Modelling 3' Gauge

[IrishPeter]

The Southwold's goods stock at 10'by 6'was unusually small. The only other 3' gauge line I can think of with wagons that size is the Schull and Skibbereen, which was also something of an eccentric creation. The Southwold eventually got some very fine Cleminson coal wagons, and the S&S learned from its mistakes and did build some larger wagons later on. However, the S&S was usually cash-strapped so its bijou goods stock remained in use throughout the line's history!

Given what had gone before, it surprises me that so much about the Southwold was tentative and experimental - but I have long suspected that they were not building a straightforward narrow gauge branchline but a light railway, which had not been invented yet. The SG Wantage,Wisbeach and Upwell Tramways were similar in using the existing law - their case the Tramways Act - to try and do something not quite contemplated by its framers.

The Light Railway really evolved in Ireland under the terms of the 1883 Tramways and Corporations Act (Ireland) so lines like the Southwold and the Wantage Tramway are interesting as 'warm up matches.' The only Irish line that was at all tentative in engineering terms was the Schull and Skibbereen, mainly due to the terrain and a rage for cheapness. The others built under the 1883 Act all seemed to know more-or-less what they were doing. Even the Tralee and Dingle with its ferocious gradients, and odd habit of crossing the road unannounced, was pretty much a straight 3'gauge light railway, with geographical challenges rather than anything experimental. They had some very good equipment right from the start in the form of the Hunslet 2-6-0Ts and the Bristol built saloon carriages which were better than a lot of what the BG in Ireland had to offer!

Cheers,
Peter in AZ

[SapperAnt]

As far as I can gather the Southwold adopted Clemsinson stock as it was the "big thing" in the late 1870s. James Cleminson's patented underframe appeared in 1877/8 and was all over the mechanical and railway press. There's a great piece in the "Wagon & Carriage Review" from 1880 and "The Engineer" from 1879.

The Southwold was originally proposed in 1865 and an attempt was made to build the line to 2' 6" gauge earlier in the 1870s based on the Tramways Act. But this was still born from what I can gather from reading the contemporary newspapers.

The final Southwold Railway which was built was planned to be built to a gauge of 2' 6" but was widened at a late stage to 3' to improve the ride for the comfort of passengers and increase the amount of cargo carried. Whether the rolling stock was designed before or after this change Im not sure. But yes, as you say, it is rather small for 3' gauge.

[IrishPeter]

That explains a lot about some of the peculiarities of the Southwold Railway, and I suspect that they may not have completely adjusted their thinking when they added 6" to the gauge.  The goods stock is certain closer to 2'6" gauge size than 3'.  The carriages are, however, a similar width to that common on the Irish Tramways - 6'6" - and Cleminson's patent was the big thing at the time.  I can think of at least seven 3' gauge lines that ran Cleminson carriages - 5 in Ireland; the MNR and the Southwold- and they all opened between 1877 and 1889.  My hunch is that the West Clare Railway was the last place in GB&I that regularly used Cleminsons' in the early 1950s.  The IMR had pretty much shunted their's to Harry Cubbon''s wing by then, the last regular use being of N41 on the Ramsey cattle mart train which finished about 1950. The IMR was not overly keen on the Cleminsons as their early experience of them running between St John's and Douglas was two collapsed centre wheels and a couple of derailments. The MNR examples ran on Maunsell wheels, which may not have taken kindly to the IMR's sharper curves.

Peter in AZ

[SapperAnt]

The "Halesworth and Southwold Tramway" was incorporated in 1872 under the Tramways Act (1870) and as far as I can ascertin the subsequent "Halesworth & Southwold Railway" followed the same route.

The Halesworth & Southwold Railway was proposed 1875 as a standard guage line but on the suggestion of the line's engineer - a Mr Arthur C Pain in 10.1875 (he had experience of Indian railways) 2' 6" was adopted as being cheaper and easier to build. Another decidig factor was that Richard C Rapier (of the engineering firm Messrs Ransomes & Rapier) who was a Director also favoured 2' 6" - his firm produced equipment in that gauge, some of which, he said was running succesfully in China.

The Act of Parliament and INcorporation of the Southwold Rly (1876) states the gauge to be 2' 6" but that was changed to 3' following a suggestion made 11.1877 that given the expected traffic, the slightly broader gauge would be superior. 3' was officially adopted early in 1878 - when consuction was already under way: track was being laid 5.1878.

[IrishPeter]

The Cleminson underframe has certain inherent advantages, not least of which is the lower tare weight for a given size of vehicle when compared to a bogie carriage. Even though the frame members are not as hefty as one would see on a bogie coach of the period, there is no appreciable sag as the vehicle is supported in the middle as well as at the ends. Their ride was also much steadier than that one associates with early bogie coaches which tend to 'thruppenny bit' their way around sharper curves.  The down side of the Cleminson six-wheeler is that it is quite meccano kit underneath and needed a bit more care and attention than the average bogie coach, which may have been why the IMR was not over keen on them.  I also have a suspicion they may have been a little harder on the track - especially on the outsides of sharp curves - than bogie vehicles. IIRC the wheelbase on the MNR examples was 12' + 12' so they probably thumped the outer rail pretty heavily going into the sharp bend, then ground round the bend - unlike the bogies which thruppenny bit their way around.

Robert Hendry assures me that N42, when she last moved by rail in 1976, was much smoother than the older IMR bogie coaches as she tracked into bends rather than nosed into them.  Even on relatively good track, the older IMR bogies can be a bit rough at 25 mph, and the life expired track of the late 1970s they were quite positively lively!  What they were like going 'hell for leather' at 35mph-ish on late running Peel line services in the mid-1960s doesn't bare too much thinking about now we are all used to modern suspension systems!  I do know that the epithet 'the Rattler' was used by certain mainland enginemen to describe the IMR.

The Southwold Railway Cleminsons look quite positively delicate to me when compared to the six wheelers running elsewhere.  I would guess that their tare weight would have been about 7.5 tons as opposed to 10 tons of a bogie coach of that size. With the relative light p'way and the small locos that would have been a saving the running foreman would have appreciated every day!

Cheers,
Peter in AZ