If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

LMS 2P 4-4-0

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by joshs, Dec 30, 2012.

  1. jnc

    jnc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western Atlantic
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Sure - but a post of the form 'I thought the Millways Mountaineer was a wonderful loco , what do people think of the idea of building one' will serve just as well to start one of those discussions (which I agree often turn up interesting nuggets) as 'I have set up a Facebook group to build a Millways Mountaineer, please sign up'.

    Noel
     
  2. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I misread that as 'Milliways' and wondered about the reaction to a loco named "Max Quordlepleen".

    If a suggestion gains enough traction to warrant a FB group (I'm one of those allergic to Faceache) or it's own website, well and good, but for so long as we have a "Current and Proposed Newbuilds" thread, I'm quite sanguine. You may recall my post a while back on the thread suggesting that early broad gauge unmitigated disaster built to IKB's specification "Thunderer", which I cheerfully admit was a less-than-serious proposal in response to something I can't now recall, but it made a point, even if I just can't quite remember precisely what that point was!

    As with any thread drift, it's tricky to quantify at just what point any newbuild suggestion warrants it's own dedicated thread. Sometimes, a truly insurmountable hurdle (other than money) puts the kybosh on an idea, which can be a useful exercise in itself. Once or twice, a suggestion might catch the imagination and who's to say whether or not it grows legs and runs? After all, the gestation period for something as complex and involved as a newbuild project sure ain't short.

    Followed to it's logical conclusion, I feel restricting comment on newbuilds to those who've already done the job a very strange way of encouraging enthusiasm. There was a time when A1SLT hadn't built a loco .... indeed, it wasn't so long ago anyone proposing to do so would've been ridiculed for 'barking at the moon'.

    If the argument is that NP isn't the place to coordinate an actual project, I'd agree with the statement, though I'd submit our own little newbuilds thread is as good a place as any to chew the fat ahead of any hard commitment to the time, money and effort for something which may (0.01%) or may not (99.99%) attract the interest to develop further. If that doesn't float someone's boat, I'd suggest they simply don't bother reading the offending thread ..... it's not compulsory and this is a forum after all. Discussion's what we do.
     
  3. Reading General

    Reading General Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,081
    Likes Received:
    2,217
    Milliways is the last restaurant I'd ever visit
     
  4. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Surely an example of a once numerous secondary 4-4-0 is a worthy addition to the ranks of new-build locos. For most heritage railways its allegedly poor performance hardly matters. I'd sooner see another one of these rather than a compound
     
    Gav106 likes this.
  5. andrewshimmin

    andrewshimmin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,761
    Likes Received:
    2,160
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    If you must build a Midland 4-4-0, at least build one of the original Johnson ones, which were absolutely beautiful.
     
  6. MarkinDurham

    MarkinDurham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,198
    Likes Received:
    973
    Location:
    Durham
    There's a 4-4-0 in Ireland - "Glenluce Castle"? - which is very Midland-esque, iirc?
     
  7. Reading General

    Reading General Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,081
    Likes Received:
    2,217
    built at Derby which may explain it. There's no need for a Midland compound, there already is one, 1000. There is no 2p and it's a gap that could easily be filled, very simple loco
     
    Gav106 likes this.
  8. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The preserved loco is U2 class No.74 "Dunluce Castle" and is located at the Ulster Folk & Transport Museum. Built by North British (Wks no.23096) in July 1924, due to the NCC works at York Rd being busy with a rebuilding programme and Derby apparently otherwise occupied .... compounds, presumably.

    The U2 boiler was the standard LMS G7S, which explains the classic 'Midland' ambience, though Stanier pitched in fairly early in his reign to order fireboxes to be widened (not too sure how that's accomplished unless they were originally built to standard gauge dimensions, but records show 5 of the 18 locos, not including the survivor, were thus modified!). No.74 was the last of her breed, outliving the rest by over a year before withdrawl in April 1963 with a final mileage of 1,135,484

    (the 'Glens' were the contemporary but slightly smaller class U1, four rebuilds of earlier locos, which went extinct when No.4 'Glenariff' was withdrawn in April 1949, having carried No.4A for the last couple of years)

    https://www.nmni.com/our-museums/ulster-folk-and-transport-museum/Home.aspx
     
    andrewshimmin and MarkinDurham like this.
  9. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    I think (please correct if wrong) that these machines had Walschaerts valve gear. If so they were as much Beyer Peacock /Bowman Malcolm in concept as Derby.

    PH
     
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,106
    Likes Received:
    57,444
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I seem to recall (I’m away from references) that there was something in Langridge about the boiler design - essentially the decision was to use standard boilers rather than utilise the extra width available between the frames. Potentially, a narrow firebox on an 5’3” gauge loco could have up to 6.5” extra width of grate, but using it on an “existing” boiler design would actually require substantial redesign work and new flanging blocks for the firebox throat plate and back plate, so the additional cost of construction where a standard “mainland” design already existed may not have been justified.

    Tom
     
    30854 and 60017 like this.
  11. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The preceeding U class (by Bowman Malcolm and his derived 0-6-0 "V" class) definitely did use Walschaerts, .... the U2's (built during the tenure of William Kelly Wallace) were a class of 18 locos, four rebuilt from NCC Class U, four from NCC Class A, seven built new by NBL and three by York Road, so I'd imagine Walschaerts was used across the board, though Ireland being Ireland, I wouldn't put money on it and I'd need to boogie across to Cultra to confirm or refute it. I can state with confidence that their 19"x24" cylinders were 1" greater in diameter than the otherwise very similar U1 ... both being smaller than the 201/2" of the MR edition.
     
    paulhitch likes this.
  12. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The same thought occured to me, hence my uncertainty. William Scott's history lists specific locos given a wider firebox, suggesting there must have been two non interchangeable pools of boilers for the class, though the survival of 'small grate' No.74 to become last of it's breed makes me wonder whether the 'large grate' conversion was everything it perhaps might've been. Whatever the truth, it seems not to have been a factor in the order of withdrawls between January 1956 and April 1963.
     
  13. jnc

    jnc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western Atlantic
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I'm also fine with using NP as a place to gather initial interest in a build.

    My gripe is with 'projects' which have a .00000000000000000001% chance because the organizer has no idea of just how big a task it is to build an engine, no extensive contacts in the 'industry' for sourcing parts, etc. With the number of builds and rebuilds going on, all over the place, there's no excuse for not joining one of these efforts (there's sure to be one close enough, for 95% of people) to educate oneself about the challenge, make contacts, show that you've got the 'stick-to-it-ness', etc. To put it another way, what are the chances of success in a new-build project for someone who can't even manage that?

    I don't recall the bios of everyone involved in setting up the A1SLT, but I'm fairly sure at least one was someone with considerable experience (Ian Storey, owner of a Black Five).

    Noel
     
  14. D6332found

    D6332found Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    179
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dinting
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Certainly a lot of interest; and the Compound, must be near 4 decades since it steamed; a 2P has all the advantages for preserved lines, can't see a P2 been useful except on the big railway. If anyone has any drawings they are prepared to copy please le me know...Otherwise will be a winter dig in the various places...
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  15. Hermod

    Hermod Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Klitmoeller,Denmark
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    How to make a Charity Thrust?
    Let us make a 4-4-0 were one side look like 2P that is no outside cylinder and valve gear,and the other side has an normal size cylinder looking like a Compound and a big low pressure cylinder between frames.
    Result is a two british heritage locomotives for one build that will be worlds most fuel efficient 4-4-0 ever for max 25mph.
    And free of any loading gauge problem

    http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrns2720.htm
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe..._4-4-0_geograph-2747922-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  16. std tank

    std tank Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,808
    Likes Received:
    946
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Firstly, purchase a copy of the Class drawings list from the NRM.
    Secondly, obtain a copy of Wild Swan Publications Midland Engines No 3 The Class 2 Superheated 4-4-0s. This is about the Fowler rebuilds of the Johnson locos.
     
  17. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    If it's someone pretending a project exists, I'm 100% with you. Hell .... I'll call psychiatric services (or the police if a scam is suspected) myself. The last I can recall wasn't a scam, simply a kite being flown for a "Maunsell L1", complete with very swish website, the most cursory perusal of which came up blank on the most basic issues ..... like if anyone was behind it. IIRC, several people mentioned the same name in it's regard, here on NP

    Not just loco schemes though. There have been a few railway schemes which didn't so much as reach not passing muster .... and I don't count the abortive Brit Valley proposal among those, though they were looking the wrong side of std gauge IMO. Then there were others (cough) ....... 50°616"N 2°924"W..... I didn't say it, so the moderators can't touch me for it!

    (Don't get me wrong, an L1 would be a pretty nifty mid-powered loco. They did remarkable frontline work in Kent until pw improvements and bridge strengthening meant first the Arthur's then the Bulleid pacifics came along, meaning transfer to another couple of decades of secondary service before electrification finally did for them, though somehow, I prefer the proportions of the earlier, slightly smaller wheeled (6'-6") E1. Haven't a clue why. Can't afford one though ..... Camelot keep cocking up the numbers!)

    I still think the "Current & Proposed" thread is the best place to give the more casual suggestions an airing, for all those reasons I won't bore you with again, but I stand by my reasoning. If something passes into serious development, it'll be because a scheme is attractive to the right people, at which point .... it becomes a serious proposition, so sling up a dedicated thread and if it were to get bogged down in spurious irrelevances for more than the odd post, I'll join you in having a jolly good 'tut-tutting' session..... Deal?;)
     
  18. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    What I find a little disappointing is that there are plenty of threads on pie in the sky new build schemes, but precious few discussing what is underway with what we already have. I look to this forum for news of what is going on in the loco departments around the country because I don't have the time to search through umpteen FB pages to seek snippets of information buried among all the other crap. Please, lets see more about what actually exists!
     
  19. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    What can one say? Fair comment, as far as it goes, although as projects underway do have their dedicated threads (and if not .... why not?) ..... I'm a wee bit surprised at the antipathy in the case of the one non-specific thread for random discussion. There evidently is a need for somewhere to bat random suggestions back and forth ... or is that too much to expect?

    Perhaps the 'Current & Proposed' hasn't become what the OP intended, but for better or worse, it has become what it is. Better, surely, to have one corner of NP available for such discussions? When all's said and done, if it contains digressions which don't float your boat, you know it's a thread of limited interest, here's a very straightforward suggestion .... don't waste your time, go concentrate on those which do and let the kiddies have fun in their sandpit. Then you know where the kiddies and the sandpit are, while the grownups concentrate on the finer points of piston ring design, blast pipe orifices or any number of specifics you wouldn't expect to find on a general discussion thread anyway .... simples!

    It's a wide ranging forum and there are several threads I've certainly never read through in any detail .... as well as several I've not understood any too well and still leave me scratching my head (well, it's that or the dandruff's come back!). Oddly, I never feel any need to tell all and sundry on any thread they shouldn't be discussing a subject coz it doesn't interest me.

    Would we even be having this discussion on the 2P thread if idea had appeared on "Current & Proposed"? It'd be very reasonable if those involved with the 2P got the hump about all this 'ere non-2P discusion .... except .... unless I've missed sommat .... there is no current 2P newbuild project. So precisely why we're having a ding-dong about a lack of project specific discussion on a thread unassociated with any extant project is, well .... slightly perplexing!

    If anyone wants me ..... I'll be in the sandpit. ;)
     
    flying scotsman123 likes this.
  20. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don't recall ever suggesting to anyone that they shouldn't discuss whatever takes their fancy, and I'm perfectly capable of exercising judgement over which threads to read and which to skip

    My point is that there are many locos out there that actually exist and are in the throes of overhaul and we hear nothing of them - why not? Have people become so jaded that only the latest gleam in someone's eye is now worthy of mention here. I'm not trying to kill off the new build stuff, rather asking for more on what already exists - for example the Black 5s at the Colne Valley, the 8F at the Churnet Valley, 7202 at Quainton Road etc, etc. 7,
     

Share This Page