Ford - Modelling Narrow Gauge Railways in Small Scales

MODELLING

Narrow Gauge Railways

IN SMALL SCALES

CHRIS FORD

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the following for their assistance: Charles and Sue Benedetto, Miles Bevan, Michael Campbell, Greg Dodsworth, Stephen Fulljames, Richard Glover, Simon Hargraves, Nigel Hill, Laurie Maunder, Chris ODonoghue, Christopher Payne, Paul Titmuss and Richard Williams.

Dedication

For Karen.

First published in 2015 by

The Crowood Press Ltd

Ramsbury, Marlborough

Wiltshire SN8 2HR

www.crowood.com

This e-book first published in 2015

Chris Ford 2015

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN 978 1 84797 936 0

All photographs are by the author.

Disclaimer

The author and the publisher do not accept any responsibility in any manner whatsoever for any error or omission, or any loss, damage, injury, adverse outcome, or liability of any kind incurred as a result of the use of any of the information contained in this book, or reliance upon it. If in doubt about any aspect of railway modelling, including electrics and electronics, readers are advised to seek professional advice.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY

BEGINNINGS

I cant quite remember when I discovered narrow gauge railways, but the root of it was definitely a talk given by Iain Rice and Bob Barlow on Light Railways at the Heathfield model railway exhibition sometime in the 1980s. To say that this grabbed me would be an understatement. I launched myself into finding out more about this new discovery of railways that were built outside of the normal mainline standards. This study led me straight into narrow gauge; not only were some of the lines technically light, but they had a quirky, individualistic, unusual air about them that still fascinates me to this day.

I suppose it would be helpful at this point to establish what this book is about, and if Ive lost you already, what narrow gauge railways are. To explain in simple terms, they are railways with the gauge (the distance between the rails) set at less than 4ft 8in (1,435mm) a measurement that became the international standard gauge and was adopted by George Stephenson in the middle of the eighteenth century. Technically this is more of a mid-gauge as the measurement preferred by a large portion of the west of England was I.K. Brunels 7ft in gauge (2,140mm, or broad). This, despite having several technical advantages, had one major cost disadvantage in that passengers and goods had to be transferred whenever the broad gauge met the standard. It was this problem over all others which hastened the demise of the broad gauge, which disappeared shortly before the turn of the twentieth century, much to the disappointment of many a Great Western (and for that matter the London and South Western Railway) devotee. There are also historically, and still in existence, other gauges wider than Standard worldwide, however the only other in the British Isles is the Irish standard of 5ft 3in (1,600mm). To all intents and purposes, this looks, at first glance, no different to standard gauge; in some cases using production body shells on wider gauge chassis units. But for now we can put all that wide gauge discussion to one side and concentrate on the narrower variety, and variety there certainly is.

The quiet inspiration. The Tal-y-llyn 2ft 3in gauge track curves around the rock face towards Towyn.

NARROW GAUGE

Just to confuse you further, there probably is (or has been) somewhere in the world, a railway gauge carrying freight or passengers measuring down at inch increments from standard gauge (4ft 8in) down to 15 inches. There is no single definitive reason for this, though somewhere in the individual railway companys records there will be an indication of why that line chose to build to that size. These reasons fall broadly into three camps: something existed prior to construction that made any other gauge impractical; some second-hand equipment became available that tipped the balance on cost grounds; or the engineer for the line had a personal preference, possibly based on earlier experience, and presented that particular gauge as the best option. Or it may well have been all three.

However, technically there are two reasons: geology and cost. Provided the payloads are within sensible limits, its generally cheaper to build a narrower gauge the sleepers are shorter, and, provided the loads are modest, the rail can be lighter. The rolling stock can also be smaller, and less equals cheaper. The geological angle is simply that the narrower the track bed and the smaller the rolling stock, the less earth and rock need to be removed during construction and obstructions can be avoided with the use of tighter track curvature. Therefore in mountainous rocky areas there is an immediate saving on civil engineering. This can also apply on totally opposite terrain if the ground is soft and unstable than a very small, lightweight narrow gauge locomotive is going to be a far more logical item of power than a large heavy standard gauge one.

The Lister Autotruck in its rail version. This lightweight machine was designed for working in tight spaces such as factories, or over very soft ground where a heavy locomotive would have proved impractical.

MODELLING NARROW GAUGE

These, then, are the reasons narrow gauge was often chosen over standard: its lighter, its smaller, and most importantly it works out, at least initially, cheaper to the company building the line. But why does that make it an ideal candidate for a model railway?

The answer to this question isnt that far away from the reasons for building the real thing. Lets start with the blindingly obvious one its smaller. In a period when houses are getting smaller and smaller and the cry goes up repeatedly that theres not enough space for a model railway, narrow gauge nearly always saves the day. Just as with the prototype, it is possible to wrap narrow gauge track around approximately half the radius of the equivalent scale standard gauge. That may not be preferable, but it is possible. Also trains are generally shorter. Twelve-coach trains are rare on narrow gauge anywhere in the world, let alone the British Isles, and traditionally here a 30-foot coach is fairly long. So, in model terms, we can halve most physical dimensions. That alone gives it an instant wow factor to someone who is short of room. If, for example, 4mm scale is used, it would be possible to build a satisfying small layout in an area of less than 1,200mm 600mm.

There are two other terms that dont usually get applied to Standard Gauge its cute and its freelance (which in this context means the adoption of an invented line with fictitious stock and livery). I will stick my neck out here and say that the former is often the primary reason for modelling narrow gauge, and the latter is usually the result, and unlike with standard gauge modelling you are unlikely to get taken to task by others for doing that. Most narrow gauge modellers freelance to a greater or lesser degree, and within modelling circles it is perfectly acceptable to do so. There are narrow gauge modellers who reside within the fine-scale ethos and do stick rigidly to the prototype, but they are rare indeed; most find a comfortable middle ground between the two extremes using a mix of basic prototype ideals, padded out with some freelance additions.