West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Has 53809 gone back to the WSR as she wasn't there during the ASG. Is 53809 just visiting again for the event?

 

in fairness, having a theme for every gala does get a little tiresome,

 

No use of the usp again ? (triangle and turntable)

 

As far as I am aware, it is only these 4 engines which will be available, so they will have to run round and head straight back at both ends. Whilst there is just enough time to turn on the turntable without coaling and watering (if all is running to time), there is definitely not enough time to run to the triangle.

 

i should have made it clearer, what i meant was other classes such as the panniers, or other engines that had a long build history, Were the 41xx unique in being a class with in a class, for instance are their simular diffences in the 56xx and 66XX?
i'm very aware of the Stanier black 5 and the many verients, of it as well as engines being reboilered or as in the adams radials or beattie well tanks being almost completely rebuilt from how they originally looked, after all some railways , were very good at accounting rebuilding, where an engine would be a rebuild on paper but in effect a whole new design.

 

How's it looking for the volunteers day with the weather like it is?

 

The forecast for Sunday is light cloud, no rain and temperature about 9 degrees - so fine.

We have a good crowd but do have a few more slots if anyone would like to join us.

Robin

 

Back on the WSR for 2017.

 

The 56xx 66xx were of course all constructed within a five year period to the original design.

Conversely the Castles, built over a 27 year period exhibited changes. The post WWII batches from No.7000 onwards were built with three row superheaters, mechanical lubricators etc. (Many others were subsequently retrospectively modified plus double chimneys etc)

An even longer build period was the 28xx 2-8-0s (No.2800 built 1903) Numbers 2884 (built 1938 onwards) incorporated outside steam pipes, modified framing. Later ones built during WWII had solid cab sides !

The large Prairie, 4160-79 variation incorporated a higher degree of superheat within a Swindon No.2 boiler. This followed a similar upgrade of the No.1 boiler, hence the 6959 Halls (Hawksworth also incorporated plate frames, new pattern cylinders, saddle and frame details etc.)

Whilst Swindon Boilers were 'standard' they were not without minor variations from batch to batch! See any of the Boiler Appendices to be found at the rear of RCTS GWR Loco parts.

There is no simple answer to your question. A formula, stating the obvious, not just for the GWR, might suggest that the longer the production life of a basic design the greater the incidence of design modifications.

Michael Rowe

 

I should perhaps say that some crews prefer GWR or BR western steam and while the occasional Midland is fine. I suppose we'll just have to pretend that the WSG is "any weekend from the 1930's" when you would probably have seen an eclectic mixture of traction on the branch.

 

I wasn't aware the Adams Radials were massively rebuilt. They did acquire Drummond boilers later in life, but they were interchangeable with the Adams originals, such that if you look carefully at photos of the last three in traffic, you will see that the same loco swapped boilers back and forth between Drummond and Adams pattern in their last years. There were also detail differences in original build according to builder (size of side tanks; square or round cab windows; single or double slide bars etc.); and the usual detail differences you see in any long-lived class.

The Beattie tanks were of course massively rebuilt over their original lives, but very broadly they went through the following changes:

- As built: Open cab, Beattie "double" firebox; dome over the firebox; copper-capped chimney; feed water heating; two cross-head feed pumps and a steam donkey pump for use when stationary; wooden buffer beam.
- Adams rebuilding: Enclosed cabs; new boilers fitted with conventional fireboxes and dome on the middle ring (some were fitted with just a new firebox, with a new pattern dome still over the firebox); stovepipe chimneys; feed water heating removed; steam brake and vacuum ejector fitted; donkey pump replaced with an injector (though interestingly, No. 314 - one of the "last three" survivors - retained its donkey pump as late as 1931; and 298 - another late survivor - certainly retained hers into the twentieth century). Some were rebuilt into 2-4-0 tender engines at this time. Not all locos received all new features in one go.
- Urie rebuilding: By 1922 there were only three survivors. The boilers were worn out and they were given new boilers of basically Drummond pattern, similar to those that had been used to reboiler various Adams O2 locos. These can be recognised by the typically Drummond feature of safety valves on top of the dome. 0314 still retained a donkey pump at that time. This may have been when 0298 lost her donkey pump. 0329 appears to have finally lost the crosshead driven feed pumps at this time and had injectors fitted.
- Maunsell rebuilding (1931 - 1935) - new cylinders provided; new front end frames; steel buffer beam and new buffers; Drummond pattern flared chimneys.

On the question of accountancy rebuilds: the early railways offer plenty of juicy examples. Probably the most extreme I know about were the "Sondes" class on the LCDR. As built around 1858, they were outside cylinder 4-4-0 saddle tanks of the Crampton pattern, in which form they proved failures. When money was available, they were rebuilt as inside cylinder 2-4-0 side tank locos, in which form they had long careers lasting into the twentieth century (subject to the usual Victorian practice of fitting new boilers, cabs etc over time). It's unclear just how much material survived the transition from 4-4-0ST to 2-4-0T, but probably not much except perhaps the boiler barrel and sundry small items. The fate of the various Drummond 4-6-0s, ignominiously rebuilt into Urie H15 / N15s is also well known. Probably not much more than the bogie wheels, tenders and numbers survived the rebuilding. North Eastern Railway "Aerolite" in the NRM of nominally 1869 is another extreme example: as preserved, it bears almost no resemblance to its original form, having been rebuilt in 1886, 1892 and 1902 and, in the process, even changed wheel arrangement twice and from simple to compound form of propulsion.

Tom

-

 

Depends on one's definition of eclectic. Nothing larger than a 43xx 2-6-0 was permitted on the branch, and they tended to only be rostered on the Summer peak through trains. Over a Christmas period at the most: 22xx & 23xx 0-6-0s, 45xx 2-6-2Ts (and perhaps a 51xx, although the two allocated to Taunton were usually employed as Wellington bankers), 57xx 0-6-0PTs possibly and 'Bulldog' 4-4-0s.

'Manors' were only permitted as far as BL and then restricted to 25mph. There does not appear to be a record of a Manor having ever worked over any section of the branch prior to 'Preservation',

I do however think some of our SSGs and ASGs have been truly eclectic.

Michael Rowe

 

Thanks Tom. Amazing what comes up within the WSR remit

The reference to the reborn 'Crampton' reminds me of the 'Crampton' pattern 4-4-0s built in 1862 by Slaughter Gunning for the LC&D, rebuilt under Martley's jurisdiction as a 2-4-0 and then rebuilt yet again in 1886 during the Kirtley regime. In this form they constituted the "Tiger Class". In 1896 they handled much of the traffic over the Swanley Junction Ashford route. Thanks to Pearson Pattinson we have details of their performance, No.21 for instance ran the 14.8 miles from Sevenoaks to Swanley in 19.25 minutes with a 150 ton train on the grandly titled morning 'London Express'.

The LC&D's permanently impecunious state is well known. Kirtley, supported by his admirable assistant Robert Surtees was arguably one of the very best loco designers. His ability to not only keep an adequate loco fleet but update it whilst under extreme budgetary limitations places him amongst the elite. His M3 Class 4-4-0s were for their period 'right up there'.

Michael Rowe

 

Fair point, even as a lifetime S&D fan I would agree with Aldfort that we all enjoy working on the GWR engines on a proper GWR branchline, the Manor is a particular favorite with its nice bark and I have to say I loved firing the great 5542 a couple of weeks ago. So quite rightly, no doubt the WSR will always be GWR focused.

However the WSR is also becoming the ‘go-to’ place for the S&D with 53808, 53809, 44422 all genuine S&D engines in everyday use on regular turns (where else could you go other than a gala to see this?). Plus of course not to forget the Peckett Kilmersdon, newly restored S&D coach no.4, a couple of other original S&D 6 wheel coaches under restoration, the other S&D rolling stock and museum all under one roof at the S&D Railway Trust site/station at Washford.

This means as a venue for fare paying passengers, enthusiasts and volunteers looking to work on different things the WSR is widening its appeal which has to be good.

 

Will this WSR expansion, with its S&DJR emphasis, cause a conflict with another Heritage railway in a similar part of the country? The other railway is very much smaller but is, at least, on the former S&DJR track bed and is trying to create something of a S&DJR atmosphere.

 

An interesting point,

The bottom line if we want to "Live the Dream" and see steam engines running doing what they were designed to do pulling trains rather than read about what they did standing in front of a locomotive in a museum is that someone has to pay for the overhauls.

The WSR can offer an locomotive owning group the opportunity to earn money over a number of years that will go a long way to offset the 10 year overhaul costs.

It is unlikely that any other Somerset based railway or S and D group can offer the same cash return.

You may like to see this engine running here and that engine running there but without a source of funding those engines are not going to run anywhere.

The upside for other Somerset based railways and S andD groups of the WSR having a nest of S and D equipment that is operational is that it could be available to them as well to operate for events etc.

The down site is that the first call on the WSR based locomotive must be pulling paying customers on the WSR to pay for everything.

Jeff

Might be a bit of Win Win for the whole Somerset and S&D groups here.

 

There are other factors.

I am a 'dyed in the wool' S&D fan, having been brought up close to the remains of Glastonbury and West Pennard Stations. But I am a traffic nut, so working railways and signalboxes which communicate with other signal boxes and the like are a must for me.

With 20-20 hindsight, I believe that Glastonbury to Wells (plus some other bits) might have made a rather wonderful heritage Railway, but it is not to be. So the WSR is, for me, the next best thing. It does help that I like Brunswick Green as well as Prussian Blue. And to see both 7F's here is nothing short of magical.

I wish schemes like Midsomer Norton well, but it is no mistake that the WSR is my 'home' railway, and if I am occasionally seen elsewhere, it is the Swanage and the K&ESR which go from somewhere to somewhere.....

Robin

 

Jeff is absolutely spot on in my humble opinion, I’d be the first one to que up to ride a 7F over 23 miles from Bath to Evercreech but sadly history hasn’t allowed that, but I can fire a 7F over 23 miles of nearby line with gradients nearly as bad (good!) as the S&D. I of course welcome the group who have come a very long way in opening a bit of the original line and sincerely hope that they expand further but as Jeff says it takes money and no-doubt there is a place for us all in saving as much as we can for the people who come after us.

One other thing apart from the ability to run and fund loco overhauls that loco owning groups have with the WSR is the emotional aspect with the ability to come and have a ride whenever they like (of course not my place to offer but…).

I had the honor during the spring S&D gala of having one of the main men from the owning group (sorry, I don’t know how many of them there are in the group) of 53809 on the footplate whilst I was firing. This is a man (like no-doubt many others of the loco preserving pioneers who saved them from the scrap man) who on the run up to its going back into traffic just before the gala this year and no-doubt for the last 40 years since it came out of Barry has worked day and night to get it finished for month after month, year after year.

I hope he won’t mind me mentioning that whilst we were on the way to Williton from Minehead he commented that I was putting rather a lot of coal in, after we reached the top at Crowcombe he could see why, as his engine was working as it was designed to, climbing a hill over a long distance with a big train steaming very well. I can’t be certain but judging by the smile on his face when we reached Bishops Lydeard perhaps he thought all of those late nights and long days rebuilding her was worth it.

 

Indeed. The LCDR has a somewhat chequered reputation, but once they got rid of the malign influence in locomotive circles of Crampton, they were well served by first Martley and then Kirtley - indeed, I'd go so far as to say that their stock of locomotives as a whole bears favourable comparison with that on any other railway of the time.

Incidentally, it turned out that the board could hardly afford to ignore Crampton at the time, misguided though he was in locomotive terms, since he was a major investor in the railway. Though even that was somewhat dodgy since the money he put in with one hand was being paid out into his Civil Engineering company which held some of the contracts to build the line - let without formal tender! It's doubtful whether much money even changed hands: probably Crampton agreed on paper to subscribe for the shares but did the work in exchange rather than pay cash, and on the back of the supposed security provided by the non-existent cash, the company raised debentures (i.e. loans) with which they paid him (and others) their share dividends; and meanwhile the contractor could raise a bond (also a loan) on the security that the railway company would pay them in the future! Charles Dickens (who was after all a resident of Rochester and presumably saw at first hand what was going on) wasn't far from the truth when he has the rent collector say in "Little Dorritt":

'A person who can't pay, gets another person who can't pay to guarantee that he can pay. Like a person with two wooden legs getting another person with two wooden legs to guarantee that he has got two natural legs.'

Tom

 

Please someone post details regarding open weekend, hope it's not to late