Route
Building Philosophy
To many of us, one of the great things about simulation (of
any brand or genre) is the ability to recreate what can’t be experienced any more in real life. The story of the preservation movement is a
remarkable one; that in 2013 you could run on the mainline behind a steam
locomotive at 90mph is extraordinary, but the recreation of many things – and we all have our favourites – isn’t possible.
SSS’ work to add realism to the
steam end of the TS market has been very successful, but there has been a strong tendency for
published routes to be set in the present “late
privatisation” era which doesn’t suit steam fans. Indeed in many cases it doesn’t suit
early diesel, rail blue and sector fans either – but
rather than whinge about it, at SSS thought we’d get
our hands dirty.
We looked at a number of options, but the qualities we were
looking for:
- A route that would cover a wide era relatively unchanged
- A challenging drive and plenty of interest
- Interesting scenery
- Distinguishing features
- Well known, but been done
- Used traction that had not already been built.
Stainmore ticked these boxes very well – it changed little
throughout its century of existence, epic climbs of 1 in 59, giving plenty
of double heading and banking of coal, limestone, heavy holiday
expresses, stopping local and freight turns. At 1368 ft, it was the highest
through summit in England (the terminus at Princetown on Dartmoor beats it at
1427ft) and ranks as one of the most challenging routes in the UK.
Bouch and why Stainmore closed and the S&C survived.
Phil mentioned Thomas Bouch particularly in the context of
his bridges. The nervousness of engineers in the design of the trestle
viaducts (Belah and Deepdale being very similar to Bouch’s Tay Bridge) had a profound impact on traction – Class
2 motive power in the form of LNER J21 and J25s were the workhorses of the route; only later outside cylinder locos
without the great hammer blow of a crank axle lead to the Ivatt and
Standard 4 locos
giving a much needed dose of power to the line after WW2
Bouch’s
career was later in railway mania, and railway companies were wanting more for less and Bouch, having served under Joseph
Locke building the Lancaster & Carlisle – the
cheap, twisty and steep option for the WCML over Shap – he
was the engineer that offered value for money. Stainmore hugged contours, minimalised earthworks, avoided tunnelling and
used minimal metal trestle viaducts instead of solid but time consuming masonry
for the greatest spans.
Stainmore may have been cheap but it was always a tough and slow road, frequently blocked by snow and heavy
on men, maintenance and coal, with no great advantage in time to running via
Newcastle and Carlisle, which is what ultimately sealed its fate in 1962.
The Midland took a more conventional approach on the later
Settle & Carlisle – much easier grades and several
tunnels giving a faster, less restrictive route that may have cost more to
build but proved more attractive to keep running.
Some comparison is interesting - whilst Belah was assembled
in just 43 days and had very little maintenance in a century;
Ribblehead (or Batty Moss) took the best part of 4 years to build yet became the
maintenance liability that nearly shut the route.
The S&C is once again a valued route and had a fearsome
reputation amongst locomotive crews (Terry Essery's account of firing a 9F to
Carlisle is well worth a read) but at 1 in 100 it is a pussycat in comparison
to its forgotten neighbour, Stainmore at 1 in 59.
p.s. It is rarely cited that the Midland made forceful
attempts to abandon the S&C once they made peace with the LNWR and secured
running rights via Ingleton and Low Gill to Carlisle, but parliament ensured
the Midland made good on its Act and finish the line.
And to Finish, Some New WIP Images:
Progress Around Kirkby Stephen
Development Work Progresses at Barnard Castle:
Lastly, Bowes Station:
No comments:
Post a Comment