Rapido OO Gauge GWR 44xx/45xx/4575 Small Prairie

[phil-b259]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I thought that their line speed in common with other heritage railways (apart from the GCR with dispensation for certain services) was 25 ?

 

A tiny minority of lines have sections of track maintained for higher speeds which can be hired out for the testing of mainline locos - and this may include the SVR (though I doubt the 70mph figure)

 

However this has to be done under a total possession of the railway and under strict conditions as nothing else (e.g. signal spacing or sighting distance at footpath crossings) is not of the required standard.

[Dunsignalling]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I thought that their line speed in common with other heritage railways (apart from the GCR with dispensation for certain services) was 25 ?

Had, rather than has?

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

we think of them as slow and bucolic, but line speeds of 50mph and more were common.  The Severn Valley line, for example, has a line speed of 70mph.

 

16 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I thought that their line speed in common with other heritage railways (apart from the GCR with dispensation for certain services) was 25 ?

 

From the context, I think @The Johnster means "had".

 

In any case the discussion is of a class of which there is no preserved example!

Edited December 4, 2022 by Compound2632

[BVMR21]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

very strong accelleration up to about 30mph or so, but would have struggling after that.

So rather ideal for a “what-if” on a preserved Railway themed layout, seeing as most operate at 25mph max. 

[The Johnster]

No, that's the speed limit imposed by their Light Railway Order; the line speed when the branch was part of BR was 70mph, and TTBOMK still is.  There are places where the speed is further restricted by permanent speed restrictions to less than 25mph, but the overall line speed is 70mph, and their trains would be permitted to run at that speed if they were to apply successfully for a 'full' Railway Order; such a thing would be prohibitively expensive in terms of track, loco, and rolling stock maintenance and is in any case not necessary for the success of their operation.  BR trains seldom achieved 70mph due to the number of stops, but the line was originally concieved as part of a through route from Hartlebury on the OWW to Shrewsbury avoiding the congestion of the Birmingham area. 

 

Line speed is the speed allowed by the formation of the railway in terms of curvature, and is sort of 'sealed in' at the line's construction, but of course modified by the overall standard of the trackbed, track, and the positioning of signals.  In general, speeds of over 140mph require high speed railways to be newly built in order to  achieve them safely, such as Shinkansen and TGV lines, HS1, and HS2.

[4069]

17 hours ago, The Johnster said:

No, that's the speed limit imposed by their Light Railway Order; the line speed when the branch was part of BR was 70mph, and TTBOMK still is.  There are places where the speed is further restricted by permanent speed restrictions to less than 25mph, but the overall line speed is 70mph, and their trains would be permitted to run at that speed if they were to apply successfully for a 'full' Railway Order; such a thing would be prohibitively expensive in terms of track, loco, and rolling stock maintenance and is in any case not necessary for the success of their operation. 

 

It's nothing to do with maintenance standards- the railway would not be permitted to run at more than 25 mph without extensive modifications to rolling stock and signalling. Central locking on all doors, TPWS, data recorders... It would cease to be a heritage railway. The Light Railway Order is irrelevant to operations today, which are governed by the Railways and Other Guided Trnasport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006, or ROGS: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/599/contents

[Corbs]

If I may mention small prairies again....

 

Seems like more 4575s received the monogram/roundel livery than the other two types - I have found only a couple of 4500s with it and no clear evidence of 4400s (although a lot of them are so dirty it's hard to tell).

 

Any ideas why? My only thought was that as they were older locos they would have been lower down the pecking order, but surely overhaul/maintenance schedules would still bring around repaints?

 

Or has anyone seen much evidence that they did have the monogram?

[Miss Prism]

I agree - shirtbuttoned 4500s seem to be comparatively rare - it's as though they didn't get repaints from 1934 until early BR days. Either that or they were elusive or photographers didn't fancy them much.

 

But here's an outside-piped 4542 at Newton on 10 August 1937 (with a short safety valve bonnet).

 

 

Also, 4549 at Barmouth

 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Miss Prism
typo

[Harlequin]

In “Great Western Moguls and Prairies” by Maidment, top of page 74, there’s a photo of 4406 with roundel on the tank.

Quote

4406 ex-works at Swindon in GW plain green livery. 1 October 1938.

 

[checkrail]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

I agree - shirtbuttoned 4500s seem to be comparatively rare - it's as though they didn't get repaints from 1934 until early BR days. Either that or they were elusive or photographers didn't fancy them much.

 

But here's an outside-piped 4542 at Newton on 10 August 1937 (with a short safety valve bonnet).

Very interesting. The shirtbutton does indeed seem to have been rare on small prairies.  In over 60 years of enthusiasm for the GWR during which I must have seen hundreds, if not thousands, of 44xx/45xx/4575 pics this is the first time I've ever seen one sporting the monogram.  

Edited December 5, 2022 by checkrail

[Corbs]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

I agree - shirtbuttoned 4500s seem to be comparatively rare - it's as though they didn't get repaints from 1934 until early BR days. Either that or they were elusive or photographers didn't fancy them much.

 

But here's an outside-piped 4542 at Newton on 10 August 1937 (with a short safety valve bonnet).

 

 

Also, 4549 at Barmouth

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

In “Great Western Moguls and Prairies” by Maidment, top of page 74, there’s a photo of 4406 with roundel on the tank.

 

 

Perfect, thank you! The Barmouth one was the only one I had previously seen that could be confirmed as shirtbutton. @Harlequin - am guessing 4406 is straight frame, outside steam pipes, tall safety valve bonnet in the pic?

[Harlequin]

5 minutes ago, Corbs said:

 

 

Perfect, thank you! The Barmouth one was the only one I had previously seen that could be confirmed as shirtbutton. @Harlequin - am guessing 4406 is straight frame, outside steam pipes, tall safety valve bonnet in the pic?

Yes, exactly right. I'll PM you a copy.

 

[Miss Prism]

25 minutes ago, checkrail said:

In over 60 years of enthusiasm for the GWR during which I must have seen hundreds, if not thousands, of 44xx/45xx/4575 pics this is the first time I've ever seen one sporting the monogram.  

 

In which case, here's 4550:

 

 

Not sure what the shed is - lots of stonework.

 

[Corbs]

Neat shot of the water sprinkler in action too!

[AndyH]

8 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

In which case, here's 4550:

 

 

Not sure what the shed is - lots of stonework.

 

Truro perhaps? Sawtooth roof in the background and pre the 1945 coal hoist?

[Miss Prism]

Good spot, yes, it looks like Truro.

[JimC]

On 26/11/2022 at 10:58, Madreddog said:

The even lower hanging fruit are the Metro tank and 517 class

I think from the POV of the RTR manufacturer those are better described as dustbins full of worms rather than low hanging fruit !

[woodenhead]

24 minutes ago, JimC said:

I think from the POV of the RTR manufacturer those are better described as dustbins full of worms rather than low hanging fruit !

I hope not, when the OO poll starts I will be logging as about 1000 different people just to place an interest in either of these.

 

But yes, like the toplights, there is a lot to think about with models of these.

[Hal Nail]

On 05/12/2022 at 15:40, Miss Prism said:

 

In which case, here's 4550:

 

 

Not sure what the shed is - lots of stonework.

 

interesting that chimney, buffers, safety valve cover, steam pipes and sand boxes all seem to have been replaced independently of each other, since you can see most combinations during that period?

[The Johnster]

5 hours ago, JimC said:

I think from the POV of the RTR manufacturer those are better described as dustbins full of worms rather than low hanging fruit !

 

Much like the half-cab panniers, which I am also hoping somebody will produce as RTR one day.  Not so much classes as a set of general specifications that a number of engines conform to! 

[Dunsignalling]

37 minutes ago, Hal Nail said:

interesting that chimney, buffers, safety valve cover, steam pipes and sand boxes all seem to have been replaced independently of each other, since you can see most combinations during that period?

Swindon Standardisation! 😀

[The Johnster]

You mean the standardisation that meant that, because non-gangwayed carriage compartments were as standard size, Collett flat-ended types varied in length from 55 to 59 feet, meaning that different jigs had to be provided for thirds, brake thirds, composites, and brake composites. 

[Miss Prism]

How to avoid the cab shutter (on 5562). I have a feeling this was not the only example of this lining style.

 

 

[The Johnster]

Has somebody built s corrugated iron flying saucer to the rear of this locomotive…

[Halvarras]

6 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

How to avoid the cab shutter (on 5562). I have a feeling this was not the only example of this lining style.

 

 

 

You're correct, 4585 was lined this way - it is clearly visible in a Peter Gray side-on photo of it at Looe in July 1958 in 'Past and Present No 17 - Cornwall '. Bachmann missed this on their model, ref 32-140. 4585 had the large early emblem so I had wondered whether this form of lining only applied to e/e locos......apparently it wasn't that simple! (Why am I not surprised?!)

 

In this picture 5562 has a right-facing BR crest, these were incorrect so short-lived - this suggests that 5562 was an early recipient of the 'new' crest and it's therefore plausible that 4585 and 5562 were overhauled quite close together, so perhaps this form of lining was 'in vogue' at the time? Or were two different works involved? And how many were like this? Questions, questions!

 

5562 was a regular on the Truro - Newquay via Chacewater/Perranporth line, I'll have to get the magnifying glass on photos of that one now.....🙂