Glyn Valley

With the loading gauge of the GVT suitable for a reguaged ex-WD Baldwin, it was clearly significantly more generous than either the CR or TR (nothing gets by me, Watson!). When the two surviving GVT carriages were restored, it's worth noting that the roof mounted lamp housings weren't, for the simple reason the bridges on the Talyllyn are too low.

The point about the GVT's historic gauge is obviously a factor which rules out visits from any line or collection I'm aware of, so if historic purity prevails, that's simply something the restored line (like the first 35 years of TR preservation) would have to accept. No visiting locos may disappoint a few gricers, but so far as the bulk of visitors are concerned, just how much of an issue is it really? I'd suggest that'd be 'it's not'.

Something evident from old images is the unique nature of the line, something I feel a visitor from (let's say) the S&KLR or W&LLR couldn't really enhance. To my mind, it'd be like restoring a section of the W&U or Selsey Tram and running a Standard 4 Tank on it ... great loco, wrong line!

From the point of view of pooled resources, ballast, rail and sleeper purchases remain viable areas for a spot of cooperation with other lines, as does much other pw kit (signalling a full-on steam operated tramway nowadays might throw up the odd challenge!). Same applies to components like wheel centres - even if not axles - plus axle boxes, brake gear and much more besides.

FWIW, if it were my decision (i.e.money!), I'd happily accept inherent limitations and stick with the 2'-41/2" gauge simply because it's unique as the GVT itself. In marketing 'a little bit of heaven on earth' (what a fantastic tag line that is!) I'd also want to develop a mutually beneficial relationship with the folks at the equally scenic and historically closely associated canal

 

It's also a case pf how far any revival scheme can extend. Once past the Chirk Castle section it would be a case of persuading the authorities of the time --- we are a very long way into the future -- to allow a roadside tramway to run, even alongside a fairly quiet road. One part of the Corris Southern Extension complexities is having a possibly upgraded barrier between the A487 and the line on the new embankment. Yes the 487 is a trunk road, and a bit of a race track there, but the authorities are concerned about protection. And I'm not going to gainsay that. I had a trip on the W and L where we stopped so that an assessment could be made of how to retrieve a car that had got across the line and ended on its roof in the trees on the Golfa.

As for building back as it was. The folk at Woody Bay and Maespoeth are both recreating as far as possible the line pre its demise. It takes lots of time and big money, and events since 1935/ 1948 mean adaptation and compromise is necessary, but look at a picture of a train on those lines and it seems very worthwhile. However I'm not making GVT decisions and they willknow many things I don't, despite my pontificating here.

If anyone does visit Chirk it's a good idea to follow the old route. At the other end there is a very good museum in the loco shed, open at weekends, and restoration of the available part of the station site has been well done.

 

Arrived by train at Chirk on Fri 13-5, delighted to find volunteers working at Chirk GVT station. Took some shots Friday and yesterday. The GVT group (Chirk end) had an excellent display stand at yesterdays superb garden railway show at Llangollen. My pictures below. Paul

 

Many thanks for those shots Paul. Any idea please whether those brick stacks are what has been unearthed, or have they been delivered for a spot of construction work?

 

Wow ...... that's an awful lot of bricks. Thinking of appeals fro bricks on other jobs, that should save a few bob and a fair bit of time come reconstruction.

I loved the photo on FB of the digger pulling out what looked like a significant lump of concrete or mortar. Following removal of the heavy tree stump from the retaining wall a couple of months back, you've got to start wondering if a spot of deep excavation round the engine shed might be worthwhile (if only, eh?) !

 

Special delivery for the Glyn Valley Tramway Trust! The first lot of sleepers has arrived, and hopefully it won't be long before we get to use them.
Lots of filming done, and lots more to do. Stay tuned for it all next year!

 

Beware anything of potential value left abandoned, there is often a catch... speaking to the chaps at Blythborough station, they found 3(?) pallets of unused bricks from the brickworks that made the original station (footings and brick courses below the wooden bit.

Problem is, they were all rejects, and no two were the same shape or size... apparently laying them was "challenging".

He did a bloody good job, mind, but I'm not sure he'd do it again....

 

Good point. Now think of it, I'm not sure whether demolition was done at the same time track was removed .. and I've no idea how quickly after closure that was. For some odd reason, I've got WWII anti-invasion fortifications rolling around in the back of my mind.

 

Noticed on Barrie Hughes, www.isengard.co.uk website this evening:

GVT goes for 2'3"

The Glyn Valley Tramway has decided on a gauge of 2'3" rather than the original gauge of 2'4.5" (724mm). This puts it in a common gauge with the Tal-y-llyn and Corris Railways with which it could exchange stock for gala events and seek help and advice. The initial railway will be from Chirk NR station to Pont Faen Trout Farm where another run round loop is required. The section between the station and Pont Faen involves a wooded valley side shelf descending at 1 in 60 into the Ceiriog Valley. The tramway used to run along the south side of the road to Glyn Ceiriog and the Granite Quarries beyond. See [link in text throws this clip up]:



Whilst I can see sense in not employing the (AFAIK) unique 2'-4½" gauge, I'm previously on record as preferring the historic precedent. I still am. That of the TR was shared by no other operational railway between 1948 and 1985. It should be noted that, had the TR's craftsmen not left the roof mounted lamp housings, the overbridge at Wharf would have removed them in any event!

I'm gonna have to think about this one ....

 

The TR stock was all extant so it made no sense to change gauge.
The CR obviously wanted to keep open the possibility of borrowing the surviving CR stock/locos from the TR, therefore it made sense to stick with the CR original 2'3"
The GVT would obviously want to follow the CR position to keep the option of borrowing the GVT stock from the TR at some point in the future, so it makes perfect sense to use 2'3"

It would be a different matter if original 2' 4.5" GVT stock survived.

 

Isn't there an original waggon? Of course, the same arguments apply to 2'-6" (1½" the other way) and that well and truly set the cat among the pigeons a few years ago. In fact, the dust from that furore has barely settled. I'll be very interested to see how this goes down with the membership.

For the record, other than what sounds like one of those ideas resulting from an evening at the pub, in this case from Tom Rolt, who mentioned it in Railway Adventure and (due to mention of 10¼in gauge, I suspect) David Curwen, I don't think anyone has ever seriously suggested regauging either the TR (and I certainly haven't ..... ever !).

AFAIK, no-one has ever positively identified why 2'-3" was adopted by both those and the Plynlimon & Hafan (and apparently, very nearly by the Vale of Rheidol).

The only other 2'-3" gauge line, the Campbeltown & Machrihanish, was a very different matter and more akin to the W&L stock in size.

Wheelsets are one thing, but the GVT loading gauge was significantly more generous. I mentioned height, but I'd need to double check width, as I've a feeling that (over footboards) would be outside what the Corris could handle.

Mine is a purely personal viewpoint, which I've made and intend to leave it at that, but otherwise, I have no dog in this fight.

 

A quick look at the Trust's website showed the last newsletter as Summer 2020, and the last news update as 17 Dec 2021.
With their appeal due to close shortly it would be wise to post some updates showing what has been accomplished so far this year to reassure potential donors that the project is still progressing !

 

Their public FB page (one of those horrible new style things which thinks if it blocks half your view in landscape, you'll stop hating facebook and sign up, but no sign in needed and it's less intrusive in portrait, if still hateful*) is a lot more up to date, but their websites really could use a spot of archiving and working out of which is to remain live.

https://m.facebook.com/glynvalleytramway/?_rdr

* sorry .... but I really hate Facebook.

 

The link you've posted is for the mobile site which could explain why it isn't rendering properly on your device, if you're using a PC or laptop
Try this to see if it is an improvement:
https://www.facebook.com/glynvalleytramway

 

I actually know one of the leading lights of this - so have seen plenty of evidence of a lot of hard, visible, work in the past couple of years. However, I might have a word as they're very under the radar if you're not on facebook. However, if you are on facebook they're leaping forwards in very large steps. Sort of the opposite of the frequent reality of facebook preservation groups.

 

Thanks for that link, but it does exactly the same as t'other one. Like public FB sites periodically spending a day or two insisting on (but not getting) me to log in. I ditched my account over their arrogant assumptions regarding personal data ..... back when escape was still possible. Now, dormant accounts seem to be merely 'parked up'.. NP is as near to 'social media' as I come, or want to come!

 

Couldn't they lay dual gauge track: 2'3" and 2'4.5"? Oh, wait ....

 

I literally can't be bothered checking, but didn't one of the aboves LRO or AOP state gauge to be not less than 2'3"?

 

In the case of the TR (the first NG line designed for steam operation from the outset) Rolt stated it was the original Act of Parliament.

In 'Narrow Gauge Railways of Mid-Wales (1850-1970)" Boyd states the 1858 Act of Parliament authorising the Corris's horse worked predecessor, "The Corris, Machynlleth & River Dovey Tramroad" specified a minimum 2'-3" gauge.

I'd agree with Rolt's view, that the gauge was already in use in quarries on the "Narrow Vein", seems the most likely explanation.