LMS 2P 4-4-0

This unapologetic midland man cant help but smile. The great men of derby might not have made the largest or fastest locos. But I bet they are laughing from the great beyond.

They would be the first to tell you a fleet of their unsaturated 0-6-0's would be the perfect locos for heritage lines today.

 

Eave clearance is what still defines Ffestiniog loading gauge, with knuckles readily skinned when hands stray outside cabs in Garnedd Tunnel.

Have a shutie at Ireland's 5'-3" gauge. Oodles of unused width south of the border (since the demise of the mid 20th century Cravens stock), but surprisingly tight height restrictions abound on earlier sometime GNRI lines .... which includes the Belfast - Dublin mainline. The upside of that is that those splendid surviving ex-GNRI 4-4-0s can strut their stuff pretty much anywhere there are still broad gauge rails!

 

To a certain extent I agree with you Simon. Footplatemen will more often than not have a strong allegiance to a particular railway and its locomotives, and a deep mistrust of anything 'foreign'. The midland men stated that they disliked the western engines, and the western men would say that the midland engines were not a patch on their own. However, many would begrudgingly admit that the other companies' locos had some good points, and that given sufficient turns to become familiar with them, their dislike would probably be tempered. A lot of the disparaging comments were made with the intent of provoking a reaction from others. A bit like NatPres I suppose.

During my footplate career I have been fortunate enough to drive and fire over 70 different classes of ex-mainline locomotives including examples from all four of the pre-nationalisation companies. I have my favorites, but hand on heart can state that I did not hate working on any of them, although a few were more challenging than others. Footplatemen on heritage railways are very lucky in that they can experience working on a much greater variety of classes than their BR predecessors.

Andy

 

O do shut up. You're only jealous because you can't have one on the IoW. Anyway, steam locos are never boring even if we do prefer one design over others.

 

Yes the little 4F would be perfect for the Avon, if they could ever manage to own and restore it.
A bit like a Transit Van, it has many little flaws, but does the job magnificently.

 

Apart from noting the actual dimensions, I see that the original draughtsman had defined clearances from centre of rail. Which means that Robinson's corrections are just a change to defining clearances from running edge of rail.

 

Do you mean saturated?

 

Would you describe a fleet of unsaturated locos as polyunsaturated?

Tom (fetching hat, coat etc)

 

I would humbly like to apologise for my previous post. It was saturated in errors...

I admit it....

I called an engine a loco....

Twice

 

Stop the press everyone - I’m associated with Bulleids. I’ve finally made it!

We have this back and forth every so often Paul, and I often admire your firmness on the business like approach (which I think many of us agree on) but variety - is - the spice of life and the general public always surprise me as to what gets their motors running.

And frankly - all steam does - but they can see the differences between one loco and another. They might not have the detailed info that we make it our business to know, but nevertheless they come to our railways and repeat visit or go elsewhere because we are all different and approach this differently.

That’s the beauty of preservation for me - infinite variety in infinite combinations. Long may it be the case.

 

Plus GNRI 131, GNRI 85 (compound) and soon to come GNRI 171

Keith

 

No, you called a loco a loco. If you had called it an engine, well that would be an error to apologise for.

 

Yep, the engine is the bit called the cylinder, rods, valve gear and driving wheels. Most engines have two of them. Er, something wrong there . . . !

 

I think you do the public a great disservice, some normal Kiwi friends of mine have seen my photos of what I get up to on our heritage railways, they seem to like certain Loco's like 34053 (They loved the fact that there was a steam engine named after someone from New Zealand in Britain) even my mother who's not really into trains really enjoyed Caley 828 when that visited the SVR back in 2011, sorry Paul but normal people can tell the difference between the locos on the front.

 

Admittedly I've never driven or fired either engine, but I rather like the 4F and Super Ds having had the pleasure of seeing both types in action, and it would seem I'm glad that I'm not the only one.

I'm well aware that we have 43924 but I'm also glad that it appears that things are progressing towards 44422 returning to steam again.

 

Indeed. Whilst I'm biased, the people who visit the NVR with the "Just Go" company just love 34081 and she's requested specifically for them. Name, livery, unconventional appearance? Maybe a combination of all three but they know the difference.

 

Having consulted the 1921 Rule Book and Appendix I can say that on the LSWR it was always 'Engine'. There was a Locomotive Superintendent, however. Obviously other railways did it differently.
Pat

 

I do think your onto a winner with 34081's livery it's very decent USP, certainly makes it stand out a little from the crowd, even my mother commented on it when it visited the railway at the top of the street in 2017 (the SVR). Joe Public does know the difference though Dad's said he's had a few people ask him when Bradley Manor's coming back to the SVR.

 

The 'engine' powers the locomotive whether it is a steam or a diesel locomotive. Time to re-write the LSWR Rule Book & Appendix, methinks.

 

Indeed different railways have/had differing ideas. Even different departments use(d) differing terms.

I Have always used for example L//E to mean light locomotive/engine.

[Even though the practice in the railway offices where I used to work was
L//E = light electric,
L//D = light diesel and
L//DS = light diesel shunter.]