WW2 locomotive building.

No, just Rugby, the first stop.

C Hamilton Ellis gives a witty account of this stop. A regular passenger noticed that a large number of young women - I won't say ladies - would get out at Rugby. He mentioned this to the guard who replied, "Yes, and now they'll get the first train back to Euston!"

 

Compartment stock? In which case, I thought Cannon St-Charing Cross was long enough - and a lot cheaper for the young women...

 

I don't suppose they were paying!

 

From 1957 Camden, Willesden and Rugby did not have an allocation of 2Ps. I would suggest that the 2Ps on any trains out of Euston would be Crewe pilots returning home.

 

That's not what I heard. And these engines were working these trains from the late 1930s.

 

The allocation is presumably a matter of fact, but this would accord with a story told by Pete Johnson (Vol II p.33-34) who did a firing turn on a 2P from Crewe to London piloting a Black Five, probably pre-1957, being told on arrival at Euston "We don't want this bladdy thing here" and being asked/told to take it back on the next available train, which was on the front of a Scot with eleven on.

 

Even in 1950, the only 2P on ex LNWR lines in the London area was 40672 at Watford.

 

Is there anything positive to say about the 2Ps?

 

They looked nice in SDJR blue.

 

I don't think much can be read into the comment from the loco people at Euston as to the merits of a 2P. Camden simply did not have any use for such a small loco on its diagrams. Re the broader question as to their usefulness, according to Cox they were pretty cheap to run, and according to David Smith, they were welcomed with open arms on the GSWR, although admittedly that may say more about the quality of their indigenous locos.

 

The GSWR locos had been alright pre-war, although there wasn't the money to e.g. superheat enough of them or replace (many were rebuilds of very old engines). But post-war they were in a shocking state. Whitelegg seems to be at least partly to blame, although quite what he did to spoil even the locos whose valve gear he didn't mess up is not clear...
The GSW men also welcomed Compounds and Crabs, but not Jinties, for some reason. Perhaps GSW shunting tanks were pretty good.

 

You have to remember that most major stations were well used to changing engines.

It was often the norm rather than the exception to be changing them and the procedure would run like clockwork, with shunters, station pilots, engine roads between platforms, bobbies close by to do the necessary in double quick time etc.

I suspect timings would allow for these operations and if so, service schedules would be little affected.

 

The GSWR did not have many tank locomotives, so there must be some other reason.

Paul H

 

I've read an account by someone, it may have been Dick Hardy, but he said that with the Liverpool Street commuter services the train would arrive, loco hook off, tail lamp swapped over, new loco hook on the front, brake test, then be ready for the off again inside of 4 minutes! Should imagine it took a fair bit of cooperation between staff, but then again I suppose everyone knew what they had to do.

 

During the 1885 railway races, a train was away from York within two minutes of arriving, having swapped locos. OK, that was a special case (and was before the need to recreate a vacuum brake) but even so, if the station layout is conducive and everyone concerned knows their job, five minutes or so is ample.

Given the dull nature of today's railways from an operating PoV, I think it is easy to forget just how much shunting and remarshalling went on in the steam era railway, with trains joined or split, through coaches for branch lines attached for detached, carriage trucks shunted in and out of dock sidings and so on. A loco change was hardly a major event in such a system.

Tom

 

Trouble is, haste could be dangerous. The Grantham accident of 1906 is now thought to have been caused by omissions in the procedure for attaching a new locomotive to the train.

Paul H

 

Quite right. Following the train's departure, the incoming loco would head to the holding sidings at the country end, and as soon as the next train arrived, would drop back on to it and be away in the same time. I suspect that the hardest job was getting all the passengers out within the time available.

 

They had a few 0-6-0Ts and 0-6-2Ts by Drummond. Although few in number, perhaps they were very good (his brother's tank locos were generally good).
Sad of course that all we have left of the GSWR is an unrepresentative small shunting tank, when they had fine 4-4-0s by Manson and predecessors, and Manson's handsome 4-6-0s.

 

With a door at every compartment commuters would empty a train in about 10 seconds, the bottle neck is clearing the platform.

 

Probably true, and since this was the commuter period, I doubt there was any great need to shove returning passengers into the vacated compartments.