1014 County of Glamorgan

They're going to have fun getting it out of that shed…

 

"Right," said Fred, "Have to take the wall down
That there wall is gonna have to go."

 

A new build James Martin surely? An Aussie built replica of an Aussie built loco that was to an original BP design doesn't make it a new build BP loco in my book. Lets give some credit to one of the various colonial companies who were able to build sound locos on their home soil.

Peter

 

I have some fun skewering other peoples prejudices. NP is not really a serious research resource, its just a discussion forum for like minded people. I welcome inconvenient facts that undermine my case but so far there have been none. I try and be light hearted about my posts but have to accept there are those who confuse an attack on their opinion with an attack on their person! I glean lots of facts from NP and welcome diversity of opinions. If however an opinion is contradicted by the facts its well worth pointing that out.

 

[Deleted]

 

I forgot to say that you should urgently get in touch with those nice Bluebell Atlantic people and advise them that their treasured Dukedog is in fact a Frankenstein engine, a pastiche of a Victorian locomotive. Clearly the GWR should be ashamed of themselves ! You might be just in time to stop them committing to overhauling this monstrosity as their next project.

 

Weren't the bottom halves of Bulldogs, onto which the Duke boilers were plonked, very similar to the bottom halves of Dukes anyway? Wikipedia even says that some Dukes were rebuilt as Bulldogs. The LNER would probably have called all of them Dxx/1, Dxx/2, Dxx/3 etc.

 

Early Bulldogs had what were basically Duke frames, later ones had a significantly improved design. Only the later design frames were used for Dukedogs - that was the point of the exercise! Dukes and Dukedogs had wider route availability than Bulldogs: they weren't really used for the same duties.

 

The frames of a County are more or less identical to those of a Modified Hall. They are exactly the same length. The only difference between the two frame units is the wheel size. As for the boiler, Swindon used the same flanging blocks as used on the 8Fs built at Swindon during WWII; the boiler barrels are different.

 

Worth noting that Swindon doesn't seem to have been wedded to all new parts on new engines. There are documented examples of new locomotives being turned out with secondhand boilers, even beyond the more obvious cut and shuts like Manors, Granges, Dukedogs, 31s, 81s, 72s etc. When components are going to be swapped at the first heavy general anyway, why use new if there are perfectly good parts on the shelves?

 

So Swindon were the first pick 'n mix. I always wondered where Didcot got the idea from.

 

Is now the right time to show this photo? A loco designed and ordered by one company (the GNoSR); paid for and delivered to a second (SECR) and carrying a replacement boiler from a third (GNR)!



Picture source: https://sremg.org.uk/steam/gclass-mob.shtml

Tom

 

I suspect that would only have happened to a limited extent. There were only a limited number of spare boilers. For instance the 47xx class had only one spare. The boiler usually took the longest time of any of the components to build/repair. If the locomotive was finished, apart from the boiler, one from the pool of spares would be fitted and the new boiler would then be part of the pool. That's why boilers were sometimes changed during an overhaul.

I doubt that it would have happened at all with the Manors, given that their boilers were unique to the class.