Bluebell Motive Power

One they have come up with.

However - our first P class No. 323 is "Bluebell" (a preservation era name). The second (No. 27) got named "Primrose" and ran for a short period in the 1960s with that name. (The railway had the nickname, pre-preservation, of the "Bluebell and Primrose line").

The third P class (No. 178) got colloquially nicknamed round the railway as "Nettle" to continue the series slightly less flatteringly. It ran for a week or so with "Nettle" nameplates in wood, essentially a loco works in-joke, before running very briefly as "Pioneer II" (its name from industrial service) and then getting the final SE&CR livery.

So "Bramble" is a Rapido joke, but in keeping with other Bluebell locos. I'm not sure about the tender carrying the name though ...

Also worth bearing in mind that the LC&DR locos, which in the Martley era carried names but not numbers, included a series of passenger 2-4-0s named after flowers, which included "Violet", "Crocus", "Snowdrop", "Verbena", "Hyacinth" and "Bluebell".

Tom

 

I seem to recall 178 carrying those Nettle nameplates on one of the days during the 50th Anniversary Gala.

 

178 did run several occasions with the nameplates of Nettle, so quite possible they were seen during the 50th Anniversary celebrations.

During it's restoration it was actually given 2 proposed names, which were chalked on the side tanks whilst the chassis was in the pump house siding. One side was named Nettle and the other Wild Garlic. It gained the name Nettle as this was the side that was visible to the public when the loco moved to outside the works.

The nameplates are/were wooden replicas, based on the nameplates made for Bluebell and were made by one of the volunteers who worked on the restoration of 178. There had a magnetic strip on the back to they could easily be attached to the tanks and removed. I don't think the loco ever ran with the nameplates prior to appearing as Pioneer II as the transfers for this were only applied at the 11th hour during the 2010 branch line gala when the loco made a brief appearance on the Sunday in an unfinished state (i know this as I stayed late on the Saturday evening to help a member of the workshop staff apply the Pioneer letting).

I can't remember for sure but i think the use of the nameplates may have ceased due to one falling off during a trip up the line with a service train.

 

The 'Bramble' was my son's idea, he works there. They were trying to think of something in the same vein as Nettle

 

It's so good I was actually convinced that I'd seen it on a P Class at some point!

I actually think Nettle's a great name for a loco too - a friend of mine refers to Bottlegreen's Lime & Mint cordial as 'Nettle Juice' and I think it's gorgeous so my nettle associations are a little more positive than most!

 

I remember seeing Bluebell running with actual nameplates and wondered where they had gone to. Do I take it from this that they were wooden as well?

Steve B

 

I was thinking, if the Bluebell were to resume in house naming the steam locomotives could be named after flowers and the diesels after weeds. Nettle, Bramble, Japanese Knotweed, Giant Hogweed...

 

No Bluebell has cast nameplates which still exist (or certainly did at the point of the last overhaul). They were used as a template to create the wooden versions for 178. The Bluebell had nothing to do with the creation of the nameplates for Nettle. These were a personal project of one of the volunteers who helped with the restoration of 178.

 

Thanks for that - I didn't think I'd imagined it!

 

The only clear photos I can find of the "Nettle" nameplates are some on this page:

https://www.derekhayward.co.uk/BluebellRailway-1/Locomotives/Overhauls/178-Overhaul

This page indicates that it was in steam as "Pioneer II" at Branch Line gala in February 2010, and was launched officially into traffic in full SE&CR livery on 1 May 2010:

https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/locos/loco_wk_178.html

By the time of the 50th anniversary weekend in August 2010, No. 178 was running in full SE&CR livery:

https://www.herrmann.me.uk/photosrail/r20100807bluebell50th/index.htm

I've got a vague recollection of seeing it run with "Nettle" nameplates attached to the smokebox, but can't find any photos now, so I think it must have been very fleetingly.

(Not my photos).

Tom

 

Tom - I think your memory is correct. I believe we did try at one point attaching them to the handrail by the smokebox.

Changing the subject slightly, all this talk of 178 has made me think about the parts of a 4th P-Class that i think the Bluebell has. Am i correct in remembering that they have a set of wheels, a boiler and some other parts (side tanks maybe?). Is there any record at the Bluebell as to which P-Class they came from? I assume they were spares that Bowaters obtained and came with 178 when it moved to the railway.

 

I remembered that Bramble wasn't just a Bluebell loco 'name', I also thought it was the name of an Eastleigh driver I once timed a run behind on the up 'Club Train', the 19.15 Southampton to Waterloo. Called the Club Train as that was where many of us timing gricers would end up together in the rear coach after a day timing a variety of different runs back in the 1960s.

So I Googled 'Eastleigh Driver Bramble' and amazingly at the very top of the searches the name Ted Bramble was in the text of an Eastleigh fireman's web diary for his time there; 1966 to when the world came to an end.

I'm already off piste for this thread so I'll just put a link to that web diary here, and if a discussion follows maybe a kindly mod can start a thread for it somewhere more appropriate. For SR gricers from that era it is well worth reading

https://sites.google.com/site/railwayselsewhere/england-scotland--and-wales/eastleigh-steam

 

At least regarding the boiler, I doubt it could be anything other than the spare from Bowaters. There are 3 P-class boilers on the list of boilers on the Bowaters system locomotives, K5/17, K5/18 and K5/22, and it's presumed that the old (potentially 1910 built) K5/17 was scrapped and replaced, as K5/22 seems to have been acquired in 1961 or later (as the preceding K5/21, a Brazil type boiler was built in 1961).

 

From Klaus Marx' book on the P tanks... Pioneer 11. 'After some very quick negotiations following an inspection by members of the Bluebell's Locomotive department, it was sold and removed to Sheffield Park on 14 October (1969), arriving with some useful spare parts accompanied by a valuable spare boiler.'

On boilers he states 'No spare boilers were built' and 'no boiler changes occurring on any of these engines'. Boiler swaps have happened post BR withdrawal. 'Bowaters put the boiler off withdrawn 31557 onto 31178'.

31178's old boiler was fitted to Bluebell at some point and is now being changed again for the boiler off 31557 originally, if this is the boiler used when 178 was restored?

Bluebell did receive the spare set of cylinders (presumed off 31557) at its last overhaul as the tops of its originals were down to polished concrete. I remember seeing them in the works looking rather holey.

I think the spare set of wheels you remember were for Avonside 'Stamford' these came from Avonside 'Hartington'.

 

Thanks for the info on 178. It is quite possible we were misinformed at the time regarding the spare wheels. As for the boiler that 178 ran with during it's last ticket, it was the boiler which 323 arrived with in 1960. The spare cylinder block was fitted to 323 during the last overhaul.

 

..and its quite possible its memory failing me. I certainly remember a whole line of wheelsets between the coal dump and the containers alongside the old loco shed. 4 of those wheelsets being Avonside. It is possible there were another 3 being the spares from a P class.

 

As 178 (31178) is getting a mention here I thought it might be appropriate to add a photo of that loco heading 592 (31592) that I took on 23 Oct 2010. I only found it yesterday as I plough on with setting up the outline of the chapters for my SR steam loco memoirs.

And, out of repsect for all here and to those who work on and finance the wonderful collection of SR locos at the Bluebell I have shown their usual numbers, with my interpretation in brackets!

I'm rather pleased I pulled this photo out of my Bluebell 2010 photo folder, to me it says so much about that lovely heritage railway. It's very low res as usual, I hope it shows here ok.

Bryan

 

What counted for CMEs when selecting between a 2-4-2 or a 0-4-4 layout?
https://www.signalposten.dk/forum/images/uploaded/202107312041396105b5838615c.jpg
https://www.signalposten.dk/forum/images/uploaded/20220331231455624635ef206d7.jpg

A danish CME could not really decide

 

There were more examples. James Holden of the Great Eastern Rly built both 2-4-2 and 0-4-4 tanks:

https://www.lner.info/locos/F/f3.php
https://www.lner.info/locos/G/g4.php

On the North British Rly, Dugald Drummond flip-flopped between 0-4-4 and 4-4-0 tanks:

https://www.lner.info/locos/G/g8.php
https://www.lner.info/locos/D/d51.php

William Adams, successively CME of the North London, Great Eastern and South Western Rlys, similarly flip-flopped between 0-4-4 and 4-4-0 tanks, with the latter evolving into 4-4-2 tank on the LSWR.

On the Caledonian Rly, three successive CMEs (Brittain, Drummond and Lambie) used the 2-4-2, 0-4-4 and 4-4-0 tank.

Within Britain, the 0-4-4 tank was the most popular of the three options in terms of numbers built, which is why several have survived into preservation.