Talk:Trinidad Government Railway

message: In 1956 when I started my five year apprenticship at the mechanical workshop of the Trinidad Government Railways I found out that the railway had 26 steam locomotives, 5 diesel electrics, 1 "straight" diesel, and a steam rail car. The majority of the steam locomotives were of the 4-6-0 type built by the Montreal locomotive works of Canada which also supplied 3 2-8-0s to do all the heavy work. There were also 2 4-6-0s built by the English firm of Armstrong and Whitworth. The other steam locos were English built 4-4-0s built by the Kitson Engine co. of Leeds, then two shunting engines of the 0-6-0 type built by the Hunslet Engine co. of Leeds, which also built the 0-8-0 'straight" diesel. Outside of the shop in the yard was the rusting away of an old 4-6-0 American locomotive awaiting repairs. This loco was a Baldwin built type brought to the railway by the Americans when they took over the operations of the railway during the war. 209.94.192.194The Americans had also brought with them two other steam locos, numbered 72 and 73, and I could find no traces of either anywhere around the workshop. Workmen told me that one of them had six foot driving wheels.
I did a six months stunt in the drawing office from where I got most of my information - and - I had that passionate obsession to build a working model of a live steam locomotive, thus I ended up knowing more than those tradesmen who spent their working lives repairing and maintaining the locomotives.
The Canadian locos were called the 21 class, starting from engine 21,to 29. These locos had Walschaerts valve gear, piston valves, and were all superheated jobs. When the 4-6-0s came from Armstrong and Whithworth, they weren numbered 31, and 32, and called the 31 class. They too had Walschaerts gear, piston valves, and superheaters.
Then came engine 41 - the powerhouse of our railway, brand new from the factory, the Mechanical engineer told me years afterwards after our railways died.
The next to come were three other Canadian engines of the 21 class that were numbered 61,62,and 63. Before them came the diesel electrics. The eight coupled 'straight' diesel from Hunslet engine co. probably came in after engine 41, and was numbered 51. Now they had to number the diesel electrics nos. 52,53, 54, and 55.
The two 31 class locos had Belpaire fireboxes.
The English built 4-4-0s were in the 1 to 18 class, starting from engine no.1 to no.18. These had slide valves, Stephenson valve gear, were not superheaded, and with side tanks. I was told that there was also another one of then numbered no.20 but never did find any drawings of no. 20.I have a vague memory of seeing a photograph of No.20 in the office of the works superviser. It had an impact on me because this engine had Walschaerts valve geat, and a tender. When I asked the mechanical engineer years later he seemed to know nothing about that engine, or photograph!
The 0-6-0 Hunslet engine was numbered "D" and workmen told me there was also a sister engine "E" I could find no trace of engine E anywhere in the yard. These two engines had saddle tanks, slide valves, and used saturated steam.
Engine 71 had slide valves, Walschaerts gear, and worked with saturated steam also. I don't think it was as powerful as any of the 41 class, but railwaymen who knew it (And believing that anything American had to be better than our English and Canadian engines)rated it as a power house. I had never seen any of the 71 class locos in action. The mechanical engineer Mr. Busby told me. "Those Americans used them to carry their dangerous bombs to Waller Field during the night." Waller Field was the inland military base during World War 2  
      When the railways died they cut up all the steam locomotives with welding torch and sold them off as scrap to local dealers. I used to follow the daily reports of the locomotives, from where I learnt that engine No. 1 of the 1-18 class was to be preserved for the museum. Engine 71 had a completely overhauled boiler waiting to be installed on the to be completely overhauled chassis of the rotting engine.
      They put engine No.13 on permanent display in the town of San Fernando - describing it as a "Train" I wondered why they had not chosen Engine 15 which was the last of its class to be completely overhauled, and in so much better working condition.
       Engine "D" was mercilessly put on permanent display in Port-Of-Spain. Today you find it there, vandalised, one of its cylinder's front cover missing, the top of the cab absent, as are all the backhead fittings of the boiler. The museum people responsible for it had the pathetic engine painted in the colour scheme of the 21 class (In its working days it was matt black)and they have the number 42 painted on it.
Who wrote the information above? I would like to make contact so as to discuss further.
I would like to make a couple of small contributions to the very good information above:
Hunslet 0-6-0 "D" is a saddle tank (makers plate number 1168 of 1914) Hunslet 0-6-0 "E" was a side tank not a saddle tank (makers plate number 1169 of 1914).
I believe the Locomotive at Harris Promenade is actually No11 (Kitson Locomotive Co builders plate No 3691 of 1895) In 1970 No 13 was seen rusting at St Joseph and derelict.
TGR 20 was originally a Kitson 4-4-0. It was rebuilt at some stage from one of the original Kitson 4-4-0 locomotives(I don't know which one)as a tender engine but retained its side tanks for fuel oil. Similar modifications were carried out to TGR12, TGR18 and TGR19. 
TGR12 and TGR18 retained original Kitson numbers but TGR19 and TGR20 appear to have been completely rebuilt in Port of Spain by the TGR using various donor parts from earlier Kitson engines and therefore carried only their TGR numbers.
G.Beadon 26-10-09
The information above was written by Al Akong. I couldn not finish because of not being familiar with the editing. Now that I have a better idea I wish to continue. Would be extremely happy to receive any contributions. You can contact me at alakong@yahoo.com so we can continue this very interesting history of our railway. I had built a working model of a 4-6-0 o gauge live steam locomotive - which tells how much I welcome your offer!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.94.196.170 (talk) 19:12, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved from article

message: I removed the speculative comment about the "narrow gauge" coupling, as apparently without doubt the line was standard gauge. However, readers are urged to put up some facts about the types of couplings used (especially if they were not either the USA knuckle type or the European buffer-and-chain style). Irv (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding coupling type used on the TGR, this was very similar to a "narrow gauge" coupling known as "Link and Pin". The gauge used was indeed standard gauge of 4' 8 1/2". Although a British system, the TGR had no buffers up until 1961 when the two Wickham diesel rail cars arrived from the UK. All operating practice, Signalling equipment, coaches and all locomotives were British from 1876 until 1919 when the first Canadian locomotives began to appear. With the introduction of the 44t GE B0-B0 locomotives by the USATC during WW2, the knuckle type coupling was introduced. From that point both types of couplings were used depending on motive power diagram. Link and pin continued on the SG cane system until 1998. Hope this is of interest. GBeadon 17June2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.247.146 (talk) 19:43, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Couplings used?