What Ifs, and Locos that never were.

I’ve never seen these figures directly so thank you for posting them. I took my information from an article I read a while back, which I suppose was greatly flawed.

 

We've all done it, don't worry. I have read a number of deeply flawed articles on the exchange trials and I am afraid Mr Cecil J. Allen is at the heart of it. It is incredibly frustrating to look back on the original statistics, turn the page of said book and find a breakdown summary that bears no resemblance to the statistics given!

 

I was just wondering, do you have an ebook variant of your Thompson book? I've been considering giving a deeper look to Thompson and Peppercorn.

 

Afraid not at this time. The hardback is selling well though and is included in Strathwood's offers this month. Of course I am going to recommend it but I hope in all seriousness that it does add to the overall debate and history.

On topic - I think the "never wuzza" standard 8f was a nice looking loco in theory but with a huge number of grouping and pre-grouping 2-8-0s everywhere, I doubt there was a business case for it where diesels were coming onto the scene too. Something the 9F 2-10-0 had over it - there were virtually no other 2-10-0s in the country - just the austerity 2-10-0 I think was available (I stand to be corrected of course!)

 

I've never understood how Cecil J Allen held such sway in the railway prints. A different era, I suppose.
Pat

 

Me neither Pat. He was very close to the LNER in a variety of roles, which may have helped greatly in that.

 

A known quantity? It still happens - there’s a former parliamentary candidate widely cited as an expert on railways whose ignorance of the subject frequently has me reaching for the off switch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

How about these two? Credit to the original creator of these images, very skilfully done. I believe it was Craig Tiley, on his Alternative Desing Histories pages... I hope he doesn't mind me posting the images here, I think these look spot-on! A Caprosti 5MT

and a couple of Ivatt-modified Caprotti 8Fs...



Richard.

 

They were all done by me, as was this SR 4-8-0 mentioned earlier. I can't remember who Craig Tiley is?


The video of the Caprosti 5MT is here

 

I wasn`t aware of and have never seen pictures of a Stanier 8F with Caprotti before. Very interesting! (and a new drawing project for me )

Thanks for posting the photos Richard!

Knut

 

For clarity, these are of course entirely "never wuzzas" - very convincing ones mind. Nicely done Corbs.

 

Me too! Also I think they looks better than a 9F (but that`s a matter of taste of course)

Knut

 

Have seen some very good photoshops/ models of a '2-8-2' 9f but a Steam era one with Caprotti Gear would be a nice addition to my gallery.

 

Neat! (Though a bit scary …)

Not sure what number a Maunsell 4-8-0 would have had, but definitely not in the 38xxx series.
Bradley says they were allotted the numbers 1881-1887 (i.e. in the Ashford series).

But that’s a minor quibble!

Tom

 

Stephen Townroe mentioned a Urie 4-8-0, based on the H15. he published a diagram in 'Arthurs, Nelsons & Schools'. Was it any more than his imagination running riot?
Pat

 

Corbs also did this.
Thank You for being genious and artist at same time

Thompson A2 Forhjul by Hermod posted May 22, 2019 at 9:05 AM

It only needs Witte steam deflector ears

 

Thanks all

Yes the Caprotti 8Fs are completely fictitious, one would imagine they would need to be balanced for faster running for there to be any point.

As for the Caprosti 5MT, Iain AKA '92220' on RMWeb built this fantastic model from the drawing pictured. Photo by Tony Wright.

 

With the sort of loads the southern companies shifted to/from the channel ports during WWI, possibly a step or two up from an outright flight of fancy. Looking to developments elsewhere, the expectation of continuing traffic growth seems to have been a fairly general assumption which held sway until the advent of the Great Depression.

Picking up on Tom's comment on numbering, historically the LSWR's methodology was to reuse numbers of withdrawn locos. Given the dates we're looking at (and possibly, for accounting reasons, the intended duties), the most likely blocks might be those freed up by prolonged demise of the 0302 class, withdrawn between 1889-1925. That, or the Nelsons would've emerged with different numbers.

Both Maunsell and Urie? If what did happen is owt to go by, methinks I'd favour a Urie design, subsequently breathed upon by Maunsell. OK, so the frame issues with the Maunsell moguls didn't become too much of an issue until BR days, but an issue they most certainly were.

Anyone for a Billinton flavoured 4-8-0?

 

What book is this in please...

 

The 5mt with Caprotti Valve Gear & Franco-Crosti boiler, surely its a Fiat?