Castle Aching

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Donw said:

 

 

Just shows dont post without checking.  Senile moment?

 

Don

 

I'd just assumed that esteemed Wagonman wanted to talk about the Small Passenger 2-4-0s 'cause he felt like it. That's par for the course round here.

 

Standard passenger locos on the WNR of course ...

 

Got to love anything with a 4-wheel tender. Here's Plynlimon

 

 

I love these 2-4-0s, and they served on the Mawddwy, one of my favourite - modelling bucket list - lines, after the Cambrian 1911 re-vamp.

 

 

Speaking of those little lines, did someone mention the Cambrian Sharp 0-4-0ST?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Edwardian
spelling!

[Compound2632]

Interesting early LNWR carriage there. 

 

If I turn up discussing something apparently random, be assured that a deeper if obscure level it is of fundamental relevance to what I happened to be thinking about at the time. 

[Edwardian]

59 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Interesting early LNWR carriage there. 

 

 

 

Yes, reminds me of those on the Brampton, another line for which I have a huge affection. Bit of an outlier, too, as North Durham and Northumberland were replete with private mineral railways, then there's Brampton on its own to the west.

 

IIRC, the Brampton coaches were ex-Firsts.  If so, that would seem to account for the 3-compartments.  And before anyone says they look like the Hornby 4-wheel coach, don't!

 

 

Circling back by these means to the Tanfield, the line is that of the NER, a branch of the Brandling Junc. Railway, which comes to mind as one of two public railways in the region named for people, not places, the other I have in mind is the Clarence Railway. The Marley Hill shed was on the dissecting private railway, the Pontop & Jarrow.  Some may know it as the Bowes Railway (after person not place name), but since that didn't happen until the '30s, IIRC, so far as I'm concerned it didn't happen.

 

I have a pretty good idea of what ran on the P&J 1880s-1900s, but I'd love to know what the NER ran up and down the Tanfield Lea branch. 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Edwardian
spelling!

[ChrisN]

The 2-4-0s were the workhorses on the Coast route of the Cambrian for well into the 20th century.  I will need three.  They were rebuilt at different times so I could possibly have three locos that look different.

 

The Cambrian inherited 8 of these.  They were 25ft long.  London Road Models do one that is 24ft long, but what is 4mm between friends?

[brack]

53 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I'd love to know what the NER ran up and down the Tanfield Lea branch. 

https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11870

 

In particular: "Before 1900 it is thought that Class L (J73) locos were used (Built 1891-2)"

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

And before anyone says they look like the Hornby 4-wheel coach, don't!

 

They don't. Not in the least. At all. They look like real carriages.

Edited May 3, 2020 by Compound2632

[wagonman]

6 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Interesting early LNWR carriage there. 

 

 

My understanding is that these coaches, eight of them as ChrisN says, were being constructed for the LNWR but were somehow 'diverted' to the infant Cambrian in 1864. Not sure how that worked out, but there were still in existence in 1923 as the GWR took a photo (as evidence?) before hauling them off to the knacker's yard.

 

I might just get round to doing one in 7mm scale...

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by wagonman

[Hroth]

11 hours ago, Edwardian said:

IIRC, the Brampton coaches were ex-Firsts.  If so, that would seem to account for the 3-compartments.  And before anyone says they look like the Hornby 4-wheel coach, don't!

 

Now why would anybody say that? 

 

I must say, however, that the 2-4-0 is a completely and unjustifiably neglected wheel arrangement!

(With or without a 4-wheeled tender...)

[Donw]

13 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

I'd just assumed that esteemed Wagonman wanted to talk about the Small Passenger 2-4-0s 'cause he felt like it. That's par for the course round here.

 

Standard passenger locos on the WNR of course ...

 

Got to love anything with a 4-wheel tender. Here's Plynlimon

 

 

I love these 2-4-0s, and they served on the Mawddwy, one of my favourite - modelling bucket list - lines, after the Cambrian 1911 re-vamp.

 

 

Speaking of those little lines, did someone mention the Cambrian Sharp 0-4-0ST?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was me confusing Plynlimon and Plasfynnon. I have long wanted a model of Mazeppa.  Last time I spoke to Dragon Models they were supposed to bringing out a 7mm etched brass kit. I would have been asking about it this Saturday but of course the ALSRM show is cancelled. I do have a Drawing.

 

Don

[monkeysarefun]

9 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

Now why would anybody say that? 

 

I must say, however, that the 2-4-0 is a completely and unjustifiably neglected wheel arrangement!

(With or without a 4-wheeled tender...)

 

 

We've got one!

 

 

[Donw]

In the build queue I have a Barnum and I rather fancy a Stella which I see Finny7 have re-introduced.  For those who has a GER turn of mind there is the Sharpie. LNWR Hardwicke is another. Great choice 2-4-0s

 

Don

[St Enodoc]

1 minute ago, Donw said:

In the build queue I have a Barnum and I rather fancy a Stella which I see Finny7 have re-introduced.  For those who has a GER turn of mind there is the Sharpie. LNWR Hardwicke is another. Great choice 2-4-0s

 

Don

You can't beat a Barnum.

[Edwardian]

10 hours ago, brack said:

https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11870

 

In particular: "Before 1900 it is thought that Class L (J73) locos were used (Built 1891-2)"

 

Interesting, thanks.

 

The Ls were a class to which I never thought I'd have any regard as there were a small classes put to working the quays on either side of the Tyne.  Before they were displaced from those duties by electric locos in 1905, I should not have thought they would have strayed, but they would not have had to stray far, perhaps, to run down this branch..

 

In appearance, they are relatively large tanks, so, relating them to familiar 4mm scale models, something more like the Holmes D Classa (J83) than an E1 (J72). 

 

Whatever was used on the Tanfield line would have been based at the sub-shed, Bowes Bridge, but I failed to find any info on allocations for the period of interest. 

[Edwardian]

18 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

 

We've got one!

 

 

 

 Looks like a Sharp Stewart

[drmditch]

11 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Bit of an outlier, too, as North Durham and Northumberland were replete with private mineral railways, then there's Brampton on its own to the west

 

I have a pretty good idea of what ran on the P&J 1880s-1900s, but I'd love to know what the NER ran up and down the Tanfield Lea branch. 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that, as you say, most of the 'private' railways were in the northern part of County Durham. Since the southern part was that served by the S&D (after 1862 the NER Central Division) It suggests that this railway was built and run in closer contact with it's local industries. The rate of development of the coal/iron industries is also interesting.

 

All too often we look at railways from an inverted perspective. They were there to serve customers!

 

As regards the Tanfield Lea branches, in later years were not some of the varieties of 0-6-2 utilised?

 

Which reminds me that I have a model of a B1 in progress but still packed away somewhere.

 

Mustn't get distracted. Wondering whether I can squeeze part of a colliery incline into a corner!

[Northroader]

Here’s a drawing I prepared for one of the Cambrian locos. I think they’re well worth a recognition as they did perform branch line work with passenger, goods, mixed, trains, which very few 0-4-0s could claim to have done. I was working towards building the National 0-4-0 Collection at the time, but when I realised how long it would take, I give up after the first two!

[NeilHB]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

 

 Looks like a Sharp Stewart

 

Beyer Peacock of 1885 - one of six supplied.

 

Anyone have drawings - I rather fancy one! 

Edited May 4, 2020 by NeilHB

[wagonman]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

 

 Looks like a Sharp Stewart

 

Or possibly a Beyer Peacock?

[wagonman]

2 hours ago, Donw said:

 

It was me confusing Plynlimon and Plasfynnon. I have long wanted a model of Mazeppa.  Last time I spoke to Dragon Models they were supposed to bringing out a 7mm etched brass kit. I would have been asking about it this Saturday but of course the ALSRM show is cancelled. I do have a Drawing.

 

Don

 

Don,

Sparkshot do a 3D printed 'kit' for this and the Small Goods as well. Worth a look. https://www.shapeways.com/product/VZKEUQ92S/7mm-fr-e1-cambrian-spc-basic?optionId=63090775&li=shops

 

 

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, drmditch said:

 

I find it interesting that, as you say, most of the 'private' railways were in the northern part of County Durham. Since the southern part was that served by the S&D (after 1862 the NER Central Division) It suggests that this railway was built and run in closer contact with it's local industries. The rate of development of the coal/iron industries is also interesting.

 

All too often we look at railways from an inverted perspective. They were there to serve customers!

 

I can only assume that the North Durham and Northumberland fields were established sooner, and/or more concentrated.  By the beginning of the Nineteenth Century there are a series of waggonways south to staiths on the Tyne, and leading to staiths on both sides of the Wear.  These were the basis of the private railway network, which tended to develop towards getting coal to points of embarkation further down the rivers and via new outlets like Seaham.

 

There seems to be no equivalent network developing in South Durham/Auckland coalfield, though the need to get coals out to sea via river staiths was long-felt; there was a canal survey in the 1760s with a view to reaching Stockton-on-Tees.

 

It seems to have taken a public railway to unlock the situation in 1825, but, interestingly, there was a substantial body of opinion that wanted the South Durham/Auckland coal away from Stockton.  This seems to be the result of the slow and difficult navigation out of the Tees at Stockton.   Tees Navigation Company was paying out 10% dividends but doing very little to improve navigation, so it was swept away by Act of Parliament in the 1850s and replaced by the Tees Conservancy Board.  This maybe seen as Part 2 of the Pease efforts to get their coal out (Part 1 being the S&DR, of course).

 

The rival route from the Auckland field was via the Clarence Railway and the Stockton & Hartlepool Railway to the new port of West Hartlepool. 

 

 

 

Quote

As regards the Tanfield Lea branches, in later years were not some of the varieties of 0-6-2 utilised?

 

The earliest we could have an L is 1891, so I wonder what else might have run and what went before?  Strikingly modern next to the assorted Pontop & Jarrow motive power at Marley Hill.

 

EDIT: I suspect the old Hornby J83 chassis is a standard Hornby one and not dimensionally accurate.  A pity, because a Holmes D Class could be a good basis for a NER L Class, as the w/b is only 2" out.

 

Anyone know the vital statistics for the Hornby chassis?

 

Quote

Which reminds me that I have a model of a B1 in progress but still packed away somewhere.

 

Built, I think, with mineral traffic on the Stainmore line in mid, so one of the relatively few Worsdell designs likely to be found in my area in the late Ninetrenth Century.

 

To my joy, I discover that in 1895 the branch engine for the Middleton-in-Teesdale branch was a Bouch 1068 class!

 

Quote

Mustn't get distracted. Wondering whether I can squeeze part of a colliery incline into a corner!

 

You know you want to!!!!!

 

Internal user chaldrons?

 

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by Edwardian
spelling!

[Edwardian]

42 minutes ago, NeilHB said:

 

Beyer Peacock of 1885 - one of six supplied.

 

Anyone have drawings - I rather fancy one! 

 

42 minutes ago, wagonman said:

 

Or possibly a Beyer Peacock?

 

Yep, I knew that!  Should have checked. 

 

 

I do have a picture of a GA of an earlier (1866) version supplied to Sweden

 

 

 

And for the similar ones (1870s) supplied to the Isle of Wight.

 

 

Some went to the Netherlands (1870s) ...

 

 

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by Edwardian

[Regularity]

43 minutes ago, NeilHB said:

 

Beyer Peacock of 1885 - one of six supplied.

 

Anyone have drawings - I rather fancy one! 

Basically a standard BP design with ~5’ drivers supplied to a few railways, including the MSWJ (not to be confused with the slightly larger 5’8” wheel locos of which 2 went to the EWJR) and the Isle of Wight Railway, so you have plenty of justification for having one on a minor railway.

You can probably find drawings in the appropriate books on those lines, but Golden Arrow has a kit:

 

Must admit that these would be rather at home on the WNR...

[Edwardian]

3 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Basically a standard BP design with ~5’ drivers supplied to a few railways, including the MSWJ (not to be confused with the slightly larger 5’8” wheel locos of which 2 went to the EWJR) and the Isle of Wight Railway, so you have plenty of justification for having one on a minor railway.

You can probably find drawings in the appropriate books on those lines, but Golden Arrow has a kit:

 

Must admit that these would be rather at home on the WNR...

 

Yes, they would.  I got quite well up on them as the intended motive power for the fictional railway scheme I first sketched out, the Isle of Eldnernell & Mereport Railway, so, when it came to a new scheme, the WNR, I decided to go for Sharp Stewarts as the principal supplier.  

[Compound2632]

44 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

EDIT: I suspect the old Hornby J83 chassis is a standard Hornby one and not dimensionally accurate.  A pity, because a Holmes D Class could be a good basis for a NER L Class, as the w/b is only 2" out.

 

Anyone know the vital statistics for the Hornby chassis?

 

 

W. Worsdell Class L: 7'6" + 8'2" = 15'8"

Holmes Class D: 7'6" + 8'0" = 15'6"

Hornby current Jinty: 31 mm + 33 mm = 64 mm => 7'9" + 8'3" = 16'0"

Triang classic Jinty: 1 7/32" + 1 9/32" = 2½" => 7' 8 7/8" + 8' 1 5/8" = 15'10½

 

To the best of my knowledge, it's always been the Jinty chassis under the J83 body moulding. To short for an LMS Standard 3F (a particularly large 0-6-0T) but too long for most others!

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by Compound2632

[Northroader]

Here’s another foreign one: (highly modellable scene)