Pre-1916 locos in steam in 2016

Here's my table of survivors of the main pre-grouping companies, tabulted by "representative types":

Green is operating (darker green operating in pre-grouping livery, lighter operating but in later livery - from memory, I didn't check them all).
Yellow is preserved static
Blue is replica in reasonable state of completion (I only put in the one I thought had a very high chance of completion in the short term)
Grey means I don't think any were built (or thereabouts)

I have grouped by Region, as there are very definite regional differences. Note there is only one operating (sort of) Scottish pre-grouping loco. The Southern does well with smaller locos (and thanks to the Bluebell, IoW and KESR!), but LMS constituents don't do well due to early standardisation.

I have also included the Big Four and BR at the bottom, as much as anything to show how lucky we are with representative survivors (also showing the LNER not doing as well). I have to admit these are from memory only.



I am sure there are various mistakes here, but it does give an overall picture...!

 

I have noticed the LSWR passenger tank and LBSCR goods tank should be light green, i.e. operational representatives not in pre-group livery.

 

From my table, the following major companies will have no operating locos in pre-grouping livery in 2016:
LSWR
LBSCR
Midland
L&Y
NSR
GSWR
Highland
NBR
GNSR
NER
GCR

Meanwhile I also noticed that (GWR examples aside) all of those few locos who are operating in re-grouping livery are not running on their original company metals!

 

Sadly I think "your undergarments are in disarray" ever so slightly with regard to the L.B.S.C.R! There is only one goods tank (the E.1) which is intended to restore to operation but not quite yet. Most of the A1x type are pre- 1880 so qualify as "oldies" and one of these is preserved statically in original livery. If you are tempted to think of an A1x as a goods locomotive just take a trip behind the "Gold Medallist" (W11) to be disabused.

Paul H

 

Couple of corrections re GER locos- "Coffeepot" 229, currently being restored to working order, was built in 1874 so should come under "oldies" and the GE did have one 0-8-0 goods engine, the re-built "Decapod".

 

My head hurts!

A few comments: I think trying to represent locos preserved and also livery is probably confusing the issue - I think the data would be clearer if you ignored livery (I know, I know - what else actually matters?) That might then show a more interesting picture about where the significant gaps are in preservation.

Trying to define "oldies" is going to be fraught with difficulty. For example, there are only 9 years in build date between FR20 and Fenchurch, but I'd suggest a world of difference in conception. If you didn't know better, a Terrier could easily be assumed to be a product of the early 20th century, in a way that FR20 could never be mistaken for anything other than mid 19th century. "Gladstone" (on your definition not an oldie) is much more obviously a product of the 19th century than a Terrier or E1 is.

Maybe making the distinction for "oldies" at 1870 might be more obvious, but I suspect it is probably too arbitrary to be useful, particularly as it then disguises the classification into passenger tank, goods tank etc.

I'd have to think about classifying into "goods tank", "passenger tank" etc. As @paulhitch has said, Terriers were undoubtedly built as passenger tanks, despite later usage. The E1 was mostly used on goods, but in an address at the time, Stroudley gave the duties they had been designed for, which included some passenger work. The distinction is particularly acute on the SR and its predecessors, in that they had relatively few out-and-out goods locos, but large numbers of ostensibly mixed-traffic loocs.

Having said all that, it is interesting to see all the data collected together.

If I had to say what are we really missing from the pre-grouping era, I'd suggest for starters:

• Mainline engines (beyond relatively non-standard oddities, such as "Tiny" and FR20, or locos heavily rebuilt, such as Columbine and Cornwall) from the open-cab era, say 1845 - 1870. A representative set might include an 0-6-0 goods, a 2-2-2 passenger engine and 2-4-0 passenger engine.
• An operational late Victorian passenger engine in original form (the T9 is rebuilt). Gladstone, Hardwicke, Adams T3, Midland Spinner, GNR Stirling Single etc. all exist, but none is likely to run.
• A big passenger tank engine (4-4-2T / 4-6-2T / 2-6-4T / 4-6-4T /) Pre-grouping examples of all of them existed, but I think the Adams Radial - at the small end of the spectrum - is the only survivor.

Others might add to that list.

Tom

 

There is also LTSR 80 "Thundersley", but I don't know if restoration to service is an option there.

Steve B

 

I believe that the boiler is considered beyond repair. That does not mean that repair is a practical impossibility but it is, of course, a National Collection engine and questions of originality have to be considered.

 

1870 does appear to be a cut off date between the early period and later designs. Most locos built before this date, ie 1845-70, seemed to disappear quite early on, in many cases by the end of the 19th century. Whereas quite a few classes built in the 1870s and 80s lasted into the diesel era (Midland 2F and 3F 0-6-0s spring to mind)

From this earlier period, only a tiny handful made it to Nationalisation, four Kirtley 0-6-0s from the Midland (one lasted long enough to carry BR livery and number - 58110) a crane tank from the North London Railway, also renumbered, 58865. The only others I can think of were the Beattie well tanks which were an oddity due to their continued use in Cornwall and two 2-4-0 tanks on the GWR which came from the Cambrian, 1196/7. There may be others, which I cant think of and I don't know what the oldest one from the LNER group was

 

A few other early locomotives survived beyond nationalisation in other hands: the Shropshire & Montgomeryshire fleet of cherishable antiquities lasted for the most part until 1950, and then of course there was Lambton No.27, originally a Newcastle & Darlington Railway 2-4-0 of 1846, which lasted until late 1968 before being cut up. One of preservation's tragedies, that one.

There's a photo 0f 27 in her final condition about halfway down the page here: http://www.lambtonlocomotivestrust.co.uk/edwardianrailway/runninganedwardianrailway.htm

 

The three Beattie Well Tanks were after 1870 in build date, but before 1870 in design (which is another wrinkle on arbitrary boundaries!). They were of course somewhat rebuilt in the interim: this model shows what they would have looked like originally. Amazing to think that this is what the LSWR were building (or rather, mostly buying) between 1863 and 1875, just about contemporary with a Stroudley Terrier (build dates 1872 - 1880)!



5" gauge Beattie Well Tank model by Tom James, on Flickr

Tom

 

Comment deleted.

 

So where are the S&DJR engines then, in this list.

 

I guess they not mentioned yet as we been talking about 1916 built and older engines. 88 and 89 were built in 1925 so not quite 100 yet....

 

It's only small but NER Cl H No. 1310 is in NER livery and is operational. It was in steam for its boiler inspection today.

 

Thanks all for the comments.
I did say there would be mistakes!
I quite agree some of the categories are rather arbitrary, and this is not intended as a classification exercise but showing where "representative types" (my definition!) are preserved or missing.
The inclusion of livery was just an extra factor - Bluebell aside, most operational older locos are currently in grouping or BR liveries (which they generally look very good in, but does leave some railways unrepresented). Static examples are more often in pre-grouping livery.
In my Excel table I put comment on each cell with which locos I had I'm mind, but I can't work out how to share that...

 

Thanks Paul, I admit to fearful ignorance of all things SR.
Particularly dim on my part as one of the few locos I have had a footplate ride on was a Terrier, and boy did it shift.

 

Hence my "or thereabouts", I ignored one-offs as hardly representative. The exercise was not to classify locos, but to find gaps where types which were representative of the railway are missing.

 

Tom, my own conclusions were very similar.
In terms of railways, the GCR and the Scottish railways are all conspicuously underrepresented.

 

Absent! I only looked at (my own arbitrary definition of) "major" railways.
The S&D didn't have an independent loco policy as such, and the general types were in my mind part of the wider Midland list.
The main exception, the 2-8-0s, are represented by two survivors, both recently in operation, so the S&D did alright compared to many much larger railways with dozens of completely indigenous types of loco, some very significant in loco development, none of which survive.
Weep for example for Lochgorm, Gorton and Kilmarnock - the latter especially as the only survivor is an 0-6-0T when the GSWR was generally very adverse to tank engines and had hardly any!