Video Archive         Recent Topics      
YMR logo

You are here:  Your Model Railway Club > Model Railway Layouts. > Members Ideas For Layouts. > What if the grouping of 1922 had not happened To bottom of page
                 

 Moderated by: Spurno
Start New Topic Reply Printer Friendly

What if the grouping of 1922 had not happened - Members Ideas For Layouts. - Model Railway Layouts. - Your Model Railway Club
AuthorPost
 Posted: Sat May 7th, 2011 04:42 pm
PMQuoteReply
link to this 1st post
shunter1
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 19th, 2010
Location: Kilkenny, Ireland
Posts: 2366
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

:hiI have just been doing a little day dreaming, A kind of what if scenario, How would our railways have developed without the Big 4 grouping. What kind of model railways would we have, coaching stock and loco,s in pre-grouping livery.Running in the 1930,s

Would there have been more variety? A Royal Scot in full LNWR livery :mrgreen: assuming loco development loosely followed the historical trend, with coaches in plum & Cream

Caledonian Blue loco,s, Highland yellow?

It maybe fun ? and get us out of the straight jacket of history if we wanted?

regards,

Derek

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Sat May 7th, 2011 10:07 pm
PMQuoteReply
link to this 2nd post
Sol
Former Member
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

Ahhh , I see the makings of a new UK railway coming on; not EWS but the SEW Lines.
( I think Owen's MN&S is like that)

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Sun May 8th, 2011 10:57 am
PMQuoteReply
link to this 3rd post
shunter1
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 19th, 2010
Location: Kilkenny, Ireland
Posts: 2366
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

:hiRon, Its just a daydream at the moment? :mutleyI always wondered how the premier line would have developed without having Derby involved. A joint LNWR/L&Y empire with the 4-6-0 type running fast goods, further development of the Claughtons ect. One could even stay close to history, just keep the old livery for your favourite company.;-):lol:

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Wed Mar 21st, 2012 07:21 pm
PMQuoteReply
link to this 4th post
bazzmund1885
Former Member
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

for a start I suspect that Stanier would have stayed at Swindon, so its possible that Great Bear would have been joined by Princesses in Green.  The Midland would probably have to pull its finger out and build a fleet of 7Fs, or a varient on Bertha, for goods traffic.  The GNR would probably be a mini LNER with gresley at the helm, but the L&Y and GC situation would be dificult with the engineers being of retiring age.  A bit of imagination to get a stirling at horwich or kirtley at gorton perhaps?

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Thu Mar 22nd, 2012 08:59 am
PMQuoteReply
link to this 5th post
gdaysydney
Member


Joined: Mon Mar 28th, 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1266
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

Fictitious Liveries -Not quiet on topic but for those that may not have seen this site before
http://www.fictitiousliveries.co.uk/



____________________
Dave
Notmutley
British OO outline, DCC - NCE PowerPro, Sound chips, Computer Control- RR&Co software
Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Thu Mar 22nd, 2012 10:23 am
PMQuoteReply
link to this 6th post
peterbunce
Full Member
 

Joined: Mon Dec 19th, 2011
Location: Near Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 94
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

Interesting though the comment on Midland 7F's could have a reply  'they had them', and sent them to the Somerset & Dorset.

 The real reason for the 'small engine policy' of the Midland was 'weak' or old (lack of forward thinking design - not including sufficient extra strength to take heavier traffic, or 'lack of money!

The Settle & Carlisle had theirs strengthened (the S&C was built 10 years after the London line, and they still were building , as was proved later, with the benefit of hindsight, weak bridges) to allow the original (quite heavy) compounds, and the new high specification (corridor carriages)  to run over it - the bridges gained the central stiffening girders. The London main line, Derby southwards as far as I know did not - so it still had the weak bridges. The LMS strengthened them in due course to take the Jubilees - I wonder if 'infrastructure' work (paid for in part by Government) as a result of the 1929 crash was involved?

The MR did try out a S&DJR 2 8 0 - I wonder if that used the (possibly stronger bridged) goods lines, which were additions to the original line.

The same thing to a degree, made the LNWR claughtons have a smaller boiler than the original design. The LMS fixed that (& used them on the S&C) but they were getting old by then, and new information (springs etc ) produced the Royal Scots.

I suspect that the science of bridge stresses was not very advanced so, and understandably, the civil engineers played safe!

The 'stock markets crash' could have forced some amalgamations? One reason for the grouping was that the enormous cost of the First world war, on the railways infrastructure in cash terms was never paid - the self same thing happened after the Second world war as well - it took BR till the fifties to rectify the delayed maintenance of track especially, which both slowed everything down, and was the cause of some accidents.

Yours Peter.

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Thu Mar 22nd, 2012 08:36 pm
PMQuoteReply
link to this 7th post
bazzmund1885
Former Member
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

Theres always the possibility that the "Austin 7s" were built under the midland banner.  Just to continue their small engine policy to a certain extant in that they wouldnt go any further than an 0-8-0 and if required shove an 0-6-0 at the front of it for good measure.

The civil engineers playing safe isnt unknown - the Highland built River class was sold off instantly for fears of being too heavy, yet almost immediately returned to the Highland routes at the grouping.  Yet the Midland's abject fear of bigger engines was, I suspect, similar to Stirlings allergic reaction to bogie carriages - its all about the initial capital expenditure, the cheap b*ggers.  But then again having just done a dissertation on the pre grouping railway scene has made me wish that they were grouped earlier!

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

 Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2012 06:57 pm
PMQuoteReply
link to this 8th post
Simonfj
Former Member
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline

My photos:
view photos in Gallery
view photos as slides

I've had similar ideas re the GE, with a probable joint working with the GN the B17's would doubtless have arrived but be in GE Blue whilst the electrification of the NER might have resulted in no A4's but electric steamliners in the 30's whilst the M&GN is to have Armstrong Whitworth Diesel Cars. GE electrics on the LBSC system with articulated quintart sets like the 2 cars on the Newcastle system. Oh and no Edward Thompson either....

Back To Top PMQuoteReply

This is topic ID = 8553     Current time is 07:14 pm  
You are here:  Your Model Railway Club > Model Railway Layouts. > Members Ideas For Layouts. > What if the grouping of 1922 had not happened
You can type a quick reply to this topic here. Click in the box below to begin.

Or to reply to an individual post, or to include images, attachments and formatted text,
click the Quote or Reply buttons on each post above.

To start a new topic in this forum, click the Start New Topic button below.
To start a new topic in a different forum, click the Forum Jump drop-down list below.
Start New Topic


Back to top of page

           
15 Most Recent Topics

Problems with this web site? Please contact the Webmaster.

All material submitted to this web site is the responsibility of the respective contributor. By submitting material to this web site you acknowledge that you accept full responsibility for the material submitted.
Unless stated otherwise, all the material displayed on this web site, including all text, photographs, drawings and other images, is copyright and the property of the respective contributor. Registered members are welcome to use it for their own personal non-commercial modelmaking purposes. It must not be reproduced or re-published elsewhere in any form, or used commercially, without first obtaining the owner's express permission.
The owner of this web site may edit, modify or remove any content at any time without giving notice or reason.    © 2008

                 

Recent Topics Back to top of page

Powered by UltraBB 1.15 Copyright © 2007-2011 by Jim Hale and Data 1 Systems. Page design copyright © 2008-2013 Martin Wynne. Photo gallery copyright © 2009 David Williams.