Castle Aching

[sem34090]

Atlantics are incredibly handsome beasts, Rob, and I think I may need to pre order an Umber one... and a BR black one... (I know, dirty language and all that!  )

[Northroader]

Somebody did once say “Umber is the new black” if I remember right?

[Compound2632]

The Edwardian decade was the heyday of the Atlantic - whilst drawing offices struggled to come up with an effective express passenger 4-6-0, they seem to have had more success with the 4-4-2 wheel arrangement, though several threw in the towel saying "to heck with this, let's just build a bigger 4-4-0"

 

This one is the epitome of Edwardian elegance, as well as having design features of which we cannot but approve:

 

Edited January 12, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

Now you say, that all rings bells.

 

No, only Toby rang a bell!

 

 

The Edwardian decade was the heyday of the Atlantic - whilst drawing offices struggled to come up with an effective express passenger 4-6-0, they seem to have had more success with the 4-4-2 wheel arrangement, though several threw in the towel saying "to heck with this, let's just build a bigger 4-4-0"

 

This one is the epitome of Edwardian elegance, as well as having design features of which we cannot but approve:

 

ImEnV101-p056a.jpg

 

And the Great Western, as in so many other matters, took a different route!

 

During the later 'Armchair Years', I started to become fascinated with 4-4-0s. Later, I started to become fascinated with 4-4-2s.  These days, I find all manner of 2-4-0s fascinating.  There is just something about 4-coupled tender engines, obviously!

 

I took to wondering why, and I think it is that I 'grew up' on the idea GW in the mid-thirties in South Devon. The only 4-4-0s that featured were the small-wheeled Bulldogs, used to assist on the banks.  Passenger engines were all six-coupled, some 2-6-0s, but predominantly  4-6-0s, and 2-8-0s for goods.

 

Obviously, then, as a child, I was starved of 4-coupled tender engines.  The sole example being Edward the Blue Engine, of course!  Clearly I am compensating now.

[sem34090]

Somebody did once say “Umber is the new black” if I remember right?

Yes, a certain M E. D. Wardian who has the annoying tendency to loiter around the Parish of Castle Aching... 

 

Four-Coupled locos of all varieties have a lot of charm, more so even than 4-6-0's and THAT 4-6-2...

[Compound2632]

During the later 'Armchair Years', I started to become fascinated with 4-4-0s. Later, I started to become fascinated with 4-4-2s.  These days, I find all manner of 2-4-0s fascinating.  There is just something about 4-coupled tender engines, obviously!

 

To say nothing of 0-4-2s, which have an irresistibly toy-like charm. Now where does the key go?

[Nearholmer]

Four coupled engines are good on model railways for the same reasons that they were good on real railways: compact, and capable of dealing happily with tight curves. Of course, 'toy train' curves, even on respectable model railways, tend to be much sharper than the real thing, but, if you look at photos of pre-WW1 stations, you will realise that points and crossings were often much sharper than became common later, so long rigid wheelbases presented something of a challenge.

 

As with nearly everything, CJF had it right that 4-4-0 and 0-6-0 tender engines are ideal ...... they look big and 'main line', but are actually quite small, which is why Edwardian railways, or railways that hung on to Edwardian engines, make such good layouts.

 

Genuinely Edwardian one below. This is an N scale (yes, N) one that is in the Brighton MUseum collection, and is a 'pushalong' that didn't have any track.

Edited January 12, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Compound2632]

Just to be contrary, see here for a successful and elegant Edwardian express passenger 4-6-0.

[Hroth]

To say nothing of 0-4-2s, which have an irresistibly toy-like charm. Now where does the key go?

A perfect prototype for a tinplate O gauge loco.  I'd say the key would go about "there"..... 

[Nearholmer]

Trouble with a little boiler like that is that the spring could only be small, so not a great length of run, I'm afraid.

[Edwardian]

Just to be contrary, see here for a successful and elegant Edwardian express passenger 4-6-0.

 

Yes, I agree where 0-4-2s are concerned.

 

I do like that G&SW loco!  Nice coaches, too!

 

Funny now Robinson really struggled with 4-6-0s, and Drummond never really managed one for the SW, and both the SW and GC had very successful late 4-4-0 designs after 4-6-0s had been abandoned. 

[Hroth]

Speaking of clockwork locos, its a pity that Hornby couldn't produce a clockwork version of the Bulleid Q1......

[Hroth]

Just to be contrary, see here for a successful and elegant Edwardian express passenger 4-6-0.

Oh, come ON!

 

If you want elegant and successful Edwardian 4-6-0s, Churchwards Stars and Saints are the exemplars of the genre.

 

H, C & definitely O!

[Compound2632]

A perfect prototype for a tinplate O gauge loco.  I'd say the key would go about "there"..... 

 

Trouble with a little boiler like that is that the spring could only be small, so not a great length of run, I'm afraid.

 

Speaking of clockwork locos, its a pity that Hornby couldn't produce a clockwork version of the Bulleid Q1......

 

But smaller electrically powered RTR engines are available. All of which suggests to me that it's the sort of engine that Hornby's "Railroad" range should really include - simple outline, robust; a cheap toy - but with potential for the serious pre-Grouping modeller.

[Compound2632]

Yes, I agree where 0-4-2s are concerned.

 

I do like that G&SW loco!  Nice coaches, too!

 

Funny now Robinson really struggled with 4-6-0s, and Drummond never really managed one for the SW, and both the SW and GC had very successful late 4-4-0 designs after 4-6-0s had been abandoned. 

 

Yes, those carriages really are the thing, aren't they?

 

It was indeed the great Dugald - and those in his tradition, though neither he nor McIntosh never tried an atlantic - that I had in mind, along with Robinson. Wilson Worsdell went down a similar route - the Class V atlantics were a great success, following the lacklustre S and S1 4-6-0s; then came the big R1 4-4-0s. But it seems that only Ivatt grasped the true potential of the atlantic layout with the wide grate of his second design - laying the foundations on which his successor would build. But that's another story, beyond the time-frame of this thread.

 

Oh, come ON!

 

If you want elegant and successful Edwardian 4-6-0s, Churchwards Stars and Saints are the exemplars of the genre.

 

H, C & definitely O!

 

I was waiting to see who would be first to rise to the bait...

 

The Great Western's DO is an exception* - progressing from moderately successful 4-4-2s to really rather good 4-6-0s, their attempt at a 4-4-0 - the 3800 class - was something of a flop.

 

*Understatement of the week?

[Edwardian]

Yes, those carriages really are the thing, aren't they?

 

It was indeed the great Dugald - and those in his tradition, though neither he nor McIntosh never tried an atlantic - that I had in mind, along with Robinson. Wilson Worsdell went down a similar route - the Class V atlantics were a great success, following the lacklustre S and S1 4-6-0s; then came the big R1 4-4-0s. But it seems that only Ivatt grasped the true potential of the atlantic layout with the wide grate of his second design - laying the foundations on which his successor would build. But that's another story, beyond the time-frame of this thread.

 

 

I was waiting to see who would be first to rise to the bait...

 

The Great Western's DO is an exception* - progressing from moderately successful 4-4-2s to really rather good 4-6-0s, their attempt at a 4-4-0 - the 3800 class - was something of a flop.

 

*Understatement of the week?

 

I often overlook the GW in these discussions, despite my great enthusiasm for the line.  I think this is because, from Churchward's ascendancy, it's on another planet.

 

Yes, you can tell and Adam, or a Johnson or a Drummond, or a Robinson, or a Dean design apart etc, etc, yet there is an overall, recognisably, British outline style, of which they are all characteristic examples.

 

Churchward's designs resulted in locomotives of a radically different appearance.  In some ways very American, but without the naked wheels and untidy gubbins all over the place, they must have looked quite shocking and almost brutally different when introduced in the early-mid 1900s. 

 

EDIT:  We have got used to them, but one feature that, in my view, 'softened' their appearance was the curved drop on the front frames, which was often not present when the classes were first introduced.  Also, the Churchwardisation of some Dean designs looks less like a rebuild and more like a brutal attack! 

 

Planet Churchward was a very different place!

 

As for early GW 4-4-0s, though a small class, there were few 4-4-0s more elegant than the Armstrongs.

Edited January 12, 2018 by Edwardian

[Hroth]

I was waiting to see who would be first to rise to the bait...

 

The Great Western's DO is an exception* - progressing from moderately successful 4-4-2s to really rather good 4-6-0s, their attempt at a 4-4-0 - the 3800 class - was something of a flop.

 

*Understatement of the week?

Rising to the bait?  More like stating the obvious....

 

Well, the first of Churchwards "modern image" 4-6-0s emerged in 1902, basically what would become a Saint though with a parallel boiler rather than the familiar conical job. Given that 1902 date, you could probably say that its a Victorian loco...  The first Star 4 cyilnder locos followed and then the GWR imported some Froggy compound Atlantics for comparison to find that the "simple" Stars beat the pants off them, even when some were re-wheeled to become Atlantics to level the playing field a bit. The Atlantic Stars were, of course, re-wheeled back to 4-6-0s after the experiment.

 

As for the County 4-4-0s, they were cut down Saints, built because the LNWR wouldn't allow the GWR to run anything bigger than a 4-4-0 on the joint mid-Wales line.  As a stop-gap they were reasonably successful, even if prone to wobble a bit when pushed, which is understandable as they had an unmodified Saint front end!

Edited January 12, 2018 by Hroth

[Edwardian]

Rising to the bait?  More like stating the obvious....

 

Well, the first of Churchwards "modern image" 4-6-0s emerged in 1902, basically what would become a Saint though with a parallel boiler rather than the familiar conical job. Given that 1902 date, you could probably say that its a Victorian loco...  The first Star 4 cyilnder locos followed and then the GWR imported some Froggy compound Atlantics for comparison to find that the "simple" Stars beat the pants off them, even when some were re-wheeled to become Atlantics to level the playing field a bit. The Atlantic Stars were, of course, re-wheeled back to 4-6-0s after the experiment.

 

As for the County 4-4-0s, they were cut down Saints, built because the LNWR wouldn't allow the GWR to run anything bigger than a 4-4-0 on the joint mid-Wales line.  As a stop-gap they were reasonably successful, even if prone to wobble a bit when pushed, which is understandable as they had an unmodified Saint front end!

 

One of my many schemes, one which may actually be realised as I have an ex-exhibition layout that I can adapt to the purpose, is based on a fictitious bit of the LNW/GW Joint line on the Welsh Marches.

 

Counties would fit both the proposed running periods, 1904-1906 and 1912-1914. 

 

For the latter period, I might sneak in Bachmann's City, on the basis that, by then, the Cities would be undertaking the sort of secondary mainline duties that the layout would feature. And also because I have one!

 

4-6-0s would be too large for the layout, and, as you say, for the prototype. 

[Compound2632]

Rising to the bait?  More like stating the obvious....

 

Just so...

 

 

Well, the first of Churchwards "modern image" 4-6-0s emerged in 1902, basically what would become a Saint though with a parallel boiler rather than the familiar conical job. Given that 1902 date, you could probably say that its a Victorian loco...  

 

No more so than my avatar - also a 1902 locomotive, claimed* to be the most powerful in the country on introduction. S.W. Johnson's Derby Drawing Office, like those at Gorton and Swindon, was successful in making the transition from small Victorian engines to large Edwardian ones by way of fundamental design changes. Crewe, St Rollox and Nine Elms went for the same as before but bigger, which in due course turned out to be a dead end.

 

*By Sir Ernest Paget, the Midland chairman, addressing the shareholders, so there may have been a bit of spin and bias there.

 

 

 

As for the County 4-4-0s, they were cut down Saints, built because the LNWR wouldn't allow the GWR to run anything bigger than a 4-4-0 on the joint mid-Wales line.  As a stop-gap they were reasonably successful, even if prone to wobble a bit when pushed, which is understandable as they had an unmodified Saint front end!

 

... which suggests a bit of below-par thinking - Churchward must have been out of the office that day. If they'd been cut-down Stars, they would have waggled less. Maybe four cylinders would have been a bit too extravagant on a 4-4-0 - three would have been about right (!). Illustrates the limitations of standardisation. But the really poor thinking was in the North Western's civil engineering department, which was very slow to understand that a big two-cylinder 4-4-0 played more havoc with the permanent way than its dead weight axle-loading would suggest.

[Compound2632]

Genuinely Edwardian one below. This is an N scale (yes, N) one that is in the Brighton MUseum collection, and is a 'pushalong' that didn't have any track.

 

That's really a rather good representation of a LNWR 42' lavatory first of 1888 (D106). A bit of a poor choice of prototype, as there were only two built, for use in the earliest Manchester 'Club' trains to Windermere and Caernarvon. The centre compartment was a smoking saloon, accessed from one of the adjacent compartments.

[Edwardian]

That's really a rather good representation of a LNWR 42' lavatory first of 1888 (D106). A bit of a poor choice of prototype, as there were only two built, for use in the earliest Manchester 'Club' trains to Windermere and Caernarvon. The centre compartment was a smoking saloon, accessed from one of the adjacent compartments.

 

Not if club members must repeatedly travel between these destinations in a vain attempt to locate Lady W's fan.

[Regularity]

 

 

 

No more so than my avatar - also a 1902 locomotive, claimed* to be the most powerful in the country on introduction. S.W. Johnson's Derby Drawing Office, like those at Gorton and Swindon, was successful in making the transition from small Victorian engines to large Edwardian ones by way of fundamental design changes. Crewe, St Rollox and Nine Elms went for the same as before but bigger, which in due course turned out to be a dead end.

 

*By Sir Ernest Paget, the Midland chairman, addressing the shareholders, so there may have been a bit of spin and bias there.

 

Accepting the spin for a moment - and if he was talking about a class of locomotives in production rather than a prototype for testing, he may have had a point - this belies the oft-repeated “small engine” policy of the Midland (they were also building the 3F 0-6-0s which would rank very well contemporaneously in terms of power). Until some point towards the latter part of the Edwardian era, the MR was generally at the forefront of locomotive design and development. At this point, someone did some sums, and worked out that double-headed freight trains, and fast, frequent passenger trains of relatively short length was a more economical way of making a return on capital investment for the shareholders. That is, after all, the fiduciary duty of the Board.

 

The much-derided “small engine” policy applied for fewer than 20 years of the Midland Railway’s 88 year corpate existence, and then because the engines had simply become big enough to do the job required.

 

The decision to impose this on the whole of the LMS without a proper assessment of the impact, however, was the kind of ill-considered arrogance we see all too often from “successful” businessmen (not been enough businesswomen making this sort of balls-up to be able to use gender neutral words!) throughout time. What worked once in specific circumstances is not necessarily universal.

 

GEC-Marconi anyone?

[Donw]

Yes, those carriages really are the thing, aren't they?

 

It was indeed the great Dugald - and those in his tradition, though neither he nor McIntosh never tried an atlantic - that I had in mind, along with Robinson. Wilson Worsdell went down a similar route - the Class V atlantics were a great success, following the lacklustre S and S1 4-6-0s; then came the big R1 4-4-0s. But it seems that only Ivatt grasped the true potential of the atlantic layout with the wide grate of his second design - laying the foundations on which his successor would build. But that's another story, beyond the time-frame of this thread.

 

 

I was waiting to see who would be first to rise to the bait...

 

The Great Western's DO is an exception* - progressing from moderately successful 4-4-2s to really rather good 4-6-0s, their attempt at a 4-4-0 - the 3800 class - was something of a flop.

 

*Understatement of the week?

 

I take it that you are not considering the City, Flowers, Badminton and other GWR 4-4-0s . Hardly flops, the Dukes, Bulldogs etc were good for the lighter lines. I think the problem with the 3800 class was too much power from the cylinders not well balanced.

 

Incidentally didn't George V also have a bell?

 

Don 

[Edwardian]

I take it that you are not considering the City, Flowers, Badminton and other GWR 4-4-0s . Hardly flops, the Dukes, Bulldogs etc were good for the lighter lines. I think the problem with the 3800 class was too much power from the cylinders not well balanced.

 

Incidentally didn't George V also have a bell?

 

Don 

 

Like the South Western, the GW frequently needed a second type of engine to cope with gradients in the south west peninsular, hence the Dukes, a very successful design.

 

Yes, but she never ran on Sodor, so far as I know, and would have been far too heavy for the Ffarquhar branch.

[Nearholmer]

Compound

 

Creating a good representation of something uncommon was a bit of a hallmark of early commercial railway models, I think, and possibly continued until quite recently.

 

The pre-WW1 German makers were exceedingly clever at bending tiny bits of tin into the shape of trains, and were astonishly good at printing onto tin (done before the bending, incidentally, so they had to get the process right to avoid the print stretching or cracking), but they were heavily reliant on 'commissioners' in GB to both decide what to make for this market, and for the basic information (drawings, sometimes developed art-work, sometimes photos or postcard paintings etc).

 

There was massive LNWR bias, because Bassett Lowke (Northampton), Greenly (Watford), and Hull (owner of a shop in Birmingham) all lived on that line, and the things they chose were sometimes simply things that drawings of had been published in magazines like Engineering, and sometimes obviously attractive oddities (see thread on here about Colman's mustard wagons). But, in 1910 they ran a poll/contest, where modellers were asked to list the wagons that they thought would sell best, the winner being the person who got closest to the collective view, then went ahead and commissioned models of them all in time for Christmas!