First batch of Hunslets finished at last!

At long last, seven months after starting, we have finished the first production batch of ten Quarry Hunslets.

The ten locomotives on parade. More Alice class locos than any one slate quarry ever owned

The batch has turned out well. I built eleven but one had a fault that did not show up until the final steam test.  It was painted,  looked lovely and ran quite well, but not quite well enough.  I have worked out what was wrong but wishing to be finished I will sort it out when the workshop has been cleaned and made tidy for the next batch. During the construction several minor points were found where the etch design will be amended.  These were silly mistakes such as forgetting holes for the rivets that retain the side bunkers to the tanks, but it is these errors that slow down the construction of a batch.

Here are a couple of pictures that show what I think is a pretty nice model.  They are to scale with no dimensions changed to make life easier.  The mechanism is slip eccentric, as the exhaust is throttled, their top speed on a rolling road is slow.  When warm they all self start. For testing I filled the boilers with boiling water and they all gave about 15 minutes of running.  If the gas tanks are filled to the brim duration will be about 25 minutes.  The boilers were tested to 180psi and the safety valves set to 65psi.  The engines run steadily and powerfully from about 25psi. In use the gas can probably be set very low which will further increase duration.

A couple of locos showing the two offered colours, the works plates still to be fitted

A bit closer to show the detail on the model.  The smokebox door opens.That make burner lighting easy.

A rear view to show the opening coal doors, not just a nice touch, but it makes cleaning the gas jet easier if needed.

So what next? I think a break from the workshop then start a second batch of Quarry Hunslets and a small batch of Wrens.  I do need to crack on.  The interest list for the Hunslets is another 50+ and we have interest lists for other locos in our range in excess of another 50. Should keep me out of trouble until I drop!

Urgent message - change of website contact details

The address used on our website contact forms - aboyne.wright@onetel.net was deactivated on the 6th of July.
Until our website is amended, please use your own email program putting 'website enquiry' into the subject line.
The new email address for Wrightscale is - aboyne.wright@btinternet.com
This domain has been active since July 7th.
We apologise to anyone who has sent an enquiry recently using our old address.

Colonel Péchot and the animals of war

We know that Prosper Péchot was fond of horses. In his officer training, many hours were devoted to equestrianism; it is not just a romantic supposition, but he rode in the woods above Fontainebleau every day while he was at the school for artillery officers. Photos taken during his career show him habitually on a horse - it gave him gravitas.

He came out of retirement to serve his county during the First World War and saw many animals pressed into service, much to his regret. His Système Péchot was devised to save horses from being used for army transport - a locomotive hauled train of 4 bogie wagons could carry as much as 60 to 80 horse-drawn carts, keeping double that number of horses out of the battle-field. Unfortunately, his superiors didn't absorb the message until the War had started and then had hastily to commisson material, following this up with the field trials they ought to have performed years before.

Gallant horses pull a machine-gun under fire. But are they galloping forward or retreating? This painting by Georges Scott appeared in Illustration magazine on October 31st 1914. Shortly afterwards, it appeared in the German press, with the caption 'Headlong retreat!' Georges Scott/Illustration/Courtesy Malcolm Wright

During the Champagne offensive (summer-autumn 1915) the French Army was still poorly prepared in matters of transport. Colonel Plassiard, chief transport officer for the Champagne network, recalled some of the problems. Temporary track had been laid on chalk subsoil. After months of war and coming into a wet autumn, it needed reballasting; they had left matters until locomotives could no longer use the track.

'We started using horses again, which led to poor operations. There were discrepancies in working new lines, lack of maintenance and repairs, worse still, lines which had been demanded urgently were not being worked at all. Finally the Army put locomotives back to work, but by now, the track was so churned up by the passage of horses' hooves that they had to be completely relaid.
Horses had given us many problems. We needed no less than three billeting officers (maréchaux des logis) to find them quarters. Food supplies, veterinary care and black-smiths to keep them shod were supposed to be the responsibility of their own units but gradually. more and more man power was sucked in. In fact, the way things were going, all available transport would be devoted to fetching fodder from greater and greater distances.
Worst of all the replacement of tired horses (for that read horses at the end of their tether) was not happening... To add to everything, winter had come on quickly and horses had to work in deep mud; it is not surprising that they suffered terribly'

All in all, it is surprising how the myth of the gallant mule, no doubt with brandy cask at his throat, supplying the whole Front has persisted. There was a happy end for the remaining horses on this particular Front. As Colonel Plassiard said, 'By January 1916, the situation had improved' There was proper housing for them  and locomotives back on the job.

The Rumanian retreat. Oxen pull a French 120L gun through a village in the Transylvanian Alps. Picture from Illustration/Courtesy Malcolm Wright

Away from the Western Front, oxen were usual. In the Balkans, they hauled Serbian refugees during the horrific retreat from the invasion. The human and animal army suffered much. In Rumania, which entered the War against the Central Powers on  27th August 1916. A French military mission under General Bethelot helped to arm them. Von Mackensen, with Turkish and Bulgarian troops, successfully attacked Transylvania from the southern border with Bulgaria. As can be seen from the photograph, oxen were common draught animals.

Worst of all was to see soldiers being used as draught animals as on the Italian Front. L'Illustration recorded 600 soldiers hauling a 149 gun at 2000 metres above sea-level, to arm a battery above Rovertero, June 1915.

Yum yum! Percy the pigeon would have made a tasty treat! Picture Illustration/ Courtesy Malcolm Wright

And finally let's not forget the carrier pigeons! Theirs was a dangerous job. As well as dodging stray bullets and shrapnel in the battlefield, the enemy would be happy to 'down' a messenger and thereby disrupt allied communications. There was also the risk of 'friendly fire'.

Gallipoli and Colonel Péchot

No one has ever doubted that the Gallipoli campaign was a defeat for the Allies, though a moral victory for the ANZACs (Australian and New Zealand Armed Corps). The idea was simple enough; land on the north-west 'corner' of the vast rectangle that is Turkey, and go the relatively short distance to the then capital, Constantinople/Istanbul. Whether it was sensible to give the Turkish Army so much advance warning, or to land on the tip of a peninsula which could readily be cut off is moot. Experience since has suggested that a sea-borne invasion needs to be 10:1 in favour of the invaders. Experience then showed that the Turkish Army was hardy and resourceful - no pushover.

Map of the Gallipoli peninsula, dated 1920. To the west is the Aegean Sea, to the north  the Dardanelles open up into the Sea of Marmara and then north again to Constantinople/Istanbul. The ANZACs are commemorated in Anzac Cove. Courtesy Times Illustrations

 On October 29th 1914, Turkey effectively declared itself for the Central Powers and on November 3rd, the Allies formally declared war. From that point, the Allied fleets blocaded the Mediterranean end of the Black Sea by patrolling off the Dardanelle straits. It was  hard to hide all the preparations which were going on in the Allied-held Mediterranean and so when they finally made land on April 25th 1915, the opposition was well prepared.

If the operation had gone to plan, the Allies would have used 2'6" portable railways to supply the advance. The British had such material; indeed, if it had not been for a combination of Kitchener's dislike - he actually said 'that is not our way of working' - and the successful French 60cm railways first designed by Prosper Péchot,  they would have used 2'6" gauge for 'siege' ie trench warfare on the Western Front. They opted to use 60cm gauge there and elsewhere. Redundant 2'6" gauge material was therefore plentiful and had been stockpiled in readiness.

In the event, Allied plans unravelled. The British were mainly on the western shores of the peninsula. They disembarked at Cape Helles, to the south of the peninsula, and Suvla Bay at the north, the ANZACs being allotted Gaba Tepé in between. They had to do some rock-climbing just to get off the beach but distinguished themselves throughout the campaign. The French and Senegalese tirailleurs took up position on each side of the straits, at Koum Kaleh and Seddul Bahr (Sedd-el Bahr). The Dublin regiment also saw action at Seddul-Bahr. The 'Leith' half-Battalion of the Royal Scots Regiment were supposed to join the Allies, but they did not arrive. At 6.49 on the morning of May 22nd 1915 at Quintinshill just north of Gretna, their troop train collided with a local passenger train which had been 'parked' on their line. Only 62 survived unscathed.  It was a foretaste of the toll that the campaign would exact.

Two vultures captured by French marines at Seddul-Bahr. With French humour, they were named Franz Joseph and Wilhelm, in honour of the Austrian and Prussian Emperors. The joke is made even more interesting because the vultures are hopping over a length of Péchot track. From 'Illustration'

Pinned down at their beach-heads, none of the Allies were able to move far inland. By May 6th, the British alone had lost 13,000 (not counting the 216 at Quintinshill). Over the months, plan after plan unravelled. One of these involved the 2'6" railway material waiting at Alexandria on the far side of the Mediterranean. So far from being threatened by Gallipoli, the Turkish Empire was threatening Egypt, certainly the Suez Canal. Defences had to be built, and 2'6" lines were laid  in the Port Said area (autumn 1915- spring 1916). Thirty Manning Wardle 160-80 hp locotractors and 350 standard Royal Engineer wagons used a 12 mile (20 km) line.

Back at Gallipoli, some 60cm gauge railways served the various beach-heads. The British had two. At Suvla Bay in the north, there was a surprisingly extensive network transporting supplies from the shore. As well as A-class four-wheel wagons, also tippers, it used bogie wagons. As far as we know, this was horse-worked. Further south at Cape Helles, there was a smaller system whisking stores from the piers to a camp sheltered directly below the cliffs. This too was horse-worked and used four-wheel wagons.

Which one is the Surrender Monkey? Lord Kitchener (front left) and General Brulard (centre) discuss the campaign amid ruins at Seddul-Bahr. Below the feet of the dignitaries runs a well-used narrow gauge railway. 'Illustration'

The French also had 60cm track as photographs taken at Seddul Bahr attest. Some was Péchot portable track but by December, the track was taking on a permanent appearance. We suppose that this railway too was horse-drawn. Colonel Péchot, the originator of military 60cm gauge, did not visit the Dardanelles. He was in Europe supervising the manufacture of the vast quantities of 60cm railways required. Late in 1914, he was in Britain, inspecting track ordered for the French Army. In 1915, he was training recruits to run railways at hastily developed schools in northern France.

On December 20th 1915, the Allies decided to withdraw. The French were careful to attribute this decision to Kitchener. General Brulard, on behalf of the French, reminded him of the losses that had been inflicted on the Turkish Army and that the British would suffer a great loss of prestige. Kitchener, however, decided that further effort would be fruitless. The evacuation began and on 8th January 1916, the last ship, the Cornwallis, left Suvla Bay. 22,000 Allied troops had died, many more suffered wounds and disease.

From Festiniog to Péchot Bourdon to Brigadelok

Prosper Péchot (1849-1928) was moved to discuss the the increasing sophistication of German military 60cm 'field' railways, developed after he had designed a system for the French. His discussion is quite interesting because, apart from technical manuals, he didn't write very much. His memorial has been his works rather than his words. This makes a series of lectures - which resulted in a book - particularly revealing. They were recorded almost verbatim as he spoke, but I have somewhat abbreviated and simplified the convoluted 19th century diction. I'd like to persuade you that, as well as his views on military narrow gauge, they help tell us about his character, so well hidden under the uniform of an officer in the French Artillery.

This photo of Colonel Péchot was taken in 1907, on his retirement. Although he was awarded the Legion of Honour and was known to the top politicians of France, he was caring and modest. Courtesy Raymond PECHOT

The text is taken from a short course delivered in 1903 (25th to 27th April) to students at the school of ponts et chaussées et des mines - the central State University for civil engineers. Péchot was there to discuss the subject of derailment, an ever-present danger for trains of all gauges. He was there as an expert, celebrated for introducing 60cm as an official railway gauge, both for military use around places fortes/frontier defenses and for civilian railways.

'Gentlemen' he began, 'I was invited here by the Minister of Works himself, the aim being to help you understand railways - with a focus on how design can help to avoid derailments. My examples are taken from the work I was encouraged to do in organising 60 cm gauge for military purposes'

The word 'I' appears three times in the original French paragraph. They are less a statement of 'ego' and more a description of self as part of a group.  'I' and 'was invited' are separated by several lines in the original text and 'invited' in the French suggests 'we are invited' - Invités is the plural form. Was he suggesting that he was there as part of a team, or that the 'we' included the students, or was this suggesting both? Another  'I' is even more interesting - the original French goes 'Je suis amené/I was led' (which has been translated 'I was encouraged'). Who led Prosper Péchot? The Army was somewhat discouraging. They tried to bury his original proposals. When Decauville appeared, ready to lend them the bogies and prefabricated track for trials. they tried to remove Péchot from the trials as fast as possible. He was too 'partisan'. Even when the Minister for Defence took an interest in the Péchot project, his superiors made sure that he was never posted anywhere near Toul. At the time of the talks, Péchot was serving in remore Castres, over 600 kilometres from Paris, even more from Toul. Yet he always considered himself part of a team.

He goes on. 'This is the problem I had to resolve when, in 1882, I had to design a 60cm system: how to transport the food, ammunition and all other necessities for an army to work efficiently, on time and to the right place in the field, regardless of the distance from the nearest railway'

The reason why 'he had to' was because of his Staff College thesis. This was a standard theoretical essay, set to all students - retake Metz in the Provinces lost to Germany. The city was surrounded by well-armed forts and the nearest railways that any invaders had a hope of capturing were about 15 kilometres away, a long march, even without artillery. One assumes that most of the officers at Staff College put their stress on 'cran et élan' - courage and sheer guts. Péchot put his faith in big guns, and lots of ammunition.

'Transport must be improved' he explained. 'The history of any siege shows that the lack of efficient transport (he uses the word puissant/powerful several times) has caused failure or near-failure. The defenders have been able to call on more and better arms than their attackers. The siege of Paris (war of 1870-1) provides a good lesson . The Prussian army took 104 days to bring up enough ammunition to begin a bombardment. Between 23st December 1870 and 28th January 1871, the guns were active on 20 days and Paris actually capitulated because of hunger, not shelling. 300 tonnes of ammunition were expended. It had taken the Prussians a lot of effort to transport this comparatively meagre amount from their railhead at Nanteuil (eastern Paris) to Villacoublay in the west where the best vantage point for gunnery was situated. They had no less than 1000 commandeered horse wagons; the work was made easier when they re-opened the railway tunnel past Nanteuil and reduced each journey from 70 to 48 kilometres. To add insult to injury, when the victors withdrew, they left the roads around Paris in a ruinous state.

It is clear that a new form of transport was needed' It was clear to Péchot but, not it appears, to the rest of the Army.

'This new transport' he continued, 'must be able to carry heavy guns. It must not expose our boys to the dangers of trans-shipping from one gauge to another within range of enemy guns. (Many strategists of the time believed that for a significant operation, a standard gauge railway should be built to as near the war zone as possible.) It must therefore be able to carry items quite a distance. The wagons should be designed to make unloading as simple as possible. It should be quick and simple to be put into operation. It should be able to carry significant tonnages - ammunition as well as 'one-offs' like guns. It should be adaptible enough to be used in our own forts as well as for attack.

'The best system uses locomotive-hauled trains on railways.' Péchot explained. To carry the guns and amunition for a respectable siege park would require either 160 train journeys, or 210,000 horse journeys (assuming that the cart of the period could carry 4 tonnes). 'I have been looking at the problem since 1878. The automobiles (cars and trucks) of the time can carry between one and three tonnes of freight, and so they are not an answer either.

The Péchot Bourdon locomotive was a development of the Welsh Fairlie, but is far more than just a compact version. It featured seven important improvements. Photo courtesy of Raymond Duton.

 Such a railway system must be able to carry up to 48 tonnes. (Péchot put a lot of energy into devising a series of bogies which could carry a 48 tonne gun. His imitators found other ways round that particular problem). The system must be based on a gauge that is smaller than standard or metre gauge, both of which need considerable civil engineering, for building the railways and the unloading points. Standard and metre gauge would be unsuitable for use within our own places fortes. (This was an important point. The Sappers wanted to use metre gauge for strategic transport in the open air and 40cm inside their forts - with a nasty dangerous trans-shipment point at every gateway!) At the same time, 50cm gauge or anything less is also impractical because studies have shown that it could not carry the tonnage required. This only leaves 60cm gauge. Here we have an encouraging example - the Festiniog Railway of Wales. By 1882, the Fairlies of the Festiniog were carrying significant loads at speeds of up to 64 km/h (40mph). It must be rail, the gauge must be 60cm and the locomotives used could be an adapted version of the Fairlie'

With help from Decauville (not his superiors!) Péchot had done a lot of work on the 60cm track required. Once again, he just said 'Nous fümes conduit à reconaître/We are led to the conclusion' before explaining the unique qualities of Péchot track. These words demonstrate his tact and modesty.

'Portable track had to be in prefabricated lengths and made entirely of steel. They had to respect the official maximum that a man could carry - 50 kg. A 5m length, to be carried by four men, must weigh no more than 170 kg. The track had to be simple to lay, therefore prefabricated. On the other hand, it had to support an axle-loading of 3.5 tonnes, the minimum necessary for the trains and their locomotives. The system could be used in the field to supply an attacking army but is equally useful for the defence. In the field' he went on, 'regular trains would supply food and ammunition as went all transporting the big guns. A distance of up to 10 km from the nearest standard gauge railhead could efficiently supply two to three thousand tonnes of supplies daily.'

Péchot then reminded his listeners that at many points during their campaign of 1870-1, the Prussians had been a day or so from meltdown. Thus, they were watching our trials of 1888. By 1891, they were trialling a version of 60cm 'analogous to ours/ analogue au nôtre qu'ils voyaient fonctionner depuis 1888'. 'In 1893, they put designs into production;  by now (1903) they have at least 1000 km of track alone, plus wagons and locomotives. Exercises undertaken by the German Army show that 10 kilometres of 60 cm track can be laid every day'

This restored example of a German Brigadelok (0-8-0T) was photographed at Apedale in 1914.  Between 1904 and 1918, approximately 2000 were built - German authorities tend to qualify their numbers with etwas/thereabouts. No doubt at the end of the war, they deliberately kept numbers vague - the more the victorious French knew that they had, the more that they would demand in reparations! Until 1904, German field railways kept axle-loading below 3-5 tonnes, just like the French, but with this new design, they began to use conventionally laid track. Photo by Malcolm Wright

Péchot assured his listeners that German material was inferior to the French. By 1903, this was a matter of opinion. By 1914, it was no longer true.

Péchot and French railways during the Great War

Aurélien Prévot has just published 'French Railways of the First World War/ Chemins de fer francais de la premiere guerre mondiale'. When we received our copy, we went straight to the section on narrow gauge. There appear some wryly humorous watercolours of the Péchot-Bourdon locomotive at war. The captions include: 'While everyone else cowers below ground, the Péchot marches up to the enemy proudly blowing off her double plumes of steam' and 'Others may avoid an obstacle - the Péchot simply laps it up'. These were painted by an artist called Renault who unfortunately died in 1917 - more below.

This model by the late Henry Holdsworth captures the colouring of the Renault watercolours. The Péchot-Bourdon locomotive is clearly on a trip to the British sector of teh Front

'French Railways of the First World War' covers all war-time aspects of the railways of France - standard gauge, metre gauge and trench railways - from the lessons of 1870 to the state of north-east France at the time of the Armistice, 1918. It describes the general mobilisation of 1914, army supplies, evacuation, hospital trains, civilian transport, Verdun, the crisis of 1917 and U.S. transport. In this, it very closely follows a book published in 1922 - 'French Railways in the War/ Les Chemins de fer francais et la guerre'. Col le Hénaff and Capt Bornecque were contributing to the series 'The Great War on the Western Front/La grande guerre sur le front occidental' published by Chapelot. There are numerous parallels, and not just in the chapter headings chosen.

Take for example the chapter on the AEF, the American Expeditionary Force which was sent from the USA to France starting in 1917. Le Hénaff writes - 'Supply Ports: Given the number of men and tonnage of supplies, it was necessary to share them among all available ports with sufficient capacity, that is, the ones bordering the Ocean, the Channel ports already working to capacity because of the traffic to England; the Mediterranean ports being out of the question because of submarine warfare'. Prévot: 'Taking account of the importance of staff and tonnage expected, it was important to choose ports with sufficient capacity. The Channel ports, however, were being used by the British and the Mediterranean ports not available because of submarine war. Therefore there remained only the Atlantic ports'

The map on page 339 of the Prévot book is very similar to map number 22 in the book written in 1922. Courtesy Terry van Winkle

The majority of the maps in the Prévot books are direct descendants of the Hénaff maps.

A sour comment?  Let me just correct this impression.  'Les chemins de fer français dans la première guerre mondiale' - even if it were just a reissue of Le Hénaff and Bornecque, was needed. 90 years have gone by and most of the original copies have disappeared. We have been fortunate to have one on loan from Terry van Winkle. In the 2014 book, there are changes in wording which reflect modern thought. 'The Ocean' of Hénaff has become 'the Atlantic' in Prévot. The 'English' have become the 'British'. The wonderful single sentence of 1922 with so many clauses in apposition has given way to three sentences in the later book. In short, even if it were merely a revised edition of the original, it is welcome!

In the 2014 book, Prévot gives us much more. There are new chapters; the one on 60cm gauge/ chemins de fer being particularly timely. A few paragraphs on 'la voie de 0m60' are scattered through the Hénaff text. Those, such my Other Half, who are fond of rail-mounted guns will welcome the new chapter on Heavy Artillery on rails/Artillerie Lourde sur Voie Ferrée (ALVF). There is an interesting section on camouflage, pages 391 to 395.

This model of a 60cm gauge WD water-tanker was built by Jim Hawkesworth using Wrightscale bogies. It shows how camouflage bariolé breaks up the outline of the wagon, making it less of a target for the enemy.

Anglophones will regret one thing. In the book of 1922, le Hénaff devoted a whole chapter to 'les transports anglais' but not so Prévot. Hang on though, Prévot has taken the sub-headings of the single chapter of the older book - concentration, up to 1916, war's end - and placed them in separate sections through the book. The Railway Operating Division - ROD - gets its own heading.

Most glorious of all are the illustrations in the new book. Apart from the maps, the Hénaff book of 1922 has half a dozen photos, mainly railway bridges. The book by Prévot is generously illustrated. As he explained, he spent many years building up a collection of contemporary photographs and postcards to be used in his work. He also thanks Didier Oberlin for allowing him to use the archive built up by Georges Mangin, his grand-father. This is one of the most important and systematic collections of railway photographs of 1914-18. Aged 36, Georges Mangin was called up at the beginning of the war. In 1916, he was commissioned as a lieutenant in the 5th regiment of the Génie (9th Company),  a regiment which specialised in operating 60 cm railways. Mangin saw service at Verdun and Reims. He was one of the few non-official photographers to possess a a camera. Inspired by a real interest in the subject, he took a series of photographs to document military narrow gauge. After the war, he went on to be a naval gunner before moving to the family firm. Until the end of his life, he kept up his interest in narrow gauge, frequently contributing to 'Chemins de fer Régionaux et Urbains' the magazine of FACS, among others.

One word of Prévot troubles me slightly. He uses the word 'inédit/not published before' of his illustrations. This is certainly not true of the maps! See above. As Didier Oberlin and his grandfather were real gents and would not refuse reasonable requests for reproduction, the word is not quite appropriate applied to the Mangin archive. Though pleased to see the tribute to 60cm/0m60/2' gauge, the Renault watecolours - La Grande Guerre de 1914/15/16/17 La Voie de 0,60 aux Armées par un poilu du front - have been circulating on the internet for some years. They are not 'previously unseen'. This is just one word in 400 very welcome pages.

How the victory parade actually happened

Let's give the last word to the Péchot Bourdon locomotive. In his seventh watercolour, entitled Le triomphe final/ final triumph, Renault shows two of them, garlanded with French flags, passing through the Arc de Triomphe on temporary track. It never happened, though he was not to only one to think  'wouldn't it have been a fine sight!'

From Péchot-Bourdon to Baldwin Gas Mechanical

In 1887, Prosper Péchot and Charles Bourdon designed the first of the remarkable Péchot Bourdon locomotives. The design had some interesting features, distinguishing it from the Fairlie which provided the inspiration. The boiler, powering two separate steam bogies, ran right through the locomotive. Locomotive frames supported the boiler, tanks and cab and kept the power bogies in place.
The first Péchot-Bourdon was delivered early in 1888, and, following official approval in June of that year, a total of roughly 60 were delivered to the frontier fortresses of late 19th century France. I say 'roughly 60' We can be certain that an inventory of 1913 lists 54 in France, and 3 in Morocco. This suggests 57. At the beginning of the First World War, the French were woefully short of transport between standard gauge railheads and the trenches. 60cm railways were best suited to the job. Within months, the Army had placed orders for Péchot Bourdon-locomotives with the North British Locomotive Works, Scotland and the Baldwin Works, Philadelphia USA. These engines was numbered off from 62 which suggests that the Army already had 61.

This fine 16mm model of a Péchot-Bourdon paying a visit to the British Front shows the sinuous shallow curves typical of late nineteenth century French design. Layout by the late Henry Holdsworth.

 The Baldwin Works delivered 100 Péchot-Bourdons in three months, keeping two for trials in Canada. They made 280 altogether. The design, economical yet complex, struck a chord with the factory and they tendered for further business from the French Army. Meanwhile, the factory made a few steam locomotives for the British.

The Baldwin WD 4-6-0 side tank. 495 were produced between October 1916 and April 1917 to supply the British Army. 16mm model built by Wrightscale

By 1915, the French Army realised that steam locomotives were highly visible near the Front. By day, their column of steam made a good target, by night so did the sparks from the fire-boxes. On October 14th 1915, they had put in their first order for 40 petrol-engined locomotives with the Schneider company of France. Trials began in 1916. Wastage, when the petrol engines were in use on the Western Front, was horrific. By May 1st 1917, 15 locotractors were left, by 31st August only 7. For internal combustion locomotives, the Army turned to Baldwin once more, just as their new ally, the AEF did.
In 1910, Baldwin had patented a gearbox suitable for an internal combustion engine and they now offered two designs based on this - two-speed locomotives both offering 4/8mph ie 6.4/12.8 km/h. One Baldwin Gas Mechanical (BGM) model was 35 horsepower, the other 50 horsepower. Petrol consumption per hour ie 4 miles was 3.5 US gallons for the smaller locomotive, 5 gallons for the larger one (taken from manufacturer's catalogue no 95). This gives an environmental-busting fuel consumption of 2 or less miles per (American) gallon. At the time, this was fairly standard. The French alone ordered 600, all 50h.p.

Jim Hawkesworth photographed this fine preserved example of a BGM in the museum at Froissy. The beautiful lamp which should be on the bonnet front has been lost. What is the horse-power? Hint: the panes of the windscreen are square and the petrol tank on its bonnet  is quite long. Yes. It's the 50 h.p.

 A familiar sight on the Western Front duning the last stages of the war, Baldwin locotractors have certain charms in addition to their historic value. The petrol tank is mounted on top of the bonnet along with with the exhaust chimney and the handy electric light (powered by a dynamo with back-up battery). All these protruberances along its 'nose' give it the characterful look of a rhinoceros. The overall design looks both to the past and the future. If the exhaust chimney harks back to steam, the split windscreen looks forward to the age of the automobile.
Most charming of all are the side-frames. As a certain television presenter might say, being clearly visible, these frames give the structure an honesty and raw integrity that is better than sophistication. In layman's terms, we can see what is holding the machine together, and that is reassuring! Furthermore, in their angular way, the design of the locotractor frames looks forward to Art Deco, whereas the spare shallow curves of the Péchot-Bourdon frames look to the emerging Art Nouveau of their period. If you have the good fortune to have a copy of Christian Cénac's La voie de soixante sur les fronts français de la guerre de 14-18, look at plates 10 and 35. The rest of us can only beg Dr Cénac to reissue the book.

This BGM model under construction shows the frames and motion more clearly. Malcolm Wright

As noted before, the wastage on the Western Front was horrible - for humans, animals and machines. Few BGMs survived until the Armistice. Some were kept by the Army. There is a photo of no 46,619 (manufacturer's number) at Toul in the late 1930s.  Where power rather than speed was needed, eg in quarries, others were purchased by civilian users. On a number of occasions, the new owners fitted the machines with more modern and frugal engines. This is reminiscent of the crusty old joke: 'My husband and I decided to save power, so I switched off his life support machine.' Moelwyn, which can be seen up in Wales, suffered this and other indignities.
If you stumble across a forgotten Baldwin locotractor in a French barn, you will want to know whether it is a 50 h.p. or 35 h.p. model. Dr Cénac lists the signs (op. cit. p 81). Here are a couple. The 50 h.p. model has a larger bonnet and so the divided windscreen is less deep than that of the 35 h.p. It is composed of two square panes whereas the windscreen of the less powerful model is made up of two upright rectangles. The petrol tank on the smaller model is shorter and there is little space between it and the exhaust.
Possibly, if we had asked an operator of the time, he (usually he) would have said of the BGM 'Bit top heavy and hard to reverse, but I like the lights'. As with any rhinoceros, Art Deco or otherwise, they moved away pretty quickly when it charged.