Query about the Talyllyn Railway in its last pre-preservation years

[Calthrop]

A query spinning-off from the recent "Railway History & Nostalgia" thread Lines Not Nationalised in 1948 , and discussion in that thread about the Talyllyn Railway, and how it came about that this line fell into that category. The matter about which I am curious, is admittedly something definitely small and obscure – pretty well in the “How many angels...” bracket – but it would be interesting if anyone well-versed in the Talyllyn’s history, might shed light on it.

I’m going by L.T.C. Rolt’s Railway Adventure; in which he states that around the end of World War II, both the Talyllyn’s locos – No. 1 Talyllyn and No. 2 Dolgoch -- were in such very poor shape that a major overhaul for at least one, was imperative. One of the two was chosen, viz. No. 2; which was sent in April 1945 for overhaul at the Atlas Foundry, Shrewsbury; “and for twelve months the railway was closed”. Per the book, this applies for sure to the passenger service, which – we learn – recommenced at the start of the 1946 summer season.

A related point, occurs to me. Re the Bryn Eglwys slate quarry, serving which had been the reason for the railway’s coming to exist in the first place: Rolt’s book tells us that “in 1946... quarrying operations finally ceased at Bryn Eglwys, although for some time after a small quantity of slate continued to travel down to Tywyn as existing stocks were cleared.” This raises for me, a question which Rolt does not seem to clarify in the book: what happened with slate extracted at Bryn Eglwys in the period while quarrying there was still going on; during the time-span mentioned above, spring 1945 to spring 1946, while loco no. 2 was away being overhauled? Was the slate brought down to Tywyn by road during that period; and indeed after?

Or; the book indicates that no. 1 Talyllyn was – though in terrible condition – basically operable, even if using her was fraught with danger of boiler-related disaster. It is mentioned that No. 2, shortly after her return from overhaul in spring 1946, became derailed up the line; so that No.1 had to be steamed and driven to her rescue. The scenario suggests itself: though passenger workings by No. 1 in the dreadful shape she was in, were not to be thought of – was she perhaps used during her sister loco’s 1945 – 46 absence, for slate trains – full down, empty up – as required?

The late John Snell, in his fascinating memoir Mixed Gauges , tells of his visiting and travelling on the Talyllyn Railway in spring 1947; and seeing at Tywyn (Wharf) station, three loaded slate wagons which had presumably recently come down from the quarry (this would be, one takes it, during the period after quarry closure, when stocks of slate were being cleared). Might this be taken as evidence suggesting that slate traffic by rail had continued throughout, even during the year which it took to overhaul No. 2 ? As per the way in which these things most often happen – going back to rail working after a year of transporting the slate by road, would seem an unlikely turn of events. Though Sir Henry Haydn Jones was, it appears, out of the common run of railway owners: financial efficiency and viability, was not his top priority.

Mention was made in the Lines Not Nationalised... thread, and in Rolt’s Railway Adventure, of the Ordnance Survey map current as at 1947 / 48, showing the Talyllyn Railway’s stations as closed – which might have misled those who shaped the nationalisation programme, into thinking that the railway was defunct. I’d speculate that the OS had been on the ball circa 1945, in being aware that the railway was not operating passenger services, and in “marking” accordingly; but had been less so a little later, in failing to realise that a summer passenger service had resumed in 1946.

Would be interested in anyone’s thoughts; and especially, factual information which might give any clarification on these issues.

 

[yorkie]

I've alerted a forum member based at Tywyn of this post (he was in the booking office and issued our tickets on our last visit to the railway!)

 

[Merthyr Imp]

This raises for me, a question which Rolt does not seem to clarify in the book: what happened with slate extracted at Bryn Eglwys in the period while quarrying there was still going on; during the time-span mentioned above, spring 1945 to spring 1946, while loco no. 2 was away being overhauled? Was the slate brought down to Tywyn by road during that period; and indeed after?

Could wagons have been worked down by gravity, Festiniog style?

 

[Calthrop]

But they'd have to be got back up to the quarry somehow.

 

[Calthrop]

I've alerted a forum member based at Tywyn of this post (he was in the booking office and issued our tickets on our last visit to the railway!)

Thank you !

 

[341o2]

Could wagons have been worked down by gravity, Festiniog style?

The Ffestiniog was constructed with a constant 1 in 50 grade to enable this. The Tallyllyn was steam worked from the outset, the grade is not constant, and there is a short uphill section faced by down trains in the vicinity of Rhydyronen.

There is no evidence that gravity working was proposed, although passengers could hire a slate wagon and coast downhill after the last train of the day, this is where sometimes they had to get off and push

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Ian Drummond’s recent book “Rails along the Fathew Valley” (which you have read) says (p.34) that while Dolgoch was at the Atlas Foundry 1945-46 “Talyllyn was steamed for a limited goods service”. Boyd, in “Narrow Gauge Railways in Mid-Wales” (1986 re-print, p.95) writes: “During [No 2’s] absence Talyllyn ran the service; the condition of her motion had to be seen and heard to be believed, and steam issued from practically every place but the chimney”. Boyd’s “The Talyllyn Railway” (Wild Swan, 1988, p.276) contains the following: “And what of services during Dolgoch’s absence, made so much longer by the shortage of materials in wartime? The ailing Talyllyn had to take up duty again and was able to provide assistance (with occasional lapses) until the service was withdrawn completely after the trains on 16th March 1945. The next passenger working was at Easter 1946.” A footnote quotes Edward Thomas as saying that Dolgoch returned in September 1945. From this it would seem that freight services were at first maintained when Dolgoch went to Shrewsbury, but they ceased for the final months of her absence. However, the historicity of Boyd’s writing is often called into question these days.

From a good source

 

[Calthrop]

ChiefPlanner, many thanks -- this greatly clarifies; albeit there are small potential discrepancies between different quoted accounts. It would seem that in respect of the 1945 -- 46 situation, Rolt in his book does not make things as clear as he might have done; though "fair do's" -- Railway Adventure, while a superb work in its own right, does not claim to be a meticulous "blow-by-blow" history of the TR.

Boyd’s “The Talyllyn Railway” (Wild Swan, 1988, p.276) contains the following: “And what of services during Dolgoch’s absence, made so much longer by the shortage of materials in wartime? The ailing Talyllyn had to take up duty again and was able to provide assistance (with occasional lapses) until the service was withdrawn completely after the trains on 16th March 1945. The next passenger working was at Easter 1946.” A footnote quotes Edward Thomas as saying that Dolgoch returned in September 1945.

Most interesting ! So per Mr. Thomas (and one feels that if anyone had the rights of things, it would have been him), No. 2 Dolgoch was away being overhauled for more like six months, than the year's duration which Rolt's compressed account, implies.

From this it would seem that freight services were at first maintained when Dolgoch went to Shrewsbury, but they ceased for the final months of her absence. However, the historicity of Boyd’s writing is often called into question these days.

Long ago, I library-borrowed Boyd's The Talyllyn Railway -- I'd plainly forgotten since then, his recounting of how matters went during No. 2's absence. Even if less than totally historically accurate, I found the book utterly fascinating -- am having thoughts of seeking it out again. My impression was that Boyd ended the book just-pre-the preservation society's taking over; not because of any animosity on his part toward the Society -- but simply in recognition of the inevitable fact that under preservation, a radically different scene came about as regards the railway.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

http://talyllynrailwayshop.co.uk/ourshop/prod_4121184-Rails-Along-the-Fathew-by-Ian-Drummond.html

A very fine read ......

 

[341o2]

ChiefPlanner, many thanks -- this greatly clarifies; albeit there are small potential discrepancies between different quoted accounts. It would seem that in respect of the 1945 -- 46 situation, Rolt in his book does not make things as clear as he might have done; though "fair do's" -- Railway Adventure, while a superb work in its own right, does not claim to be a meticulous "blow-by-blow" history of the TR.

Also I have heard the derailment of Dolgoch on p38 of Railway Adventure was not upon her return from overhaul, but Rolt has confused two separate incidents.

If you delve into detailed history of the Tallyllyn, you will find other mysteries, such as Tyler's inspection in 1866, where he refers to "two brick arches" in the vicinity of "Tallyllyn", historians have thought both Towyn and Abergnolwyn were in fact meant (Railway Adventure p10)

 

[Taunton]

If I am not mistaken, nationalisation did not include any narrow gauge lines, apart from those like the Corris already owned by mainstream railways.

 

[Calthrop]

If you delve into detailed history of the Tallyllyn, you will find other mysteries, such as Tyler's inspection in 1866, where he refers to "two brick arches" in the vicinity of "Tallyllyn", historians have thought both Towyn and Abergnolwyn were in fact meant (Railway Adventure p10)

Have referred to the text, in Railway Adventure, of Captain Tyler's report. I'm wondering whether it's a simple as the Captain -- like many folk unfamiliar with the Welsh language -- finding Welsh more of a "bogey" and source of puzzlement that it perhaps needs to be; and conflating the names Towyn / Tywyn, and Talyllyn. (I don't speak Welsh, but consider that I have "got down" its -- in fact pretty highly regular -- spelling / pronunciation conventions; do that, and the whole business is IMO far less of a horror, than many feel it to be.)

If I am not mistaken, nationalisation did not include any narrow gauge lines, apart from those like the Corris already owned by mainstream railways.

It could be suggested that as at 1948, there were in Great Britain all-but no remaining privately-owned public narrow-gauge lines in the classic mould, to nationalise. Apart from the Talyllyn -- the Ashover Light Railway was by then running purely as an industrial line, and was seen as on its deathbed (was abandoned in 1950); the Festiniog had suspended its services, and was struggling to find a way through the legal / parliamentary entanglements, to achieve official abandonment. One could reasonably assume that the Snowdon Mountain Railway and the various 15 in. gauge lines of any substance, were regarded as "pleasure railways" / freakish -- not serious public carriers for which nationalisation would be appropriate.

 

[341o2]

Towyn reverted to the more authentic Tywyn in the 1970's

The name derives from the Welsh tywyn ("beach, seashore, sand-dune"): extensive sand dunes are still to be found to the north and south of the town. The place-name element tywyn is found in many other parts of Wales, most notably Towyn near Abergele.[2] The town is sometimes referred to in Welsh as Tywyn Meirionnydd (with Meirionnydd here probably referring to the cantref of that name, and later the historic county). In English, during the late 19th century and until the middle of the 20th century, the town was sometimes called Towyn-on-Sea. With the standardization of the orthography of the Welsh language in the first part of the 20th century, the spelling Tywyn came to dominate, and was accepted as the official name of the town in both languages in the 1970s.

source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tywyn

 

[Taunton]

We must also bear in mind that the nationalisation was carried out by a Socialist government, and the railway unions would have been deeply involved. As none of Sir Henry, Edward Thomas, or Peter Jones are likely to have been union members, it was doubtless beyond their horizons.

 

[Calthrop]

We must also bear in mind that the nationalisation was carried out by a Socialist government, and the railway unions would have been deeply involved. As none of Sir Henry, Edward Thomas, or Peter Jones are likely to have been union members, it was doubtless beyond their horizons.

I take it you mean that the railway was beyond the Socialist govt's horizons; rather than nationalisation being beyond those of Messrs. Thomas and Jones (Sir H.H. and P.)? The former could be seen as a contributing factor -- I wouldn't have thought of it, but I'm often not acute as regards "political stuff".

 

[30907]

I take it you mean that the railway was beyond the Socialist govt's horizons; rather than nationalisation being beyond those of Messrs. Thomas and Jones (Sir H.H. and P.)? The former could be seen as a contributing factor -- I wouldn't have thought of it, but I'm often not acute as regards "political stuff".

Think he means the unions wouldn't have been aware of it (at national level) - government would have left the detail to civil servants (no doubt equally unaware).