Numbers of locos in railway company fleets

5322?1363?2516?

 

According to "Locomotives of British Railways" by H C Casserley, on 1st January 1948 the GWR handed oved to BR 3,857 locos. The Southern 1,845, the LMS 7,850 and the LNER 6,550 a combined total of 20,102,
The entry for GWR, SR & LNER states steam locos. Against the LMS it merely states locomotives, so that figure may include some diesels. It does include narrow gauge "Wren" as that was still in service and the last remaining LNWR rail motor car which was scrapped in 1948.

 

I've checked the books again as several others have posted 3,856 GWR locos to Casserley's 3,857. The GWR acquired a 0-4-0St from a tin works on 1st Jan 1948. It was numbered 1 by BR.
Just to possibly muddy the waters. in 1940 the GWR absorbed some LB&SCR "Terriers" that had been working on the WC&PR, although they appear to have been included in the GWR tally.

 

I'm going to separate off the discussion of "how represented in preservation" as this discussion is interesting enough without veering off...

 

List of all the engines which became part of the GWR in 1922 and what survived until BR excluding the narrow gauge ones.

 

I was interested in the earlier observation that the SR fleet was smaller at nationalisation than at grouping, and wondered a bit about where / how the change occurred.

So here's a rough graph. A couple of caveats: (1) I haven't yet included the locos inherited from the various Isle of Wight companies at grouping, unless they were LBSCR standards, i.e. Terriers. The various Beyer-Peacock tanks that came into SR ownership, for example, aren't included (2) I still need to check the figures, though the end point is close enough to those given earlier that it won't change the picture substantially - I need to check the start point a bit.

The red line shows the total stock of steam locomotives, plotted on the right axis.

The green bars show the locos acquired each year, and the purple bars those disposed of, plotted against the left axis. Note I use "acquired" / "disposed" rather than "built" / "scrapped" since some locos were bought or sold. For example, in 1927 the SR "acquired" a Terrier that hadn't been in LBSCR stock as at 1922 (Fenchurch, acquired when they took over Newhaven Harbour Co.) and they "disposed" of an E tank which wasn't scrapped and in fact still exists, having been sold to Cannock and Rugely Colliery (Burgundy, now on the isle of Wight).

I've plotted a substantial rebuild (E1 --> E1R; K --> U; L --> N15X; D / E --> D1 / E1 etc.) as a loco disposed in one year and a different loco acquired in the same year - hence the figure for 1928 shows 20 K class tanks disposed off, and replaced by 32 U class Moguls, 20 of which were rebuilds and 12 entirely new construction. Minor rebuilds (for example, locos given new pattern boilers but not otherwise significantly changed) are just shown as a single class without the rebuild date being represented.

The thin black line shows the net annual total for acquisitions / disposals, plotted against the left axis.

So, just at a macro level:

• There is a steady decline in locomotives right through the period. In fact, the number of locomotives in stock declines every year between 1923 and 1940 before staging a very minor recovery as Bulleid started building locos in earnest while not scrapping many.
• The effect of the 1930s looks clear: there was a lot of activity from 1923 to the end of the 1920s which stretched into the very early 1930s (loco building programs don't stop on a sixpence), but from about 1932 until 1938/39, loco building slowed to a crawl, while disposal continued apace so the total loco stock declined sharply. No new steam locomotives were built in 1937 or 1940. To what degree this was a consequence of the Great Depression, and how much is due to electrification, would take further analysis.
• By contrast, the big years for new construction include 1925 (including 40 King Arthurs - some contracted out to North British; and 30 N class Moguls - some built from Woolwich kits); 1928 (includes 7 Lord Nelsons and 32 U class moguls, though 20 of those were K class rebuilds; 1942 (including all 40 Q1s) and 1945 - 1947 (when the Light Pacifics were being built).
• In only six years did the SR build more locos than they scrapped, all in the Bulleid period (though the first couple of years were building Maunsell-designed locomotives): 1938, 1939, 1941, 1942, 1945 and 1946. In every other year, they scrapped more than they built.
• Hardly anything was scrapped during the war - but the result was a stock of elderly pre-grouping locos making it into 1945 that were beyond worn out. Scrapping of these took off with a vengeance around 1946 / 1947 and continued (not shown on the chart) into the early BR period: 1946 - 1951 were brutal if you liked late Victorian locos with pretty much anything still surviving by Stirling, Stroudley and Adams getting the chop except for the few that survived by dint of fitting very specific niches.

Tom

 

Very interesting graph above from Tom @Jamessquared showing the decline in SR steam loco numbers through the Grouping period. Some noticeable peaks in building, such as 1925 with large batches of King Arthurs and Woolwich Moguls coming into service.

The withdrawal peaks reflect replacements both by new steam and by EMUs. Peak events in the electrification programme show very clearly, including the suburban lines to Guildford, Orpington & Dartford in 1925/6 and the Brighton main-line in 1933.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Railway_(UK)#Electrification

Steam classes such as the H and M7 tanks were displaced by electrification from London duties to the provinces, but many older types went for scrap. The link below includes a photo of a long line of withdrawn ex-SER Class Q1 tanks.

https://sremg.org.uk/steam/SER_Q_Q1.html

 

Some years ago, I did an analysis of the numbers of locos listed in Casserley & Johnston "Locomotives at the Grouping". My totting-up will certainly have included many errors, but most of my results were close to those listed above!

It is sometimes difficult to establish precise figures and there may be more than one correct answer, for example in respect of whether "duplicate list" engines are included or excluded.

RCTS "Highland Railway Locomotives" flags a particular issue in respect of that company. After 1918, the HR ceased to formally withdraw locos, in spite of acquiring 24 new engines in 1916-22. It is speculated that the HR Board thought that having more engines might lead to higher Government WW1 compensation and later to a better deal from the LMS. The net result was that the HR had 173 locos on its books by 31 Dec 1922. A significant number were stored unserviceable at various locations, creating a precedent for the "linear scrapyards" found at some of today's heritage lines!

The LMS accepted only 150 HR locos into LMS stock. It is only these 150 that are listed with their new LMS numbers in Casserley & Johnston. Some of the remaining 23 continued to be used on light duties until mid-1923, with Nos. 76A & 81A given an extension in the "twilight zone" until mid-1924. These were Jones 1886-built "Clyde Bogies", class-mates of No 79 seen here:

https://railway-photography.smugmug.com/LMS-Scotland/David-Jones/Jones-Assorted-designs/i-7sQtPGH

Something similar happened on the Dublin & South Eastern, whose loco fleet was apparently badly run-down when it was absorbed into the Great Southern in 1925. Only 43 out of 67 DESR locos were accepted into GSR stock.

I wonder whether there were other cases of locos being "lost" during a takeover operation - particularly in respect of other LMS constituents?

 

Thinking of many photos of lines of unserviceable LBSC locos and the early demise of so many absorbed companies' locos on the GWR, I'm given to wonder whether @bluetrain is on to something worthy of it's own thread. The Highland case I had come across and there seems no other rational explanation.

Regarding pre-grouping Irish companies, to judge by the sheer number of locos withdrawn by the GSR (formed 1925) before 1930, keeping clapped out near scrap on the books wasn't too uncommon, even on the largest of the pre-grouping lines, the GS&W (though the resolutely independent SL&NCR kept much of theirs serviceable, at least nominally!).

As an aside, the D&SER board favoured merger with the GNRI*. As it was a notoriously difficult route to operate, right down to the end of steam, I rather suspect the GNRI dodged a bullet there!

* for any who wondered, all cross-border companies were excluded from the 1925 grouping and remained so until the GNRI threw in the towel in 1953, though the company jointly nationalised by both Irish administrations in that year retained something of it's identity until final dissolution in 1958, when all assets were divided between the CIÉ and the rabidly anti-rail UTA.

 

From memory, the North British put any sort of loco-building on hold as soon as grouping was on the cards. Hence why quite rapidly after grouping, the LNER ordered a new batch of Robinson 4-4-0s to fill the Southern Scottish Area motive power shortfall that had resulted.

 

A shuftie at NBL's industrial and export order books for that period might prove interesting. Other UK builders too, for that matter. Then, as now, periods of slow sales tended to induce what we might now call "special offers" to keep production lines moving, even if at reduced profit margins.

 

Even with withdrawals, the majority of ex-GS&WR and ex-MGWR locos survived into the 1950s and provided the bulk of Southern Irish motive power until the diesels arrived. In the early 1950s, the entire network was a heritage railway! Ireland would probably have benefited from a lot more Maunsell Moguls than the 26 that had been acquired from Woolwich in the 1920s. I find it quite difficult to get my head around the numerous classes of Irish engines. The McDonnell Class 101 (J15) 0-6-0 was the only really prolific standard type.

That is true. The tight-fisted NBR Board had constrained locomotive expenditure since before WW1. The last new builds for the NBR were a batch of J37 0-6-0s delivered in 1921. Gresley was left to sort out the problem of many engines overdue for replacement, which he did partly by drafting in replacements from down south and partly by new orders, including the Robinson 4-4-0s that you mention and an extra 30 NBR-type N15s. The latter 0-6-2Ts were the last engines to be built at Cowlairs.

 

I strongly recommend Locomotives of the GSR by Clements and McMahon to get your head around the various classes. Some cracking photos in there.

Andrew Shimmin
(Member: RPSI, FfRS, TRPS, RERPS, RHDRA, WLLRPC)

 

Seconded .... it's a superb volume and one of my most highly prized.

 

A couple of further thoughts about the above figures. I think that the LNWR total excludes NLR engines and the NER total excludes H&BR. When the LNWR took over the management of the NLR in 1909, a few NLR locos were absorbed into LNWR stock but most remained in a separate account, retaining NLR numbers. In a rather strange accounting exercise, the NLR stock was eventually absorbed and given LNWR numbers in early 1923 - immediately prior to the LMS absorption and renumbering!

A further complication with the LNWR was that some of its engines were treated as outside the main loco fleet and did not carry normal loco numbers. A few more had carried LNWR numbers but were not allocated LMS numbers. These engines included Railmotors, Tram engines, Departmental locos, Crane tanks and Works shunters, some of them narrow gauge. Depending on which of these (if any) are included, a series of slightly different totals can be derived. If all are included, then the LNWR (with NLR) had roughly 3500 engines.

In round numbers, British main-line companies had approximately 24,000 engines in 1923, split 60% tender engines to 40% tanks. For those fellow anoraks who like numbers and statistics, I've attached an analysis of the tender engine portion. Most of this analysis was done 20-30 years ago based on Casserley & Johnston and no doubt contains some errors, but hopefully only minor ones. Some observations:
- More 0-6-0s than anything else. I think that was true through most of the steam railway age in Britain.
- The LNWR had far more 4-6-0s and far more 8-coupled goods than anyone else. A contrast to the MR.
- The GWR tender engine total is relatively low, balanced by that railway's larger number of tank engines.

 

Interesting, it would be good to see the tank engine figures as well. I had to think for a bit what the six locos listed as "other" were for the LSWR, but I assume they are the Drummond 4-2-2-os.

Re the LNWR and NLR: did they merge in 1909, or just come to an operating agreement? That could explain keeping the loco fleets separate. I believe there were a number of company mergers in 1922-23 that were essentially preparatory to the groupings o as to make the ultimate distribution of shares a bit easier. I believe that was why the LNWR and LYR merged in 1922.

Tom

 

The North London Railway despite operating in a limited area was highly successful and well run. Broad Street at the turn of the century is stated to have 794 trains a day and on average 85,000 passengers. The agreement with the LNWR does seem to have been an operating one and the formal takeover in 1922 was presumably because it would benefit both companies shareholders when compensation for Grouping was paid.

The North London locomotive fleet of tank engines were highly effective and the LNWR does not seem to have had any desire to suddenly swop the existing stock for its own regardless. They did take over a few of the locos into LNWR stock and 4 of these survived until LMS days. The North London Railway had it's own works at Bow which built and maintained its own engines and the works lasted until 1960 which suggests it had a high degree of useful to survive various regime changes.

Electrification was started by the LNWR and this seems to have been one of the main reasons the operating agreement came into effect in 1909.

From Bob Essery's and David Jenkinson's 'An Illustrated History of LMS Locomotives volume 2' with the formal merger of the two companies in 1922 the LNWR renumbered the NLR locos to prevent number clashes and most seem to have been actually applied in the 12 months but not all.

74 of the 1922 transferred NLR outside cylinder 4-4-0T came into LMS ownership and they seem to have been run until the next major repair was due and then all had been withdrawn by 1929. They were then by some considerable age with some being rebuilds from the 1870's and they would have all had very high mileages on the very onerous stop start North London services. One was put aside for preservation and stored at Derby but was scrapped when William Stanier came in.

In addition there were 4 surviving former NLR 4-4-0T which had been transferred to the LNWR in 1909 and these went by 1925.

Thus 78 4-4-0T's which had NLR origins came into LMS ownership. The original design
came from William Adams period and then the development and rebuilds from John Park's time.

The goods were handled by 30 0-6-0T designed by John Park and fifteen of these survived into British Railways days. One fortunately survives on the Bluebell.

There was also a 0-4-2CT crane tank which survived until 1951 having origins dating back to 1858 as an 0-4-0T and being rebuilt as an 0-4-2T with crane in 1872. This was numbered by the LMS yet 8 crane tanks from the LNWR were not in the main LMS numbering but considered departmental stock.

This makes the total NLR classes into LMS days as

4-4-0T 78
0-6-0T 30
0-4-2CT 1
------------------
109

 

Survivors 1

 

One of the LNWR electrics that ran on the North London route is preserved at the NRM, an Oerlikon motor car number DMBT 28249.

It's not quite the same as having the Adams 4-4-0T that was put aside though..........