35018 British India Line

You have to ask yourself if the MNs built and indeed the WCs too were actually what was needed or just more evidence of Mr Bulleid indulging himself.

 

Few years time, will be fourth Merchant Navy return to steam is 35005

 

A4s were regularly used on the Kings Cross (Goods) to Niddrie fitted freights.

 

Was a top link diagram at Top Shed.

 

Since 35025 Broccklebank line has come up in this thread is there any news on what's happening with this loco. I read in SR someone wanting to buy the loco from the owning group but apart from that there doesn't seem to be much news about 35025

Thanks

 

The owners have rejected the offer, so it's staying at Sellindge.

 

Not a chance this year I would think, to much going on in the summer around the Southern and it is still preferred motive power for the rich man's steam (Belmond Pullman). You will just have to do what I do when I want to see a Scot or Duchess, treat myself to the delights of motoring on the M6

 

There are other roads to get you up 'ere Johnb. It might take you a bit longer, but with less hassle.

 

I know I've used M1/A1/A66 to get to Appleby in the past but I don't normally have any trouble at the time of morning I leave home. I never use the M6 through Birmingham the A50 from the M1 to Junc 15 is quite often quicker and about the same distance.

 

A bit of both methinks; the MNs and BB/WCs were needed as locomotives to replace the mix of pre-grouping locomotives but - I suspect the SR were expecting a range of locomotives not the pair of designs provided by Bulleid. IIRC Bulleid saw the BB/WC design as the mixed traffic loco that Stanier had created with his Class 5MT design or Thomson later created with his B1 design but Bulleid's "indulgence" was the introduction of such "gizmos" as the thermic syphon; Chain-driven valve gear, steel firebox etc. Reading some of the biographies of both designers and drivers it appears that once drivers became familiar with these two classes and got to know their characteristic quirks they were able to work them in the manner that Bulleid expected.

Another factor at play is that during wartime the railway companies would often have to take short term decisions about motive power that in the rational period of peacetime would be taken on a longer term basis that could see different decisions being taken.

 

Including the speed restrictions on the M6 currently between Jn 16 - 19 whilst being converted to a SMART Motorway ?

 

I'd point you again to the locomotive building chart in post #363. Buried within that, consider the front line express passenger motive power the SR built. 54 King Arthurs in 1924/25 and 16 Lord Nelsons in 1926-1929. After that, the biggest passenger loco they built up until 1941 was a mid-size 4-4-0 - albeit a superlative one. If you consider that most front-line engines have about 15 - 20 years hauling the most prestigious trains before being demoted to lesser duties and giving way to more modern successors, it is pretty obvious that the SR needed new powerful passenger locomotives - by the early war years, they had hardly any passenger engines less than 15 years old and the majority of those were in a class that traced its origins back to the First World War. Passenger traffic didn't magically disappear on September 3rd 1939, and was in any case supplemented by an increase in services like troop trains - so mixed traffic or not, clearly there was a need for more passenger locomotives. By time 1945 came around, that need for large numbers of passenger locos was even more pressing, hence the construction of the Light Pacifics.

That's true, and the issue about Bulleid not being able to proceed with his preferred valve gear layout on account of no manufacturing capacity to make the required gears (all the capacity was used building aero engines) is well known. In 1941, having a good loco now was far preferable to having a better one at some indeterminate point in the future. Well all is said and done, they did anything the traffic department asked of them, but at slightly higher fuel cost (which was largely irrelevant) and lower availability (which was significant, but could to a degree be made up for by larger numbers).Tthey were not exactly the only example of a machine built during World War II that was put into production when "good enough" rather than later when it was "perfect".

Tom

 

More like, Slow Moving And Regular Tailbacks.

Dave B

 

That is a pain but no way of avoiding it, just engage the speed limiter and add about 10 min th the journey, They have also been doing the same thing on the M1 Junc 16 to the M6, still not finished

 

being as 8Fs were built by the Southern , maybe it would have been more sensible to build Black Fives.

 

Or 'Improved Arthurs' along the lines of The Red Knight

 

And let us all hope and pray that it forever remains the last such job....

 

You won't have to this year! The LMS invasion of last year looks set to continue into 2017, with both Royal Scot and the Duchess booked for RTC and SD trains in the south, along with some Black Fives too. Mind you, I don't think there will be too many complaints about this from this neck of the wood, especially as we'll have plenty of Bulleid action too, with 34046 and 35028 on the main line as well as several special events on heritage lines.

 

A Black 5 couldn't hope to perform the duties that an MN was built to do. Doubleheading may have been an answer but not a good idea in times of manpower shortages in the middle of a war.