rail? I know there are some surviving examples in a few places around the UK, but none near me AFAIK.

[apl31]

These ones are assumed to be  from original S&D railway. They are in South Park in  Darlington.

If of interest I can measure them next time Im down there, 

[sir douglas]

no idea of dimensions but theres a set of Whitby & Pickering stones in Goathland next to the pub

[Fair Oak Junction]

39 minutes ago, apl31 said:

These ones are assumed to be  from original S&D railway. They are in South Park in  Darlington.

If of interest I can measure them next time Im down there,

 

If you could that would be fantastic, thank you!

[billbedford]

Just be aware that the sizes of the rails and sleeper blocks were not standardised. Each engineer had different ideas. 

[Fair Oak Junction]

12 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Just be aware that the sizes of the rails and sleeper blocks were not standardised. Each engineer had different ideas. 

 

I'm not surprised given how the railways worked in the early days 😉

It'll be close enough for me. I'm not going for absolute 100% accuracy, more just trying to capture the essence of the early S&DR 👍

[whart57]

4 hours ago, Fair Oak Junction said:

Does anyone know the dimensions of the stone block sleepers used to carry fishbelly rail? I know there are some surviving examples in a few places around the UK, but none near me AFAIK.

 

The link to Whishaw I gave earlier might help as Whishaw describes the technical sides of the railways of 1842 in some detail. Unfortunately he does miss out the size of the stone blocks on the S&D. On the neighbouring Stockton and Hartlepool Railway though he does state these stone blocks were 2 foot square. The S&D was using wood blocks as well and, interestingly, used "small coal" as ballast.

[apl31]

As luck would have it my wife wanted to visit my son in Darlington today. So took a detour to the very large and well kept South Park. One of the oldest public parks in UK apparently .

I took a few photos and measurements before my wife become too twitchy.

The first shows a plaque confirming they were ex S&D railway.

I measured 3 stones  

24x25x10 inch

21x21x10

24x25x10

The height was approx. not sure if there was more beneath the mud.

Ill send others separately

[Fair Oak Junction]

1 minute ago, apl31 said:

As luck would have it my wife wanted to visit my son in Darlington today. So took a detour to the very large and well kept South Park. One of the oldest public parks in UK apparently .

I took a few photos and measurements before my wife become too twitchy.

The first shows a plaque confirming they were ex S&D railway.

I measured 3 stones  

24x25x10 inch

21x21x10

24x25x10

The height was approx. not sure if there was more beneath the mud.

Ill send others separately

 

That is absolutely fantastic, thank you so much! That'll be a big help when building the layout 👍

[apl31]

The chairs are probably as originally fitted to the blocks as they seemed to fit the shape  cut in block, which is surprising if the have been outside for ~200 years. The fixing hole centres  were ~7" along rail  and ~6" across rail. 

[apl31]

The chairs appear to be in 2 halves bolted together through the rail but it could be later repair . Ive shown both sides. Each side of the chairs were 9" long 3-4" wide  and finally the rail section. I seem to remember the Darlington railway museum currently closed for refurbishment had some of these blocks fitted with fishbelly rail, again I may be wrong 

Please note all sizes given are approx

Edited January 28 by apl31

[Fair Oak Junction]

Marvellous, thank you again!

[sir douglas]

Railway Magazine 1931

[Fair Oak Junction]

Ooooh, very handy! Thanks!

[Edwardian]

Hornby now have a colour image of their forthcoming OO gauge Locomotion. Apparantly that represents the extant condition, though whether adifferent true 1820s appearance would beknowable or much different, so far as is known, is another matter. 

 

No 1820s chaldrons in the offing? Not so far, and, certainly there are already voices proclaiming that, if it's not 100% accurate for the 1820s one may as well run anything with it, so Accurascale chaldrons will do.  I find that unsatisfactory. 

 

 

 

I note Hornby continue to believe that drivers and firemen of the 1820s-1830s wear top hats!

 

Possibly on opening day...!

 

 

Even then, though, Hornby seems to have dressed the crew like the gentleman spectator at the front of this illustration, with tall round hat and swallow-tail coat. Actually, even en fête, the crew wear short coats  and different hats; the chap on the tender with the typical John Bull titfer.

 

[Fair Oak Junction]

To be fair to Hornby, nowhere have they stated the model is of anything but Locomotion No.1 as preserved. It's even marked as Era 11, not Era 1.

I'm pretty sure the crew figures are based on the crew who drove the replica for the 1925 centenary event, who were wearing top hats. So blame the people of the 1920s for that one! 😄

And for the replica run then the Accurascale chaldrons are indeed correct.

Those of us using the model and chaldrons to represent the actual S&DR are doing so fully in the knowledge that it isn't historically accurate, but that it's the closest we are ever going to get.

Yes we could scratchbuilt more accurate chaldrons, but the Locomotion isn't in any way accurate for in service. condition. And the work required to make it accurate you might as well just scratchbuild an entire new model. It's a case of making the best of a bad situation. But unlike their "Era 1" items, in this case Hornby are being very up front.

Edited February 11 by Fair Oak Junction

[Fair Oak Junction]

It would be nice to get some of the loco crews from the Pockerley Waggonway at Beamish scanned by Modelu, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

Edited February 11 by Fair Oak Junction

[Edwardian]

45 minutes ago, Fair Oak Junction said:

To be fair to Hornby, nowhere have they stated the model is of anything but Locomotion No.1 as preserved. It's even marked as Era 11, not Era 1.

I'm pretty sure the crew figures are based on the crew who drove the replica for the 1925 centenary event, who were wearing top hats. So blame the people of the 1920s for that one! 😄

And for the replica run then the Accurascale chaldrons are indeed correct.

Those of us using the model and chaldrons to represent the actual S&DR are doing so fully in the knowledge that it isn't historically accurate, but that it's the closest we are ever going to get.

Yes we could scratchbuilt more accurate chaldrons, but the Locomotion isn't in any way accurate for in service. condition. And the work required to make it accurate you might as well just scratchbuild an entire new model. It's a case of making the best of a bad situation. But unlike their "Era 1" items, in this case Hornby are being very up front.

 

That is a sufficient explanation of both the crew and the wagons, I accept, and the above would make a nice Grouping era train! 

 

It is the job of the modeller, I suppose, to find something more useful and persuasive to do with such collectors# issues to give a more early railway feeling!

 

 

[James Harrison]

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Hornby now have a colour image of their forthcoming OO gauge Locomotion. Apparantly that represents the extant condition, though whether adifferent true 1820s appearance would beknowable or much different, so far as is known, is another matter. 

 

No 1820s chaldrons in the offing? Not so far, and, certainly there are already voices proclaiming that, if it's not 100% accurate for the 1820s one may as well run anything with it, so Accurascale chaldrons will do.  I find that unsatisfactory. 

 

 

 

I note Hornby continue to believe that drivers and firemen of the 1820s-1830s wear top hats!

 

Possibly on opening day...!

 

 

Even then, though, Hornby seems to have dressed the crew like the gentleman spectator at the front of this illustration, with tall round hat and swallow-tail coat. Actually, even en fête, the crew wear short coats  and different hats; the chap on the tender with the typical John Bull titfer.

 

 

Hornby following the typical Steampunk outing trend there then.  20 people dressed as aristocracy/ high-level Victorian military officers, nobody dressed as a stoker. 

[Fair Oak Junction]

Considering that is how the fireman was dressed on the 1925 centenary run then I'd say Hornby have modelled it exactly as it should be 😉

Edited February 11 by Fair Oak Junction

[Northroader]

Try Cuneo: (more of a “Regency” titfer.)

Edited February 11 by Northroader

[Fair Oak Junction]

I love that painting! There is so much about it that ranges between highly questionable and lunacy, but it's just so evocative. I adore the atmosphere it creates 👌

[Fair Oak Junction]

It might not be a bad idea to sometimes think about modelling early railways as being more like the style of 19th/early 20th century artists/illustrators. Most paintings, drawings, and illustrations of the early railways (even contemporary ones) are of questionable accuracy. But they do generally succeed in getting across the atmosphere, the feeling, the buzz and excitement around this new and novel form of transport. And sure you can pick them apart until the cows come home, but you can still enjoy them. And the same can be said for making a model railway based around them. Sure it won't be 100% accurate, but does it get across the feeling? The atmosphere? Of course this won't be everyone's cup of tea, but it can still work really well. A painting in model form.

 

And maybe I've been too hard on Hornby's "Era 1" items. I absolutely wish they were more based on academic research than on illustrations, but they do still allow people to make an interesting model of the early days of the L&M. And it makes people happy, which matters. I feel sometimes being a "modeller" puts you under more scrutiny than say an artist or illustrator, but being a modeller does not mean you HAVE to be obsessed with minute details. Abstract or impressionistic modelling has just as valid a place as scale modelling.

 

Take J.M.W. Turner's The Fighting Temeraire. It is one of the most popular, well respected, and beloved paintings. And yet it has noted accuracy problems. It's a romanticised view of the scene, but what matters is the atmosphere. It's capturing an important event and it gets that across superbly, so people generally ignore the inaccuracies. But I guarantee if someone made a model of the scene with the same inaccuracies it would be torn to shreds! "The tug's mast is in the wrong place!" "Temeraire's topmasts had already been taken down!" "the hull planking is 0.0000001mm out of scale" etc.

 

We're all in this hobby for different reasons, and I don't expect people to agree with me. But I feel it's at least something worth thinking about and giving consideration to.

Edited February 15 by Fair Oak Junction

[billbedford]

But Turner's railway paintings are not "solid" enough to build models from. 

[Fair Oak Junction]

Yes, hence why I didn't use Rain, Steam and Speed as my example 😉

Edit: Also I'm not saying making exact models of paintings, I'm saying using them as a basis for the style of a model is not a bad thing.

Edited February 11 by Fair Oak Junction