A Nod To Brent - a friendly thread, filled with frivolity, cream teas and pasties. Longing for the happy days in the South Hams 1947.

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

You can ask someone why Gods Wonderful spelt the name differently.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dryslwyn_Castle

 

Robin,

 

I can't answer specifically concerning "Drysllwyn Castle" but have some useful information about GWR loco naming and the errors that did occasionally occur.

 

You probably assumed as I did that an organisation as traditional and conservative as the Great Western would be punctilious on such matters. Then I acquired Bill Peto's excellent tome on the "Manor" class and had my eyes opened! Consider the preserved 7828 'Odney Manor' currently in service on the West Somerset Railway. There IS a manor house in the village of Odney, Berks. but it is, and always was called Lullebrook Manor. Similarly there is a manor house called "Draycot Manor" near Chippenham. The GWR named their loco "Draycott Manor". There are two settlements called "Draycott" but neither have a manor house. The engine named "Torquay Manor" should actually have been called "Torwood Manor" but the owner of the stately home requested that the GWR name their engine "Torquay Manor" in order to publicise his constituency!

 

Hope this is of interest.

[mattingleycustom]

Robin,

 

I can't answer specifically concerning "Drysllwyn Castle" but have some useful information about GWR loco naming and the errors that did occasionally occur.

 

You probably assumed as I did that an organisation as traditional and conservative as the Great Western would be punctilious on such matters. Then I acquired Bill Peto's excellent tome on the "Manor" class and had my eyes opened! Consider the preserved 7828 'Odney Manor' currently in service on the West Somerset Railway. There IS a manor house in the village of Odney, Berks. but it is, and always was called Lullebrook Manor. Similarly there is a manor house called "Draycot Manor" near Chippenham. The GWR named their loco "Draycott Manor". There are two settlements called "Draycott" but neither have a manor house. The engine named "Torquay Manor" should actually have been called "Torwood Manor" but the owner of the stately home requested that the GWR name their engine "Torquay Manor" in order to publicise his constituency!

 

Hope this is of interest.

 

"but the owner of the stately home requested that the GWR name their engine "Torquay Manor" in order to publicise his constituency!" - bl00dy politicians!

 

Totally agree on that Glenn, I'm just pleased that the GWR didn't decide to name one Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­chwyrn­drobwll­llan­tysilio­gogo­goch ! I'd never have ordered one

 

Yours

 

Dick Slexic

 

With a name like that it would have needed some extra driving wheels to mount the nameplate(s)? on, a 4-10-0 perhaps?

 

Stu Pidity

[colin penfold]

So why for a while did the GWS have dry thingy castle plates on one side and Earl Bathurst on the other side of the same loco?

[gwrrob]

So why for a while did the GWS have dry thingy castle plates on one side and Earl Bathurst on the other side of the same loco?

That's because it was the first time they used Drysllwyn as the name in 1936 on 5051 which became Earl Bathurst in 1937 when some Castles were named after Earls.GWS are correct.Drysllwyn was used again on BR build 7018 till it was withdrawn.

 

It was pronounced ' Drith-loyen'

Edited June 3, 2017 by gwrrob

[81C]

So why for a while did the GWS have dry thingy castle plates on one side and Earl Bathurst on the other side of the same loco?

It was just a name swop , when the Duke names were removed from the scrapped Duke class and put on Dukedogs the lords kicked up a stink their names were on a lowly class of engine so they ended up on Castles, 1940 10 Castles were renamed after WW2 aircraft again these names and the renamed duke locos appeared later on when more Castles were built.

 

 

 

Edit As per Robs post

 

 

C.B. Collett

Edited June 3, 2017 by 81C

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

So why for a while did the GWS have dry thingy castle plates on one side and Earl Bathurst on the other side of the same loco?

 

Hi Colin,

 

Castle 5051 was named "Drysllwyn Castle" from new in May 1936.....but only carried that name for a little over a year until it was renamed in August 1937 to "Earl Bathurst". As discussed above, the "Dryswllyn Castle" plates then moved on to 5076 a year later in August 1938.

 

So, you my be wondering WHY 5051 was renamed from "Dryswllyn Castle" to "Earl Bathurst"? There is an apocryphal story that when C. B. Collet was instructed by the GWR board to name some GWR locos after various Earls (probably shareholders or directors of the company) he chose to bestow the names on the most archaic, antiquated machines he could think of and chose the "Dukedog" 4-4-0s. Collett it is said had a particularly dry sense of humour and had no time for pomposity. The story continues that a delegation of the noble gentlemen were assembled at Paddington Station by the company and were expecting to see their names carried by some powerful, state-of-the-art locomotive type. Apparently the arrival of the arcane Dukedog, looking for all the world like an escapee from Victorian England was greeted with a stunned and horrified silence. Collett was later instructed to transfer the names to locomotives more becoming of the importance of the gentlemen in question! Unfortunately there was a problem with this, as the radius of the splashers on the "Dukedog" were considerably less than the radius of the splashers on a "Castle" and consequently the "Earl" nameplates fitted to the "Castles" are not properly concentric! None the less the old plates were re-used and the difference in radii is still visible to this day as a reminder of Collett's sense of mischief.

 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:5043_Earl_of_Mount_Edgcumbe_Tyseley_(3).jpg

 

So, in answer to your question Colin, I don't believe 5051 ever carried the "Castle" and "Earl" plates in regular service, though this may be a "nod" from the GWS to the loco's twin identity.

 

Best Regards,

 

Andy.

[checkrail]

You can ask someone why Gods Wonderful spelt the name differently.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dryslwyn_Castle

 

And of course, as we all know, that would change the pronunciation!

[81C]

And of course, as we all know, that would change the pronunciation!

The GWR were reknowned for c0cking up the spellings of named engines and new plates were recast when the error was spotted..

Edited June 3, 2017 by 81C

[colin penfold]

The ceremony I referred to above was 5th April 1980

 

[colin penfold]

PS to the photo above. I know it's preservation but it is preservation by people who know what they are doing. The lining is considerably more subtle than Hornby have managed, and the green is both darker and greener to my eye

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

The ceremony I referred to above was 5th April 1980

 

0520.jpg

 

Just a few weeks later it was to be the main GWR representative at "Rocket 150" at Rainhill (24th, 25th, 26th May 1980). The only other GWR attendee I can think of was the Collett Goods 3205. Hard to believe that was 37 years ago!

[The Stationmaster]

Robin,

 

I can't answer specifically concerning "Drysllwyn Castle" but have some useful information about GWR loco naming and the errors that did occasionally occur.

 

You probably assumed as I did that an organisation as traditional and conservative as the Great Western would be punctilious on such matters. Then I acquired Bill Peto's excellent tome on the "Manor" class and had my eyes opened! Consider the preserved 7828 'Odney Manor' currently in service on the West Somerset Railway. There IS a manor house in the village of Odney, Berks. but it is, and always was called Lullebrook Manor. Similarly there is a manor house called "Draycot Manor" near Chippenham. The GWR named their loco "Draycott Manor". There are two settlements called "Draycott" but neither have a manor house. The engine named "Torquay Manor" should actually have been called "Torwood Manor" but the owner of the stately home requested that the GWR name their engine "Torquay Manor" in order to publicise his constituency!

 

Hope this is of interest.

 

That is different from the usual story about the naming of 7800.  Francis Layland Barratt, the 2nd baronet Layland Barratt was a well known railway enthusiast and modeller and apparently also a Director of the GWR (although I'm not entirely certain on that latter point) and when he heard about the development of the new class he entered into correspondence with Collett - one story is that he was seeking information to commission a model of the new engine.  I believe he lived at the Manor House (presumably the one in Torwood Road?) Torquay at that time and no doubt his interest and influence resulted in the proposed names being slipped back one place causing 7801 to become 'Anthony Manor' while 'Torquay Manor' was bestowed on 7800.

 

As far as I can trace he was no an MP although his father, who died in 1933, had at one time represented Torquay until he lost the seat in 1910, he later became MP for St Austell (from 1915 to1918) and never served as an MP after the Great war although he remained involved in the Liberal Party.

[The Fatadder]

Look forward to seeing it with its new name, I've been finishing off my Spitfire this evening (although the poor lighting in the garage makes the Hornby green (ex Wellington).

[The Stationmaster]

Talking of 5051 during GW150 I started slightly adopting its name and calling it 'Drink swillin' Castle' as it was a right nuisance being very heavy on water due to the valve setting being somewhat off the mark.  There is nice littel sound track of it and 4930 slipping to a stand on Dainton with my voice coming over a bit in the background - the longer version which picked up far more of my remarks doesn't seem to be on the 'net nowadays.

 

However while searching for it I came across the film linked below which is the trip up Sapperton with 4930 in February that year in the hands of a Severn Tunnel Jcn Driver who steadfastly refused to 'play the game' and drove the way his Driver had always driven up the bank (when working ballast trains  ).  The fun bit comes around 3m30-3m40ish when you'll note a change in the exhaust - a result (alas only for a short while) of me having a go at the Inspector to tell the Driver to get on with it (or words to that effect).  Incidentally despite what it might say the engine very definitely wasn't struggling and if it had been driven with more elan it would have definitely been going faster - it was simply driven in a rather leisurely manner on the blinkin first valve of the regulator).

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-boJonxuQrU&list=PLzbgm6Lb1nIGBpI7AN0DhhSx0MSE6nuOn

Edited June 3, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[gwrrob]

Look forward to seeing it with its new name, I've been finishing off my Spitfire this evening (although the poor lighting in the garage makes the Hornby green (ex Wellington).

 

I found a photo of 5071 Spitfire in war condition in The Power Of The Castles.It had just been named and was in shirtbutton livery and metal covered side windows.At this time it was also attached to the eight wheeled tender.

[gwrrob]

Thankfully a bit of escapism is here in a never ending world of uncertainly at this moment in time.

 

 

 

 

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

That is different from the usual story about the naming of 7800.  Francis Layland Barratt, the 2nd baronet Layland Barratt was a well known railway enthusiast and modeller and apparently also a Director of the GWR (although I'm not entirely certain on that latter point) and when he heard about the development of the new class he entered into correspondence with Collett - one story is that he was seeking information to commission a model of the new engine.  I believe he lived at the Manor House (presumably the one in Torwood Road?) Torquay at that time and no doubt his interest and influence resulted in the proposed names being slipped back one place causing 7801 to become 'Anthony Manor' while 'Torquay Manor' was bestowed on 7800.

 

As far as I can trace he was no an MP although his father, who died in 1933, had at one time represented Torquay until he lost the seat in 1910, he later became MP for St Austell (from 1915 to1918) and never served as an MP after the Great war although he remained involved in the Liberal Party.

 

Hi Stationmaster,

 

My source for the 'Torquay Manor' story is Peto's Register. In Peto's version of events the individual concerned is Sir Francis Leyland-Barratt whom Peto describes as Member of Parliament for Torquay and well known railway artist and modeller. Peto goes on to say that Sir Francis wrote to the company asking if drawings could be loaned to him so that a model could be built. He further asked if an engine could be named after his residence which he said was "Torquay Manor". Pete then draws the conclusion that Sir Francis wanted to publicise his constituency.

 

Bill Peto was the Historical Research Officer for the Great Western Society and therefore usually a reliable source on matters Great Western. There is no reason to suppose he was an authority on parliamentarians or the aristocracy of the time. Perhaps that is where the discrepancy has arisen?

[Clearwater]

The GWR were reknowned for c0cking up the spellings of named engines and new plates were recast when the error was spotted..

Other railways also had issues: eg Blackmore/Blackmoor Vale I believe

[The Fatadder]

I found a photo of 5071 Spitfire in war condition in The Power Of The Castles.It had just been named and was in shirtbutton livery and metal covered side windows.At this time it was also attached to the eight wheeled tender.

Fortunately it had gained the standard Collett 4000gl by 47 making it a lot easier to model

[Coach bogie]

The GWR were reknowned for c0cking up the spellings of named engines and new plates were recast when the error was spotted..

4074 Caldicot Castle springs to mind which in earlier shots appears as Calidcott.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[81C]

The Saint class loco Redgauntlet was a classic bungle it was corrected at a later date to Red Gauntlet as per the book title (from the Waverley Novels) and as for name changes it wasn't only limited to Castles.

[St Enodoc]

Hi Stationmaster,

 

My source for the 'Torquay Manor' story is Peto's Register. In Peto's version of events the individual concerned is Sir Francis Leyland-Barratt whom Peto describes as Member of Parliament for Torquay and well known railway artist and modeller. Peto goes on to say that Sir Francis wrote to the company asking if drawings could be loaned to him so that a model could be built. He further asked if an engine could be named after his residence which he said was "Torquay Manor". Pete then draws the conclusion that Sir Francis wanted to publicise his constituency.

 

Bill Peto was the Historical Research Officer for the Great Western Society and therefore usually a reliable source on matters Great Western. There is no reason to suppose he was an authority on parliamentarians or the aristocracy of the time. Perhaps that is where the discrepancy has arisen?

I first read the story, pretty well exactly as you have described it, other than the conclusion regarding publicity, in C J Freezer's notes to his drawing of the Manor class in Railway Modeller June 1968.

[The Stationmaster]

Hi Stationmaster,

 

My source for the 'Torquay Manor' story is Peto's Register. In Peto's version of events the individual concerned is Sir Francis Leyland-Barratt whom Peto describes as Member of Parliament for Torquay and well known railway artist and modeller. Peto goes on to say that Sir Francis wrote to the company asking if drawings could be loaned to him so that a model could be built. He further asked if an engine could be named after his residence which he said was "Torquay Manor". Pete then draws the conclusion that Sir Francis wanted to publicise his constituency.

 

Bill Peto was the Historical Research Officer for the Great Western Society and therefore usually a reliable source on matters Great Western. There is no reason to suppose he was an authority on parliamentarians or the aristocracy of the time. Perhaps that is where the discrepancy has arisen?

 

Looks like Peto mixed up the father and son - both had Francis as their first name - and failed to adequately research the son.  

 

The MP for Torquay in the 1930s was Charles Williams (Conservative) who won the seat from the Liberal inciumbent in the 1924 General Election and then held it, in nine successive elections, until his death in 1955.  The 2nd Sir Francis Layland Barratt appears to have never been an MP and very definitely was never one for any constituency in Devon.  It seems odd to me that someone involved in 'historical research' should draw a conclusion without fully researching the facts on which he based that conclusion - but then he wouldn't have been the first (or last) person to do that!

Edited June 4, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

 

 

However while searching for it I came across the film linked below which is the trip up Sapperton with 4930 in February that year in the hands of a Severn Tunnel Jcn Driver who steadfastly refused to 'play the game' and drove the way his Driver had always driven up the bank (when working ballast trains  ).  The fun bit comes around 3m30-3m40ish when you'll note a change in the exhaust - a result (alas only for a short while) of me having a go at the Inspector to tell the Driver to get on with it (or words to that effect).  Incidentally despite what it might say the engine very definitely wasn't struggling and if it had been driven with more elan it would have definitely been going faster - it was simply driven in a rather leisurely manner on the blinkin first valve of the regulator).

 

 

Hi Mr. Stationmaster,

 

There is a rather nice audio recording of "Hagley Hall's" climb of Sapperton in February 1985 thanks to the excellent "Steam Sounds" website:-

 

http://www.steamsoundsarchive.com/10/10_1.html

 

The accompanying account of the rail tour corroborates your memory of the handling of the locomotive, that it was driven on the Pilot (First) valve of the regulator much of the way to Sapperton Tunnel. Another explanation is offered as to why the loco was driven in that way, though I suspect the author may not have had access to the Driver himself as you did!

 

Andy.

[Clearwater]

Never mind the shade of green, Hornby seem to have some more basic identification issues from the email I've just received!

 

Back to school eh?

Edited June 4, 2017 by Clearwater