MikeOxon

i agree that the inside frame Broad Gauge (BG) engines do look very strange to our eyes. Some of the 'Prince' class had straight footboards that ran across the front of the driving wheels but I went for the 'full frontal' versions. The 'look' did return with the 'convertibles', which appeared towards the end of the BG period. Even the famous Dean Singles - often regarded as the pinnacle of 19th century elegance - started life as inside-frame BG engines before conversion.

A splendid result! Having modelled one of these myself, I'm amazed by how much detail you have been able to incorporate in a single print. I started off thinking these were South Devon engines and only later discovered what versatile and widespread engines they actually were. Those sweeping curves around the bunker give them a very special character 😀

In my previous post , I wrote about the unusual arrangement that Gooch adopted for the regulator mechanism on the first engines that were built at the new Swindon Works, where repair work started in 1843. The first new engine to emerge from the works, in February 1846, was a member of the ‘1st Lot Goods’ named ‘Premier’. It wasn’t built completely ‘in house’, since the boiler came from an outside supplier. This was swiftly followed by ‘Great Western’, an engine with which Gooch intended to show what the Broad Gauge could do. By the standards of the time, it was a huge engine and, before putting such a radical machine into series production, Gooch introduced the ‘1st Lot Passenger’ engines, of which the first was named ‘Prince’. Although largely forgotten nowadays, this small ‘Lot’ provided the motive power for all the main Paddington to Exeter expresses before the arrival of the large 8 foot Gooch ‘Singles’. It was these engines that established the 4½ hour schedule for these trains – a revolutionary performance for that time. There were six engines in the Lot and each of them had minor differences from the others. The GWR initially referred to this class as the ‘Queen’ class but the RCTS booklets adopted ‘Prince’ class. A detailed description of each of the class members is given in Chapter Four of Arman’s ‘The Broad Gauge Engines of the GWR, Part Three’. The class was not perpetuated once ‘Great Western’ proved to be a success, which led on to ‘Iron Duke’ and the remarkable line of ‘8 foot Singles’. These larger engines then handled all the main expresses until the end of the broad gauge in 1892. An early photograph of ‘Sylph’, of the Prince-class, shows the curved lever to operate the regulator, described in my previous post, in front of the near side of the firebox. ‘Sylph’ photographed c.1857 at Swindon I decided to examine ‘Queen’ in detail. As I showed in my previous post, Queen was the subject of one of E.T.Lane’s fine drawings, which provide us with such a valuable record of the early GWR engines. In creating a 3D model, I realised that I could draw on parts that were already in my computer design ‘parts bin’. I took the smokebox from my earlier model of a Gooch Standard Goods , as well as the boiler, which I had to adjust in terms of length and diameter. The ‘haycock’ style of firebox came from my model of a member of the Firefly class and again needed slight enlargement to match the specification of ‘Queen’. The only completely new parts I had to create were the wheels and the inside frames. The wheels had large numbers of fine spokes, which give a rather filigree appearance. These were easy to create by making use of the ‘circular pattern’ tool in ‘Autodesk Fusion’. Unlike the earlier ‘Firefly’ and later ‘Iron Duke’ classes, there were no outside frames, so the wheels were fully exposed, thus forming a large part of the individual character of these engines. The inside frames were the usual type of slotted sandwich frames, so I was able to draw on the experience of having made very similar frames in the past. As usual, I extruded these by sketching over Lane’s drawing, which I imported in to 'Fusion' as a ‘canvas’. With all those ‘parts I made earlier’ to hand, I soon had a 3D model in my computer, as shown below: My 3D model of Gooch’s ‘Queen’, with front-end regulator shaft Note that I have incorporated the parts from my previous post ‘Gooch Regulator ’, although most of them are hidden inside the smokebox. I have not yet added Gooch’s Link Motion or its control lever – something for a later addition. What I really like about 3D computer modelling is that I can bring together different models and compare them while viewing from various angles. When I bring this model together with my Firefly-class model, it is clear that the Prince-class represented a fairly modest enhancement of Gooch’s original ground-breaking design. My 3D models of ‘Firefly’ (left) and ‘Queen’ class engines The most obvious external difference is the boiler, which was 2 feet longer in the Prince class, with a modest increase in firebox dimensions. Whereas ‘Firefly’ (as originally built) had ‘gab’ gear, which provided no opportunity for expansive use of steam, ‘Queen’ was fitted with Gooch’s own form of link motion, as were all the other early products from the new Swindon Works. This motion was retro-fitted to earlier engines, as they passed through the works for major overhauls. My 3D models of ‘Firefly’ and ‘Queen’ head-to-head’ emphasising the differences in wheelbase and boiler length. So, my modelling has filled another gap in the development of GWR express engines, with a small class, which became obscured by the fame achieved by its successors in the ‘Iron Duke’ class. Mike

this illustration comes from "The Practical Draughtsman's Book of Industrial Design" which can be downloaded from Google Books It contains a fascinating collection of architectural and engineering drawings.

another artist who used mice as his trademark was the furniture maker Robert Thompson. I recall hunting them down on the tables and chairs in the school library.

I agree - I was reluctant to describe those beautiful drawings as 'sketches' I think it must have been assembled later, since there is an overall index at the front and the pages are grouped under specific engine classes. One day I hope that Lane's drawings and sketches might be made available in a similar way.

Some time ago, when I made a model of Aeolus , I was very puzzled by the arrangement of the valve gear, which included a shaft running across the front of the smokebox. After further investigation, I discovered that this shaft was actually part of the regulator mechanism, which Gooch applied to some of the first engines built (or re-built) at Swindon, although it was soon abandoned. I never found out much more about it until recently, when a fellow Broad Gauge Society member pointed out that a digital copy of Gooch’s Sketch Book is now available online In those pages, I could see various drawings of the components of this type of regulator mechanism on the cylinders of engines to which it was fitted, such as the ‘First Lot Goods’, which started with ‘Premier’, the first engine to emerge from the new Swindon works, in 1846. The same mechanism appeared on the ‘Prince’-class passenger engines, which appeared shortly afterwards, but then it was abandoned and engines reverted to being fitted with a central regulator in the smokebox, controlled by a lever high on the backplate of the firebox. Once again, we are fortunate to have one of E.T.Lane’s beautiful drawings, dated 3rd July 1849, of ‘Queen’ (from the ‘Prince’-class): ‘Queen’ drawn by E.T.Lane 1849 The regulator mechanism with its cross shaft can be seen in front of the smokebox in this drawing. It seems odd to me to fit two separate regulators – one to each cylinder – as these seem unlikely to provide even distribution of steam at all settings. Perhaps the point is that these same engines were also the first to be fitted with Gooch ‘link motion’. No doubt, drivers were being encouraged to use the new ‘expansion control’ to adjust the power output from their engines, rather than the wasteful ‘throttling’ process. If that was the thinking at the time, then the regulator was being relegated to a mere ‘on-off’ switch, with all the fine adjustment being made by ‘notching up’ the expansion gear. I have annotated one of Gooch’s sketches to show how a regulator valve was fitted on top of each cylinder casting, immediately in front of the slide valve chest. A gland, passing through the front of the smokebox contained the operating rod for the regulator valve. Unfortunately, I have not yet found a drawing of the valve itself, so have to assume a simple sliding flap across the live-steam input pipe Sketches of Regulator and Valve Components from Gooch’s Sketch Book I decided to make a 3D model to see how everything might have been assembled together and, fortunately, the drawings in Gooch’s sketchbook include side and end elevations, as well as a plan view. My mode of working was to create each part separately, by extruding from the most appropriate drawing and then to move the pieces around until views from all directions looked correct. Some parts of the drawings puzzled me until, for example, I realised that they showed webs to strengthen the sides of the valve chest. The following views show how my modelling progressed. Creating 3D models of cylinder and valve chest My next step was to determine how two of these cylinders fitted into the bottom of the smokebox and how the regulator operating system was laid out. I noticed on the sketches that the exhaust duct from the cylinder was angled towards the front of the engine. When I placed two cylinders alongside each other at the correct spacing, I found that if I set the exhaust on the other cylinder at the same angle towards the rear, then the two ports feeding up into the blast pipe lay neatly adjacent to each other, as shown below: My 3D models of Two Cylinders behind the Smokebox Front Now I turned my attention to the mechanism in front of the smokebox. There are detailed sketches of the various components in Gooch’s Sketch Book, from which I extruded all the individual parts. Sketches of Regulator Components from Gooch’s Sketch Book There is another page of sketches, which show the handle on the footplate and the rod that connects this handle to a lever on one end of the regulator shaft. Once I had built up a set of 3D-modelled parts, I could assemble them into the overall arrangement shown below: My 3D models of the Operating Rods for the Gooch Regulator I set this assembly up onto the front of the smokebox that I had previously created for my model of a Gooch Goods . In those engines, the cylinders were raised and angled at 7° for the motion to clear the front axle while driving the central axle. I felt pleased to have sorted out this short-lived piece of locomotive history. It seems an odd step for Gooch to have taken, since this arrangement of shafts and levers on the front of the smokebox does not look to have been a very robust arrangement. It seems to be associated in some way with his introduction of the Link motion to drive the valves. Now that I have designed the parts, I may try retro-fitting the visible items to my model of a Gooch Goods at some time. My Model of a Gooch Standard Goods Mike

It's always worth pushing against the limits. I have frequently been amazed with what my filament printer can achieve

I should have looked at 'Great Western Way', where there are drawings of 1840 carriages with the shields exactly as you describe, the crests on the outer compartment doors, and Great Western Railway text in the panels on the doors. Mike

In the days before loft insulation in most houses, it was usual for the snow on roofs to melt quite rapidly

From what I've read, it seems that Thunderer could only manage about 4 carriages. I meant to explain that my header picture shows my train models superimposed on an illustration of Maidenhead (Dumb Bell) station, from Measom's guide to the GWR, dated 1852

I have seen some coloured renderings of Bourne prints that do show the colour scheme that you suggest. I did my own thing in the absence of hard information.

It' not quite true that I'm no longer interested in printing. I was very disappointed when I found that my Prusa printer didn't perform as well as my cheap Chinese printer and it put me off a bit. It's more that, when I started creating all those 'Stars' and other early engines, I had nowhere t put them all

That seems quite likely but it seems curious that none of Bourne's illustrations show any markings at all.

It’s quite a while since I created my model of Vulcan, the first engine to actually run on the GWR. I wrote at the end of my blog post “This has been a journey of exploration for me into the earliest days of the GWR. I hope my readers will enjoy reading about it as much as I have enjoyed making the models “. My 3D Printed model of ‘Vulcan’ At that time, I had no idea where my model-making was going to take me. I soon filled my shelf with 3D-printed early Broad Gauge engines but realised that, for me, the largest part of the pleasure came from the process of designing the 3D models on my computer. I’ve gradually become more proficient in my modelling skills and have built up an inventory of ‘stores’ on my computer, containing items such as wheels, buffers, and other common components. The result is that I can now ‘knock up’ a new carriage model in a matter of a few hours, although my models often lack those fiddly details that mark out really high-quality models. I just like the ‘look and feel’ and the spur to my imagination in going back to the time when railways were in their infancy. It was a long time before I realised how easy it is to ‘cut and paste’ parts between different projects in ‘Autodesk Fusion’. The point I had missed is that, after copying a body from a donor model, you have to ‘Create a Base Feature’ in the recipient. This allows the body to be pasted in, without upsetting the ‘time line’ which ‘Fusion’ maintains throughout a project. Now, I find it easy to put models into position on my larger scenes, such as my 3D models of the old Paddington Station and Engine Shed. Old Paddington Station models extruded from Network Rail Archive drawings I first tried this out after modelling ‘Thunderer’ and was very pleased with the result. That exercise also reminded me that there are still a few vehicles from those very early days that I have not yet modelled – one of which was the 4-wheel 1st class carriage, which showed its stage-coach origins very clearly. In this post, I shall correct that omission and also learn a little more about how railways were presented in the early days. For a few years, the railways were in direct competition with stage coaches but there was also a co-operative element. For example, when the GWR only reached as far as Maidenhead, many passengers would use the train to that point and then transfer to road coaches for the rest of their journey. Wealthier patrons, who owned their own private carriages, could load their carriages onto trucks and even stay inside them during the railway part of their journey. For those who chose to travel in the railway’s own carriages, it was important to show that these vehicles could provide higher standards of comfort than the best road coaches. So, although the earliest railways carriages look very spartan to our eyes, they were a major improvement over the relatively cramped road vehicles. I have previously modelled a 4-wheel 2nd class carriage dating from 1837. (remember that there was no 3rd class in those days, other than by travelling in goods trucks). The first broad gauge closed seconds were rather primitive vehicles that could not have given a very comfortable ride because the wheelbase was actually shorter than the railway gauge! It is hardly surprising that, according to George Gibb’s diary, these carriages were “ordered off the line”, following a GWR Board Meeting on 12th July 1838. My 3D model of an 1837 ‘closed’ 2nd-class Carriage First-class passengers fared rather better – the compartments were larger and, significantly, much taller, with louvred ventilators above the doors. The traditional appearance of road coaches was maintained for the individual compartments. The wheel base was still very short, at 7 feet. So I can’t imagine the ride was very good – perhaps this is why the GWR standardised on 6-wheel vehicles after this initial experience. Creating a 3D-model 1st Class Carriage As usual, I started by finding a drawing from which I could extrapolate into 3 dimensions. The Broad Gauge Society Data Sheets provided a good starting point and it was there that I noticed a reference to a drawing shown in the ‘Pall Mall Magazine’, which I managed to track down on the web: The ‘Pall Mall’ drawing shows some interesting features; in particular the decorative artwork on the central door (I’m not sure what Shield is represented) and on panels inserted into openings in the frames. The elaborate waist mouldings are also shown. Very little is known about livery details on early broad gauge carriages. The general assumption is all-over brown but, in view of the ‘decoration’ shown on this drawing, it seems possible that there would also have been lining (gold?) on the panelling. I extruded the coach sides from the above drawing, imported as a ‘canvas’ into ‘Fusion’ . The chassis appears to be a lengthened version of the open-frame design used on my previously modelled 2nd class carriage. I also copied the end panels from my earlier model, together with buffers and wheels. Altogether, therefore, the construction involved very little ‘new building’: My 3D model extruded from a ‘canvas’ with re-used parts I believe that the sides of the original compartments may have been bowed out towards the centre. After some exploration, I found that this type of distortion cannot be applied to ‘Fusion’ bodies so, as a compromise, I angled the sides of each compartment at each end, as shown below. Inset between compartments Now, all that remained was to ‘render’ my model and make some screen-shots. While it is possible to add images as logos onto flat panels in ‘Fusion’, I decided that it was easier to add these and gold lining in Photoshop, as shown below. My 3D model of an 1837 1st-class carriage, rendered and ‘decorated’ While this treatment does produce an opulent appearance, there is no support for this amount of decoration in Bourne’s lithographs – not even on the ‘super-luxury’ Posting Carriages. I did notice, however, in his lithograph of Bath Station that the Posting Carriage is shown with lighter lower panels than above the waist and also a very pale band (possibly white or cream) around the side windows but adjacent 1st-class carriages look completely plain. There is a note on some drawings, dated 1853, in the NRM/OPC collection stating “Drawings 5295/6/7 all include the inscription "Black and fine Yellow Lines". This appears in the flat portion of the left-hand side of the coach enclosed by the curved moulding.” That is, of course, considerably later than our period. On the basis of Bourne’s engravings, I felt that the Posting Carriage should be given a little extra decoration: My model of a Posting Carriage with pale lower panels and light window band There is one other carriage to complete my 1838 ‘set’ and that is the 4 wheel open second. Note that ‘open’ in those days was different from its current meaning – these carriages were literally ‘open’ along each side. In those days of lethal infectious diseases, many people actually preferred to travel in that way, although the GWR was also concerned that they were losing potential 1st class customers to the ‘closed’ Seconds! Creating a model of the 4 wheel second proved ridiculous easy. Simply cutting two compartments and a pair of wheels from my existing 6 wheel version was all that was needed. All the remaining dimensions remained the same. My ‘cut and shut’ 4 whl Open Second model A 3D view of the models, rendered in Fusion, shows the close relationship between the two designs: 3D models of 4 whl (1838) and 6 whl (1840) Open 2nd Carriages So now I can assemble a complete train of the earliest period of GWR operations between Paddington and Maidenhead. Two Views of North Star with a train of 1838 stock Mike