LSWR Urie H16 new build proposed?

There is also a spare tender frame at Ropley, or was, the one originally with 499, was found to be heavily corroded and an ex bogie tender frame later used as an Hampshire engine test rig, at Eastleigh was purchased as a replacement tender chassis,

 

I think that was more down to Woodhams of Barry. All of the S15's now preserved come from that yard. Back in 1966 I believe there was an attempt to save 30836 that last to see use but a lack of money got in the way.

Well that ends that then. A H16 is a worthy engine but I not sure we ever seen one again...

 

Trust Tom to put a spanner in the works.

 

I must admit, I watched the video with some trepidation. You see, the ULS has always seemed to me to be a relentlessly sensible society, looking after a couple of un-glamorous but highly effective goods engines from possibly the most pragmatic CME of the 20th century (I do not feel qualified to comment on the 19th), all on relatively modest resources and generally by doing a lot of the work themselves. The interpretation in the first post made me think they'd thrown away all that good sense and launched a new build project. Having actually watched the video, I don't think that's what's happened at all...

Although it comes across as narration to lots of nice footage (I particularly liked the scenes of 120 and 506 together in Southern green), I think it's almost a question and answer format, with the questions edited out. So:

1. Who are you and what do you do?
2. What's your history?
3. What have you been up to lately?
4. Future plans?
5. Dreams?

Overhauling the spare boiler to get 506 overhauled quickly next time round comes under future plans. Since she's had such a thorough going over this time around, you'd expect that a basic bottom end overhaul would be the limit of other required work, with no nasty surprises, so the boiler would probably be the critical path. Doing it first gets her back out sooner earning income for the society, which is good.

Building an H16 seems to be to come under dreams, if they somehow found themselves at a loose end with not much to do on 499 and 506, nothing to do with overhauling the spare boiler at all. And yes, if you had the time and money, and wanted to build a Urie engine, an H16 would be a relatively sensible choice (as sensible as any new-build project can be considered to be). They do have a different boiler to the 4-6-0s, described as a D15 boiler with a slightly shallower firebox (and I'm sure the ULS know that), which puts them firmly in the highly sought-after class 4 tank territory, but with basically the same cylinders and drivers as a Urie S15.

So a smaller boilered S15 tank engine, which will pull anything on a heritage line. Their downsides (short-ish valve travel and dubious bunker first running at speed) don't really matter in a heritage line context, and they kept their Urie look throughout their lives, so presenting it in different eras would be just a coat of paint. They expand the surviving Urie family by more than an H15 would, seminal as that design was.

All that said, I didn't get the impression it was a serious dream, but everyone's permitted a bit of fantasy every now and then.

 

Quite. The precise quote, in full, is:

“We’d love to build a new version of that. It will probably never happen, but that is the Urie dream”. ​

That’s it: five seconds at the end of a five minute video. Which is a long way short of “we’re going to build a new loco”!

Tom

 

I seem to recall first reading about this idea around 40 years in a journal that lasted just two issues, "Trains Today" maybe? A number of the major components are about, so all that is needed is an agreement to sell those frames and wheels and
a very large bag of money.

 

Wow, this snuck back a bit quietly, didn't it?
Parts in common with the Urie tender classes: Bogie; Driving wheelsets (as S15); Cylinders (but there are no spare Urie-pattern cylinders); Radial wheels (but not axle). That's all folks. It's not a lot to hang a new build on, is it?
Another inconvenience is that G16 and H16 were (apparently) the widest engines to run in Britain, so a gauging exercise would have to be done before you could contemplate running one anywhere. (Unlike Swindonian products, the width was higher up, at the tanks.)
Bloody shame, frankly. An ideal engine to work turn and turn about with a 80xxx tank, in my view.
Pat

 

How does it compare to a W in terms of common parts (and width)?

 

No common parts and the W is much narrower

Sent from my SM-A105FN using Tapatalk

 

Sorry, I meant in terms of other locos (rather than the H16) - wiki just says 'standardised with parts from the N, N1, U and U1 classes.' I just wondered if a W having more common parts and being narrower might be a better bet? (As lovely as an H16 is)

 

A W isn't a Urie loco though, it's a Maunsell one, so perhaps not the kind of thing the Urie Loco Society would be interested in

 

A Maunsell W class (or for that matter, a Metropolitan Railway K class) would be a useful bit of kit for the larger heritage lines. Nothing much in common with a big Urie tank though!

Tom

 

Of course the Urie Society could take a leaf out of Golden Arrow Models book and use that spare 8f chassis as a basis for a G16.

 

What 'spare' 8F chassis would that be and how do you propose to modify it to a 4-8-0 configuration?

There's also the matter of the difference in driver wheel diameter, wheel spacing, cylinder inclination etc etc etc. And that's just from looking at a picture of each loco!

 

Not a bad shout for a new build fleet. Tender and tank versions, adapt as the line sees fit.

 

You could have eight different types (large / small wheeled; 2 / 3 cylinder; tank / tender version):

Small wheeled (5'6")

Two cylinder

SECR / SR N class (tender)
Metropolitan Railway K class (tank)​

Three cylinder

SECR / SR N1 class (tender)
SR W class (tank)
​

Large wheeled (6'0")

Two cylinder

SR U class (tender)
SECR / SR K class (tank)​

Three cylinder

SR U1 class (tender)
SR K1 class (tank)​

Tom

 

You neglect the Irish examples, sir!

GSR class 372 (MGWR D2) 20 locos, 5'-6" drivers, operating between 1925 and 1962
GSR class 393 6 locos, 6'-0" drivers, operating between 1930 and 1959
These were all 2-6-0s, with UK width cabs
Plus, arguably the solitary GSR class 850, a 2-6-2T with 5'-6" drivers, operating between1928 and 1955 which seems to have been designed around spare parts common with the 372 class.

Edit: All three classes of locos were 2 cylindered machines.

 

Come on I wasn't being serious, Golden Arrow Models sell a resin G16 body to go a Hornby 8f chassis.

 

And if you want a new new build, you could probably use it to start building some of the ARLE 1920s designs...

 

Shall we put you down for a K, W, N1, U1 and a spare boiler?

But more seriously would you ever make any savings at all from building batches of parts? Would it really knock enough off the cost to make say Metropolitan K viable for say Quainton Rd?