Jump to content
 

JimC

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,482

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by JimC

  1. JimC

    Barry Railway H Class

    By JimC,


    Barry Railway Locomotive Sketches
    This is a early version sketch of a Barry H class. There are some puzzles. Photos appear to show a much narrower dome than the various weight diagrams, Barry and GW, which I've tried to reproduce. More problems come from the underframe being in shadows on most photographs. No brakes shoes on the leading driving wheel, and although I've drawn them the same, I have a suspicion the brake gear on the second pair of drivers was different to the other two. Finally the best profile shot of the L/H side of a locomotive I found shows a very prominent injector (I think) with a large diameter pipe leading a few inches below the footplate to a box like structure between the 1st and 2nd driving wheels, but I can't make any sign of it out in the shadows in any other photos I've found. No sign of it in drawings in Mountford and Russell. I try to avoid drawing injectors unless I have a very good reference as they are such a pain to get looking vaguely right, but if the universal fitment was as per this locomotive then I shall have to make the attempt. However I note that RCTS states that the locomotives started life with an exhaust steam injector which was fairly soon removed, so I wonder if its that early fitment that I am looking at. Anyone know?

     
  2. JimC
    No, sorry, I haven't made a drawing of these. I'm thinking I should, but there's not a lot of material about. There are some drawings at the NRM, but the catalogue descriptions don't give me immense confidence I want to go ordering half a dozen up at getting on 30 quid a time. Soon adds up! The GWS doesn't seem to have anything useful. Does anyone know of any other sources?
  3. JimC

    Barry Railway G Class

    By JimC,


    Barry Railway Locomotive Sketches
    This was an interesting one to draw too. The nicely drawn Barry weight diagram is dimensioned with a front overhang of 6ft 7in, but the drawing scales some 5 inches less! I've gone with the written dimension, which is the safer option with workshop drawings.
     
     

  4. JimC

    Rhymney Railway S Class

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    The S class were four powerful and heavy shunting engines, delivered by Hudswell Clarke in 1908. They bore a definite family resemblance to the R class 0-6-2T, with the same coupled wheelbase but a shorter boiler, a round topped firebox and smaller driving wheels. Their original boilers were replaced with A class boilers by the grouping. They joined the GWR as 608-611.
    In 1930, all were rebuilt with superheated Standard 10 tapered boilers and new GWR style larger bunkers. They were renumbered 93-96 in the 1946 renumbering and all survived to British Railways to be withdrawn in 1953/4.

    The first sketch is intended to show the class as delivered, with the round top firebox and the short lived oval number plate. This sketch should be treated with caution, since I didn't have a good drawing to work from, just a particularly rudimentary weight diagram, although I did have a good official photograph. There was particular difficulty in reconciling the proportions of cab and tank between the photograph, the weight diagram, and drawings of the class after reboilering with a GWR boiler, and I just crossed my fingers and hoped for the best.
    The reboilered version of the S class is covered in this entry. 
     
  5. JimC

    Rhymney Railway L1 Class

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    The L1 class were built as L class 2-4-2 saddle tanks with double frames. By GWR days two of them had been converted to 0-6-2T, given new design boilers based on those of the K class, and called class L1. A third conversion had been scrapped in 1921. The rebuilds presented an odd appearance, since the 2-4-2s had a small rise in the footplate over each crank on the drivers, but this was not repeated over the new leading driving wheel. The 0-6-2s, allocated diagram J, were scrapped in 1922 and 1923, and never carried their allocated GWR numbers, 1324 and 1325.

     
    This is an updated version of the sketch, and hopefully further updates will follow. The sketch attempts to represent RR No 64 between 1911, when it was converted to 0-6-2ST, and 1917. At this stage it was still carrying a modified L class boiler. Some time after 1917 it received a new boiler, documented as being a K class boiler, and photographs show it to have been considerably higher pitched. At the moment I am uncertain as to whether 62 and 63 had the higher pitched boiler as I have yet to find any photographs. Published information states all three had low pitched boilers as per the sketch, but the K class boilers were a few inches longer.
     
    This is one of the least well founded drawings. The material I have found for the L1s so far consists of drawings and photographs of the L class 2-4-2ST, a single rather indistinct photograph in WRR Vol 1No 64 in this form, two photos of 64 in post 1917 configuration and a particularly sketchy - in more than one sense - GWR weight diagram which includes a rise in the footplate over the leading wheel which didn't actually exist. So this was created by taking my drawing of the L and truncating the frames in what seemed to be a reasonable manner and hoping for the best. If anyone can urn up some good photos of the L1s I'd be grateful. More than most drawings this one suffers from not having found any kind of source for the inside rods and motion, which I think should be particularly prominent between the leading and driving wheels. I would like to thank contributors to this blog for comments that predate this drawing, which have been extremely useful in making improvements.
     
  7. JimC

    Barry Railway E Class

    By JimC,


    Barry Railway Locomotive Sketches
    A class of five small lightweight 0-6-0T, numbered 781-5 by the GWR. Two survived to join British Railways but were gone by 1950, whilst three went to industrial use in the 1930s and lasted to 1958/60. Only one received a really major GWR rebuild, which included a non standard Swindon designed boiler as well as GWR style cab and bunker. 

    There are complexities around the E class bunkers! 781, 783 and 785 had an upward extension of the bunker with coal plates in Barry days, but 782 and 784 did not - or at least had lost it in their GWR time. I've drawn it in the Barry sketch. There are various problems with the GWR weight diagrams. Diagram A82, which was purportedly the locomotives as received shows the wrong shape cab entrance and the bunker too low. Diagram B5 ,which only applied to 782, shows a GWR shaped bunker that was never fitted. The locomotive appears to have had a new bunker at that rebuild, but it was a plain rectangle, taller than the Barry bunkers and about the same height as the extensions.  783 had a more major rebuild for Diagram B21 and did have a GWR style bunker. Another feature is balance weights on the wheels. I often leave these off as being tricky to manage accurately, but in the case of the E class only 782 appears to have had them. The generous supply of handrails seen on the Barry sketch may not have been present on every locomotive. They had quite an array of pipework behind the safety valve cover which I haven't managed to understand well enough to reproduce.
  8. JimC

    Rhymney Railway L Class

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    These were saddle tanks with double frames. Five were built in 1891 by the Vulcan Foundry. They had started life with a polished brass safety valve cover as well as the dome, not to mention elaborate lining out. As shown here the lining is omitted completely and its intended to be a post WW1 configuration.   The frames are rather different to the general run of 19thC RR saddle tanks.  By GWR days three had been converted to L1 Class 0-6-2ST, one of which had already been withdrawn.


     
    The two remaining 2-4-2s were numbered 1324/5 and acquired GWR safety valves (and cover) and other minor features, and the air brakes were removed. They were scrapped in 1928. So there's really not much difference between the RR and GWR configuration. From the few photos I've seen they didn't have any GWR lettering on the tanks, which wasn't unusual for saddle tanks, not that these sketches are intended to portray accurate liveries. 
     

     
    The sketch looks very bare between the leading and driving wheels to me. I think in real life the connecting rods and valve gear would be filling that gap. I noted with some amusement - if I interpret the drawings I have correctly - that the leading wheels appear to have bearings in the outside frames only, the driving wheels bearings in both sets of frames, the second set of drivers just the outside, and the radial trailing truck only frames inside the wheels. 
  9. JimC

    GWR 1360 (Ex Pembroke and Tenby Railway)

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    This one is really much too conjectural... The Pembroke and Tenby Railway was taken over by the GWR on 1st July 1896, and this Shrp Stewart 2-2-2T, one of two biuilt in 1863, was taken out of service in July 1897, so there must be some considerable doubt as to whether it ever carried its allocated GWR number or was painted in GWR livery. Apparently it hung around until 1908 before finally being scrapped, so photographs might exist. My drawing is worked up from a handful of dimensions in RCTS and a couple of photos, one in RCTS and the other here.  Neither are exactly up to the standards of Swindon works photos, and curiously both must have been taken within seconds of each other from the same camera position , since all the same figures appear, but some are in different positions.
     
    It seems one drawing has survived with the GWS, but its catalogued as being just the wheels, so I didn't think it would be very helpful. Beyond that I've made all sorts of guesses about what the photos actually show, and you're all very welcome to disagree with me. There are quite a few things I am not at all confident about. Did the safety valve cover really overhang the structure its sitting on, for instance? Cute as it undoubtedly is, I'm not quite sure why I picked it to draw, other than I am in the middle of writing a lot of text, and fancied a change. Rather than consider a second edition of the book, I'm looking at an alternate way to use the drawings, and am drafting out a very chronological format which is currently in the 19thC. The format ought to be good for tracing design concepts, and I've picked up a few things myself, but the big drawback is that, for instance, some classes have to feature in two or three different places to reflect rebuilds that brought them up to the latest state of the art. One thing I've already spotted, incidentally, was that the Armstrongs seem to have initiated few or no classes with sandwich frames, but were quite happy to retain them on rebuilds of existing designs, even when the rebuild involved such major changes to the chassis - different wheelbase and so on - that you'd think reusing components was hardly worth the bother.
  10. JimC

    GWR 3511 Class

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    Not to be confused with the 0-4-2T 3521s that ended up as 4-4-0s, these were 2-4-0Ts that ended up as 2-4-0s.  Built in 1885, the ten double framed 3511 2-4-0Ts were a tank engine version of the Stella class 2-4-0s, a part of a Dean standardisation exercise that also included the 2361 outside frame version of the Dean Goods and the 1661 0-6-0ST. All had major components in common. They were a much larger engine than the Metros with 17in by 26in cylinders and class P (Dean Goods) boilers. Originally (as shown) they carried condensing apparatus for use in the Severn Tunnel. 3501-10 were similar, but built as convertibles for the broad gauge.  The 3511 series lost tanks and gained tenders to become additional members of the Stella class in 1894/5.
     
    This sketch was quite a challenge. I started it because I was given a couple of blueprints of weight diagrams of the class, but when I came to trace the blueprints the frames just didn't look right to me against photographs. I've decided, on *very* limited evidence, that the running plate on the drawings is a little too low, and so I lifted it and now I think it better matches photographs. 
     
    Sketch updated 1st Feb
     
  11. JimC

    GWR Nos 93 & 94

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    Another early bird this one. These two were the first GWR built 0-6-0T, and belong to the Gooch era - built in 1860. They were quite small engines with 4ft 2in (or possibly 4ft) wheels. They were fairly typical Gooch designs with domeless boilers, raised fireboxes and Gooch valve gear. They had inside frames, small side tanks and a well tank under the bunker. When renewed in the 1870s, they were turned out as members of the 850/1901 classes, so it is probable that no significant parts were reused. They don't really seem to feature in the general GWR 0-6-0T evolution. 

    I rather fancied doing this one, but the only source I could find was the E L Ahrons drawing which has been reproduced in several places, notably Holcroft and RCTS. I haven't found any photograph, which isn't really surprising given their early demise and probable low profile. Curiously Ahrons and Holcroft (the latter following Ahrons I imagine) refer to the 'class' as being 91 & 92, but as seen elsewhere in these pages 91 and 92 were 0-4-2T built for the GWR by Beyers.
    The valve gear was a particular issue. I didn't think I could leave it put completely, so I tried to make some sense out of the lines in Ahrons drawing against a copy of Stephenson's gear from another locomotive and altered it for what I figured were the visible differences in Gooch gear. I call these drawing sketches since although intended to be scale I can't guarantee accuracy, but this one is perhaps more sketchy than most.
    Which brings me on to livery and lining. I omit lining. It's shed loads of work, and scale lining at this sort of size disappears into anti-aliasing anyway. Plus it tends to obscure the underlying shape. But this one does look a bit bald without it. As for livery, well according to GWW dark holly green, so I picked a dark holly green from a number of choices available on the net. But like most colour names its a broad church. Who knows!

     

  12. JimC

    Port Talbot Hudswell Clarke 0-6-0ST - GWR 808 Class

    By JimC,


    Port Talbot Railway Locomotive Sketches
    These Hudswell-Clarke built locomotives were delivered to the Port Talbot in 1900/01.
    They weren't given any major rebuilds under the GWR but were lightly westernised. They were withdrawn in the late 1920s/early 1930s, with some sold into industry, .
    One has survived and is a popular and successful locomotive in preservation. In spite of being basically an industrial shunter type she works heritage line trains very capably.

  13. JimC

    Cambrian Small Side Tank (2-4-0T) Class

    By JimC,


    Cambrian Railway Sketches
    Three small side tank locomotives from Sharp Stewart, delivered in 1866. They received a significant reworking in Cambrian days which altered their appearance considerably. All survived to the GWR, who proposed to scrap two of them immediately, but they were reprieved and numbered 1192, 1196 and 1197. They soon received the full GWR treatment above the footplate. The boilers were thoroughly overhauled with top feed added and they were given new GWR smokeboxes, tanks, cab and bunkers. Thus utterly transformed they resumed work, normally on the very weight-restricted Tanat Valley line. One was scrapped in 1929 but the other two soldiered on until 1948, becoming British Railways locomotives and running over a million miles each.
    A difficult one to draw, because they all had minor variations and the GWR changed the bunkers twice. Lets not be too precious as to whether every feature in the sketch was on any one locomotive at the same time, but this is intended to show the second bunker enlargement. 
    This drawing is very much influenced by the 7mm drawings in Welsh Railway Records Vol 4 - Cambrian Railways Drawings Part 1 : 1853-1892, which has just been published and is much recommended. I've also grabbed photos and so on. I find the safety valve cover rather unconvincing in some drawings and models. Maybe this one is better! This little class has a somewhat higher profile than one might expect due to being the subject of an old school white metal kit in 4mm, and an etched brass one in 7mm. Also, I suspect because they were notably cute in GWR form and more photographed than one might expect. 

  14. JimC
    Numbers 34 and 35 seem to have been reserved for oddities! Later there were a couple of Dean 0-4-4Ts.
    The original GWR 34 & 35 were a pair of locomotives built by the Vulcan Foundry which the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway bought off the shelf in 1853, and one may suspect at a bargain price. They could be described as long boiler 0-4-0 tender engines, but the drive was not to either wheel axle, but to an intermediate crank axle, somewhat in the position that the middle driving axle of a long boiler 0-6-0 would be. An original works drawing of these oddities is available here on this excellent site of  Vulcan Foundry locomotives . Presumably they must have been reasonably competent since they ran for twelve years before they were taken out of service. This drawing is from Ahrons "The British Steam Railway Locomotive" but was clearly originally published in "The Engineer". Anyway long out of copyright, so I'll break my normal habit and include it.



    In 1866 George Armstrong took these weird contraptions in hand and reconstructed them. They reappeared as long boiler 0-6-0s, the only ones of this configuration to be built by the GWR, although a fair number of others were taken over in the early days. They were definitely not in the general Armstrong style. and one may speculate how much of their predecessors was reused and why. RCTS claims that the boilers were of the same design as those of the Vulcan Foundry originals, but the surviving Vulcan foundry drawing shows a dome as does the above illustration. 

    There's very little other information about them, and they were withdrawn in 1888 and 1889.
     

  15. JimC

    Rhymney Railway J Class

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    This one might be the last for a while, because I get a little weary of doing too many of these sketches at a time.  This one owes a huge debt to the Welsh Railway Research Circle's excellent publication on the Rhymney,  Welsh Railway Records Volume 1, which was the source not only for the drawing I used as a foundation, but also provided some excellent photos. The sharp eyed who have the book might be able to see a number of (minor) areas where my interpretation of the photographs differed from my understanding of the drawing.


    This was a tricky one to shade. Dark Brunswick Green, apparently, was the chosen colour of the Rhymney, so I found a "Dark Brunswick Green" reference on line and constructed a shading palette from that, but together with the thickish outline I use for these sketches the result is perhaps not as clear as it might be. I may have to think about that, but if I go paler it would be getting closer to GWR middle chrome green than I would really like.

    I've always found these idiosyncratic outside frame locomotives rather appealing, and wish I had the skills to model one. It will be fun when I get on to the GWR rebuilt 0-6-2Ts with similar frames and pannier tanks.
     
  16. JimC

    Barry Railway C Class

    By JimC,


    Barry Railway Locomotive Sketches
    Built by Sharp Stewart, the C class originally comprised four small 2-4-0T, without the standard boiler used by most Barry Railway classes. In 1898 two were converted to 2-4-2T, and the other two, one also converted to 2-4-2T, were sold to the Port Talbot Railway. Both the Barry locomotives were gone by 1928, even though one received a major rebuild with a Metro boiler. 
     
     
  17. JimC

    Barry Railway J Class

    By JimC,


    Barry Railway Locomotive Sketches
    The J Class. Another fairly early version of this sketch. Interesting to compare the J class 2-4-2T with the G Class 0-4-4T. They both use the standard Barry boiler and cylinders, but the J is a longer and heavier locomotive with considerably more coal and water capacity. Sadly I don't know enough about locomotive design to understand the pros and cons of the 0-4-4 and 2-4-2 wheel arrangements. I need to focus a bit more on the differences between the Sharp, Stewart and Hudswell Clarke versions of the J class, and make sure this isn't some kind of uneasy blend. There's also the problem of dates, since they did have some changes over their lives with the Barry Railway. Its sometimes said that its as easy to get models right as wrong, and presumably the same is said of sketches like mine, but I find it an endless struggle to get a reasonable stab at the details. To say the least its rare to find a set of photographs taken from all angles of a single locomotive on a single date, and even then you'd need dimensioned drawings as well. Also one really needs to become expert on the locomotives of a given railway, and I'm more of a generalist. I'll recommend again the work of the Welsh Railway Research Circle when it comes to studying these locomotives. I was surprised to see more brightwork on the photographs of these than I've sketched for other Barry classes, and I had better go back and check the other passenger types at some stage.
     
     
  18. JimC

    GWR 157 Classes (1862 and 1878)

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    There were actually two 157 classes. The first, above, was specified by Gooch and built by Sharp Stewart in 1862. They could be regarded as a development of the earlier 69 class with larger driving wheels. They were numbered 157-166. They were little altered in their lives, with only one receiving a new boiler, from an Armstrong Goods. They did receive weatherboards and it is possible that some may have been given open cabs.
    Most were scrapped in 1878/9 when the new 157 class took over their numbers. The last three stayed in service until 1881; these survivors were renumbered 172-4 for their declining years.
     
    I don't usually put drawings up here that are featured in my book unless very heavily updated, but I thought both 157 classes should be in this piece. Normally 19thC heavy rebuilds, even those reusing "only the space between the wheels" were classified as renewals, but RCTS tells us the second 157s were classified as new. Its interesting that even when renewals were effectively all new locomotives they tended to keep the same frame type as their predecessors as these did. As with most of the later 19thC classes they had a healthy variety of different boilers fitted over their lives, domes and domeless, belpaire or round topped box. This sketch is intended to be representative for around 1900. A little prototypical note though: I typically draw my locomotives bearing the class number, so 157 here. But to be strictly correct then as I read RCTS 157 herself  never actually ran with a domeless Belpaire firebox boiler. 

    And finally a Wolverhampton variant of the class, discussed in comments below.
     

  19. JimC

    Rhymney Railway R Class

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    Stephenson’s built the first three locomotives of the R class in 1907. Although based on the design of the Ms, they had quite different boilers with a slightly larger barrel and a Belpaire firebox, and cylinders with the valves between the cylinders rather than above as in the Ms. Two more Rs followed in 1909. The last batch of Rs, known semi officially as the AR class, were delivered in 1921 and will follow in another entry.
    The Rs are commonly held to be the major influence on the GWR 56xx, although to be honest the family style was so strong between all the Rhymney inside frame types that making a distinction seems futile.
    The most obvious difference between the Rhymney locomotives and the 56s is that the GWR design had piston valves above the cylinders, whilst the Rs had slide valves mounted between them. This is not, of course, evident in the sketches.

    This sketch is based on a 1908 Stephenson's drawing of the 1909 batch. Later in their Rhymney lives there were safety valve and front suspension changes. The GWR changed safety valves again, and in several cases installed Std 2 boilers. I have a drawing in preparation for the Std 2 boiler, but I am uncertain of several details. That may have to wait until the AR article.
    The earlier R conversions were, as might be expected, all of the pre war engines, yet the GWR drawings I have, although prepared before the first conversions were made, shows AR frames and I am not clear whether the converted Rs received the suspension and frame changes which would be needed to exactly match the drawings. 
  20. JimC

    GWR Large Prairie Bunkers and Rear Tanks

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    I've sketched out the obvious principal variations in Large Prairie bunkers visible in Russell, both drawings and photos. I'm making the assumption that the lines of close spaced rivets on the bunker side did indeed follow the top seam of the water tank. It sees to me there must have been variations in coal and water capacity. I shall have to take a closer look at the RCTS volume.
     

     
  21. JimC

    GWR No 1490

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    Built in 1898 this odd experimental locomotive is arguably significant only as having the first set of pannier tanks. It had outside frames and an unconventional firebox, wider than it was long and  initially featuring water tubes inside the firebox. Apparently it was unsuccessful in its designed role as a passenger engine and was relegated to shunting duties before being sold off. Initially it went to the Ebbw Vale Steel and Iron Co, then to the Brecon & Merthyr at a time when they were particularly in need of locomotives and finally to a Northumberland colliery, who scrapped it in 1929.
     
    The sketch is better founded than some, in spite of it being based only on a weight diagram, because there are some excellent photographs available.  Its difficult to imagine it as an industrial shunter, but maybe the colliery got it very cheap! 
     

  22. JimC

    Rhymney Railway A and A1 Classes

    By JimC,


    Rhymney Railway Locomotive Sketches
    The A class could be considered an enlarged S class 0-6-0T, and the S class a smaller R class 0-6-2T. The As had a smaller boiler than the Ms and Rs.They had 4ft 4½in driving wheels like the S class, the Rs having 4ft 6in. Stephenson’s delivered 10 As in 1910, and Hudswell Clarke 6 more in 1911.

    The A1s were essentially the same as the As except that the boiler was pitched higher, had a Belpaire firebox and was fitted with top feed. There were also small differences to the frames. Three came from Hudswell Clarke in 1914, two more in 1916, and three from Stephenson’s in 1918.

    Several of the A class were given A1 boilers, which put them in the A1 class. By the time of the grouping the A class was reduced to ten and the A1 class increased to fourteen. They were allocated numbers 52-75 by the GWR. The sub class complications continued under the GWR and some A1s received A boilers and vice versa as boilers were exchanged at heavy repairs.

    From 1929 standard 10 boilers were introduced and these were fitted to about half the class. GWR bunkers appeared on most, and GWR cabs on some. Withdrawals started in 1948 with some of the earlier locomotives, and the majority went between 1953 and 1955. 
     
    The GWR created the same boiler fitting drawing for both variations. The Std 10 boiler sketch above shows 1914 (A1) frames, but the differences are small. I also idly wonder whether the frames from the three different builders of A1s were identical. There seems little point in drawing both. As usual with the RR classes I owe a substantial debt to the Welsh Railway Research Circle's excellent publication on the Rhymney,   Welsh Railway Records Volume 1, but a GWR drawing reproduced in Russell was also very important, especially in sorting out the differences between the frame types. 

    Sandboxes... You'll see the A has the front sandbox above the frame, and the A1 below. Some As definitely had the sandboxes changed to under the footplate. Another in life change was that the front suspension springs were moved to under the frames on a couple of the locomotives in the early 1950s.
     
  23. JimC

    GWR No 342 0-4-2ST

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    from an E.L. Ahrons sketch, this is No 342 in original or at least very early form. It was built in 1856 by Beyer, Peacock for the Commissioners of Chester General Station, which was jointly owned by the GR, the LNWR and the Birkenhead railway, and was bought by the GWR in 1865.
     
     

     
     
    In this form it was really a slightly earlier version of Nos 91 and 92, also from Beyer, Peacock. In 1881 it was altered into an 0-4-0ST of much the same form as its cousins. The rebuilt locomotive looked substantially similar to nos. 91 and 92 as discussed elsewhere in this blog.  In 0-4-0ST form the locomotive was in service until 1931.

    I wonder what the rationale for the conversion was. They would up rather heavy on the trailing wheels, as noted under No 92. I suppose it may have been a fixed wheelbase rather than a trailing truck of some kind, so they would have been a lot more flexible round sharply curved sidings as 0-4-0STs. 
     
     
     
  24. JimC

    GWR Nos 9, 10, 12, 14, 22 & 23 (Ex Shrewsbury & Chester)

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    These were built in 1847 by Sharp Stewart for the Shrewsbury & Chester, and  came to the GWR in 1854 as part of the merger that formed the Northern Division and brought narrow gauge to the GWR. They were of a type known as Sharp singles that were delivered to a number of lines. One was converted to a tank engine, and a couple more had replacement cylinders but otherwise they were not greatly altered.  They were in service until the 1870s (1885 for the tank engine conversion). It's disappointing to note that no 14 was preserved at Wolverhampton until 1920 when it was finally broken up. A shame it didn't make it to 1928 and the York museum. One web page states that the GWR Directors didn't know it had been cut up and asked for it to be prepared for the 1925 Railway centenary at Darlington, but that might be just another rumour like the ones surrounding the loss of the Broad gauge locomotives some years earlier.
     
    This sketch is more conjectural than I'm really comfortable with. I didn't find a drawing of one in as built condition, so I extrapolated from a drawing of the tank engine conversion and photographs of No 14 as preserved and significantly altered. I've found a suggestion that E L Ahrons had to do a fair amount of guess work in some of his series of drawings of early GWR engines in "The Locomotive" that are more familiar from the RCTS series (and which I am largely relying on for these very early types) so perhaps I am in good company.
     
     
     
  25. JimC

    GWR No 40 (Ex Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway)

    By JimC,


    GWR Locomotive Sketches
    This was one of those locomotives which, for no reason apparent at this distance, was rebuilt time and again for a very long life. This is the  first GWR No 40, which was officially withdrawn in 1904! It was constructed as a long boilered 0-4-2 tender engine with outside cylinders in 1849 by R.B. Longridge & Co of Bedlington, for the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway, and was so well regarded that the S&B attempted to sell it without success. In 1854 it became GWR property. In 1858 Armstrong had it completely reconstructed as an 0-4-2ST with inside cylinders, possibly using the old boiler, much modified, but little else. In 1873 it was reconstructed again, still as an 0-4-2ST, but with new cylinders and boiler. Finally in 1897 it received new boiler and cylinders again. Ahrons has a neat phrase for these complete rebuilds come renewals: "Reusing the space between the wheels" and in this case it seems entirely appropriate.

     I wonder how Armstrong saw all these locomotives. Did he treat them as classes, or as individuals, upgraded/rebuilt or withdrawn according to their merits and the state of the GWR bank balance? Presumably when one of these antiques and curios came into the factory some long vanished notebook contained estimates of what was going to be needed to repair it to run until another overhaul was due, and George Armstrong would look at what it was going to cost and where there was capacity in the factory, and a decision on high would be promulgated to scrap or rebuild. Its also worth considering, I think, too, that we need to consider that because so much had been replaced over the years, in 1897 it was not so much a question of putting a new boiler and cylinders on an 1849 locomotive, but rebuilding an 1873 one. Maybe too the Chester workshops, which had once been the works of the Shrewsbury and Cheseter, was adept at keeping the old crocks running. Its striking just how many of the oddities survived in that area, and how few were in front of Dean or Churchward's eyes at Swindon!
     
×
×
  • Create New...