2999: Lady of Legend

Britannias. Oh, and quickly on ugly eight coupled locos, the Caledonian had a few 0-8-0s where the middle pair of axles were very closely spaced, with big gaps between the front and rear ones. They just looked wrong.

 

Poor b**tards would think they'd been banished! Ais Gill? What would be wrong with South Devon? Or Newport Gwent over Abergavenny to Shrewsbury, which is what they were built for.
The only GWR designs appropriate for Cumbria are the Princess/Coronations

 

Please excuse me for not reading the questio before answering..
The question I ask is if two cylinder steam locomotives with big wheels are best for express trains.
Churchward must have decided no as he made four-cylindered instead.
The Lady is probably the best of her kind.
And looks lovely.

 

It gives room for longer connecting rods and better ashpan than other more normal 0-8-0s.
But they do look strange indeed.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Caledonian_Railway_600_class_0-8-0_locomotive,_600_(Howden,_Boys'_Book_of_Locomotives,_1907).jpg

 

Not really 'instead'. There were 77 Saints and 73 Stars, and there were already 40 Stars in service when the last 25 Saints were built. The Stars were apparently considered 'a coach better'. Collett on the other hand does seem to have had a distinct preference for the 4 cylinder types.

 

Churchward decided that as successful as the first 20 29xx were proving to be, more power was preferred for the long-distance non-stop express services which were becoming more numerous. In 1906 he started developing the 4000 series, but the Saints, 77 in all were being built until 1913 and carried on in service for 50 years more. The GWR didn't stop building 2 cylinder locomotives. They built both 2 and 4 cylinder express locomotives concurrently. I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion from the facts.

Aaand JimC got there first

 

The Saints, including the Ladies, were certainly popular Newport to Shrewsbury in their later years but they were originally designed and built for the fastest and heaviest West Country expresses to Bristol, Exeter and Plymouth.

 

Lady of Legend is quite possibly potentially the best Saint ever built. The reason for this is that, I believe, she has an "improved draughting" arrangement with the narrower chimney (with an added capuchon) as fitted to Modified Halls, Granges and some original Halls in the 50's. She also has the original design of cylinders with the large steam chests. I often wonder if the later outside steampipe cylinders, with (I assume) a smaller steam chest volume, made the Saints just big wheeled Halls. That's the way 2999 would have been if Maindy Hall's cylinders had been reused.
I remember asking a GWR fireman/BR driver and later loco inspector, which were the best locos he ever worked on. His reply was the 29s.

 

but the Saints were considered better on the W.Country banks due to the Churchward setting of the Stevensons valve gear . better for slogging

 

Not seeking to disparage the truly wonderful Saint project, but, what with modern CAD and improved manufacturing techniques, couldn't the same be fairly said of newbuild class members generally? They're certainly treated to much more loving attention (perhaps even mollycoddled?) than their batch-built forebears.

 

The width of the valve ports & rings was increased on the Halls, together with the valve travel, which is one of the reasons why Saint Martin was never really a Hall. The ports and rings on 2999 are to Saint spec, although I don't know what was done about the travel. It would be interesting to know just how much the internals of a Modified Hall chimney actually differ from that of a Saint. From past experience, the results may be surprising...

 

I would imagine the blast pipe of 2999 is of the "improved draughting" Modified Hall type, to match the narrower chimney. It would be interesting to know for sure. I could be wrong, but I think the steam chest volume of the Saint cylinders was greater than the Halls and this feature was reintroduced with the Granges which led to the latter's legendary free running characteristics.

 

All my relevant books are in store, so unfortunately I can't make a direct comparison. But fitting an 'improved' blast pipe usually just meant changing the jumper top for a plain top, with a slight alteration in diameter, usually about 1/8". (The Kings and Manors had more involved changes with regard to blast pipe centrelines etc.) The thing is, Swindon used plain tops in addition to jumper tops, long before 'improved draughting' became a thing in the 50's, and so it would be interesting to see how different the Modified Hall arrangement is compared to a Saint in say 1910 and 1930.

The Granges had a larger steam chest on account of their using the motion from the 43xx's, but with a cylinder centreline that was 2 1/2" lower, to coincide with the axle centreline. In other words, the cylinders were dropped down, but the valves stayed in the same place, and the steam chest was enlarged to fill the gap. I think the early 29xx's - Scott/Ladies - had the same cylinder offset as the 43xx's, but the later engines didn't, so the Saints and Courts may well have had larger steam chests. 2999 has the earlier, offset arrangement.

 

A E Durrant states that the larger steam chest on the Granges was a deliberate design feature, influenced by Chapelon's work, and that the steam chest was 'bellied out' between the valve liners to provide extra volume. Durrant says, though, that this design feature was added to all new cylinders, not just the Granges (and Manors).

 

Not sure I understand that - if you keep the same motion, the pistons and valves would maintain their relative positions regardless of variations in wheel diameter. Or am I missing something?

Tom

 

Of those three engines mentioned,777 isn't currently in ticket, I'm not sure about 61572, so the likelihood of arranging for 2999 to visit another railway for a comparison trail with those engines isn't going to happen, but if you were to substitute an S15 for An Arthur, it would be interesting to see just what 2999 could do .

 

Not sure I understand the clamour for comparative trials or what in modern times it would teach you, given that none of the three is likely ever to be severely taxed on a heritage line; and even if they were, slogging with a massive load at 25mph doesn’t tell you very much constructive about how they might have performed when running with a lighter load at express speeds.

The whole comparison thing leaves me a bit cold: locos were built to perform the duties their owners wished to carry out. A hundred minute boat train express to a Dover with a slog over Sole Street bank on a cold fire is a different proposition to London to Bristol; and different again from six hours non-stop to Edinburgh. Horses for courses comes to mind.

Tom

 

I think it means that the cylinders and valves position relative to the rest of the locomotive is different, so an extra 2 1/2" twixt valves and smokebox, but this sort of thread begins to show me how very little I know compared to how much I thought I knew.

Dunning-Kruger at its best!

 

Ah, it's unrelated to wheel diameter, reading back I should've been more clear. The early Churchward engines were designed so that the centre line of the cylinders was 2 1/2" above the axle centres, for clearance reasons I think, but others may be able to elaborate. This later fell out of favour, and by the time of the Granges, engines were built so that the cylinder centre line coincided with the axle centre line (i.e. the whole cylinder block including the valve chest was lowered). In reusing the motion from the 43's, the valves were kept at the 'old' height in relation to the axle centres, whereas the pistons were at the 'new' height. I think it may have needed the valve rod altering in order to re-jig everything. Of course it may be that the valves were deliberately kept at that height in order to provide a larger steam chest, I can't say I've read A E Durrant's book, although I do have it somewhere...