MGWR 129 Celtic

[Maitland]

More from Locomotive Magazine 1902. The MGWR had just introduced the A class 4-4-0s, and they printed a partial general arrangement drawing and a photo. Sadly, both just side views so not quite enough for modelling, but I hope it's of interest. General arrangement first, if I can get the forum to swallow it...

[Maitland]

Photo and article. Built as one of four A class in 1902, with two more in 1905, 129 was rebuilt with superheater and Belpaire firebox in 1918 (from the photo below it looks as though it was Belpaire already), and became GSR 546. For some reason it was withdrawn and then reinstated in 1933 (I wonder if it had supported Eoin O'Duffy?), and survived till 1959. I also wonder if Celtic was pronounced "Keltic" or "Seltic" in 1902.

Edited Tuesday at 13:10 by Maitland

[Mayner]

19 hours ago, Maitland said:

Photo and article. Built as one of four A class in 1902, with two more in 1905, 129 was rebuilt with superheater and Belpaire firebox in 1918 (from the photo below it looks as though it was Belpaire already), and became GSR 546. For some reason it was withdrawn and then reinstated in 1933 (I wonder if it had supported Eoin O'Duffy?), and survived till 1959. I also wonder if Celtic was pronounced "Keltic" or "Seltic" in 1902.

According to Clement's & McMahon GSR locos the 1933 rebuild of 546 (formerly 129 Celtic) produced a hybrid combining the wheels of 546, frames and cab of withdrawn 549 and the boiler of withdrawn 646 (J2) O-6-0. The rebuily 546/549 featured the raised running board and canopy cab fasionable in the 1920s also fitted to 548,549,550. The rebuilding of the large MGWR 4-4-0s with superheaters and piston valves from 1917 onwards would have been intended as an economy measure to reduce coal and water consumption. 

The GSR had a surplus of medium power locomotives following the arrival of the Woolwich Moguls and the effects of the Great Depression, leading to the withdrawl of a number of large MGWR 4-4-0s and 0-6-0 Types.  Business appeared to have improved enough by the mid 30s to justify the re-instatement of 546/549 the construction of the 5 342 Class 4-4-0s and the 800 Class.

1948  Inchacore assessment indicates that the As/ D5 Class were mainly used on goods/cattle trains in CIE days and occasional passenger trains in the Cork Area and considered a 'poor design'

 

Comparison of the A Class in its original as built condition and rebuillt form with superheater and pistpn valves.

The styling of the raised running board and canopy cab in the A1 version is similar to the final batch of Cattle Engines.

Reprints of MGW A.As,A1 weight diagrams issuedwith New Irish Lines Sep 2014

Edited Wednesday at 08:44 by Mayner

[Maitland]

Interesting. I can't say the rebuild improved the appearance much, and if it didn't improve the performance either, well what a shame. If I build a model it will be as original, that front view gives me plenty to go on along with a couple of photos in Shepherd. Mind you, IIRC that 1948 assessment bellyached about the Woolwiches on the grounds that they didn't make full use of the Irish loading gauge. Duh.

[Horsetan]

1 hour ago, Maitland said:

..., IIRC that 1948 assessment bellyached about the Woolwiches on the grounds that they didn't make full use of the Irish loading gauge.

I'm not sure that widening the cab and tender would have produced a useful improvement in power output....

[GSR 800]

2 hours ago, Maitland said:

Interesting. I can't say the rebuild improved the appearance much, and if it didn't improve the performance either, well what a shame. If I build a model it will be as original, that front view gives me plenty to go on along with a couple of photos in Shepherd. Mind you, IIRC that 1948 assessment bellyached about the Woolwiches on the grounds that they didn't make full use of the Irish loading gauge. Duh.

The same assessment that outlined the bigger boiler refit they were due to have was a waste of money?

[Mayner]

13 hours ago, Maitland said:

Interesting. I can't say the rebuild improved the appearance much, and if it didn't improve the performance either, well what a shame. If I build a model it will be as original, that front view gives me plenty to go on along with a couple of photos in Shepherd. Mind you, IIRC that 1948 assessment bellyached about the Woolwiches on the grounds that they didn't make full use of the Irish loading gauge. Duh.

Personally I preferred the appearance of the superheated locos to the original saturated version of the A Class, Celtic is likely to have been pronounced Keltic in Ireland. Jack Kennedy a prominent Irish steam age railway photographer and enthusiast once told me the the MGWR would have not been interested in an IC125 unless it was capable of hauling cattle trains.

The A and C Class 4-4-0s were built with 6'3" driving wheels and crossed eccentric rods on the Stephenson valve gear (visible in the GA) in contrast to the 6'7' drivers and open (straight) rods on the GSWR express passenger 4-4-0s of the same era.  The crossed rods apparrently had an advantage in starting and hauling heavy loads at low to moderate speed required for a mixed traffic loco.

The main purpose of the superheating would have been to reduce the running costs of the loco by reduced coal and water consumption, while the MGWR 4-4-0s were considered poor/sluggish engines by the 1948 Inchacore appaisal they were likely to have been considered a 'foreign design" with different arrangement of valve gear to otherwise similar Inchacore 4-4-0s likely to have been quite run down with little maintenance since the beginning of the Emergency.

Enginemens comments on the mechadically identical Cs (D5 & D6 Classes) in "A Decade of Steam" and various IRRS papers speak of free-steaming locos that ran roughly at high speed, that were tried successfully on Kingsbridge-Nenagh-Limerick trains.  Haven't read of comments of rough riding with the As (D5) Class, the problem with the Cs may have been tied up with raising the boiler centre line when the locos were superheated, the shorter coupled wheelbase of the Cs and the valve gear not like being 'pulled up" for high speed running. Problem seems to have been widely known but apparenty nothing done to improve the ride quailty.

Quite a few photos of Cs on cattle trains including double heading an empty westbound special with a Cattle Engine.

CIE appear to have plans to "rebuild" some Woolwich as  3 cylinder 4-6-0s with 400 Class boilers, effectively new locos with Woolwich driving wheels, not dissimilar to the Midland's 'rebuilding'/Renewal of the 2-4-0 "Mail Engines" of 1889/90 into the C Class from 1909 onwards.

The problem with overloading of the Woolwich would have arisen as a result of the changing in operating patterns following the "Fuel Crisis: of the late 40s which would have resulted in the running of less frequent heavier trains in response to fuel shortages and increased running costs.  Similarly CIE reduced train frequency and increased train loadings in response to fuel shortages and cost increases following the 1973 oil crisis.

The design developed to the stage that the CIE produced a diagram of the loco!

 

[Maitland]

From a Google search:

Quote

MGWR is an extension of GWR that allows the neighborhood around each spatial feature to vary between each explanatory variable.

I thought it was the W&L that was a GWR extension....

As for soft or hard C in Celtic, that was prompted by a reference in Sean O'Casey's autobiography, where he satirises the S pronunciation used by some at the time (he being a Nationalist and later James Connolly's general secretary). It's hard to work out why, as we're nearly all happy with the soft C in cycle or ceramic, and Celt being from Keltoi.

But to be serious. I'm working on a drawing in original form with a view to maybe one day making a model, and what I can't work out from drawings or photographs is which side MGWR drivers were. Long shot, any photo of the backplate?

[Mayner]

15 minutes ago, Maitland said:

From a Google search:

I thought it was the W&L that was a GWR extension....

As for soft or hard C in Celtic, that was prompted by a reference in Sean O'Casey's autobiography, where he satirises the S pronunciation used by some at the time (he being a Nationalist and later James Connolly's general secretary). It's hard to work out why, as we're nearly all happy with the soft C in cycle or ceramic, and Celt being from Keltoi.

But to be serious. I'm working on a drawing in original form with a view to maybe one day making a model, and what I can't work out from drawings or photographs is which side MGWR drivers were. Long shot, any photo of the backplate?

Ernie Shepherd's MGWR book ( & company records in IRRS Archives)  are likely to be a more reliable source than Google. 

Born and bred in working class area of Dublin in the 50s and 60s we tended pronounce C... as Keltic ,  One of my friends got into hassle in school for spelling his first name Kieran as he and his family pronounced it rather than Ciaran as the Head expected, as far as we were concerned Celtic was a Scottish football club.

MGWR locos with the exception of te F (Cattle Engines) drove on the right hand side with a screw reverser, the reversing lever is visible in photos of the rhs of the A Class There is a photo of the cab interior of 541 (superheated condition) in the R N Clements collection on the IRRS Flickr site.