A Southern Railway query

A friend of mine has asked this question elsewhere and I'm wondering if someone here may be able to help?

 

The second order of S15s was called A16 in the LSWRs eccentric system, but that, according to the not very reliable Wikipedia was 502–506. LSWR locomotives had their numbers prefixed with A after the grouping. Both would seem to offer scope for confusion.

 

Wasn't it the SECR locos that were prefixed with an A? A for Ashford, B for Brighton, E for Eastleigh? I could obviously be wrong; I'm not really that sure about anything that doesn't have a copper-capped chimney. And even there I know far, far, far less than you, Jim.

 

Correct for the period 1923-31.

From 1931, the E-prefix (Eastleigh/LSWR) was dropped, A-prefix (Ashford/SECR) locos had 1000 added to their number and B-prefix (Brighton/LBSC) had 2000 added.

I'm wondering if the apparent "A-class" designation for the S15 referred to a freight train loading or power class?

 

"A" was the power classification for S15's and I think H15's under the LSWR system.

Cheers, Neil

 

On the LSWR under Mr Urie there was a power classification, running from 'A' to 'K', plus 'Unclassified'.
For completeness: (Courtesy of RCTS and the late Don Bradley.)
A: H15; N15; S15; H16; G16; F13 (333 only).
B: G14; P14; T14; F13.
C: 700.
D: D15; L12.
E: S11.
F: K10; L11.
G: 0395.
H: T9.
I: C8; E10; T7; T3; T6; X2; X6.
J: A12; 0380; Beyer Double-framed Goods.
K: M7; T1; 0445; 0460; 046; 0415; Beyer Single-framed Goods.
Unclassified: B4; C14; F9 (The Bug); G6; O2; Beattie Well Tanks; 0330; Terrier 735; 0-4-0Ts 734, 0111, 0408 & 0458.
There was nothing eccentric about the LSWR class descriptions. The alphanumerics were the Works Order Numbers. (The S15s were S15 - 497-501; A16 - 502-506; C16 - 507-511; E16 - 512-515 & 496. O/Nos T15, B16, D16, F16 were for the tenders. Simples.) I have looked at a fair number of Eastleigh Works plans and it strikes me that the Drawing Office could have been getting down to it long before the Running Department came up with a list of numbers*. In any case the railway's own practice seems to have to refer to classes by number (S15s were 496 class, even though 496 was the last built.) Some classes were always referred to by class number due to having been built by outside contractors (so no Works Order).
The Brighton and the SECR used alphanumeric systems for their loco classes; I guess the SR wanted to bend the South Western to match.
* An interesting terminology appears on some drawings for 'H15s'. They refer to Engines of Groups H15 & K15 & Engine 335.
Pat

 

Thanks for the details of LSWR power classification.

The LSWR class numbering system had originated on the GER, pre-dating William Adams period as the GER loco superintendent (1873-78). Adams subsequently began to use it on the LSWR but only from the mid 1880s, several years after he had moved from the GER.

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/locomotives/classification

 

Yes. Don't know how the hell I managed that seeing as I had Holcroft's book open in front of me. Serve me right for straying south!

Reckon Neil has it. Power classification. I didn't see Holcroft mention that.

 

Mr Adams used it from 1879 for components (A1 was 5 sets of 16½ × 20 cylinders). The first new-build order was E1 in 1888 the Jubilee / A12s). No-one can answer the conundrum of why A12 'jumped the queue' as it were; a misunderstanding among the clerks in the various offices seems as good a guess as any. Mr Adams recruited James Reid from Stratford as Chief Draughtsman so he must have understood the system.
Pat

 

Though even there, there were different systems in use!

• Ex-SER locos used a letter for each type; and the SE&CR appended the suffix "1" when a loco was reboilered. So class A, B and F were three different types of Stirling 4-4-0, and B1 and F1 were two of those classes as reboilered by Wainwright.
• Ex-LCDR locos used the same letter for broader group of closely-related types, with sequential numbers for updated designs. So M, M1, M2, M3 were progressive iterations of the Kirtley 4-4-0 passenger loco, gradually increasing in size and power. They did not distinguish reboilered locos.
• Ex-LBSCR locos used the same letter for locos built for similar duties, regardless of how closely related they were. Later, the system was developed to add a numerical suffix to distinguish different classes, but they might be quite different in design but similar duties. So class B was for express passenger locos, and later subdivided as B1 (0-4-2 Gladstone's) and B2, B3 and B4 (various iterations of 4-4-0). They used an "x" suffix to indicate a loco that had been reboilered and / or significantly rebuilt, hence the A1x being a Stroudley Terrier fitted with a Marsh-pattern boiler.

Then you get bastardisations in SR days like the N15X, which I think was a Brighton drawing office man thinking "well this thing has been rebuilt so it must have an X, and it fits the same duties as a King Arthur, so must be an N15 - so it must be an N15X ..."

It always drily amuses me that a Bulleid Q1 is essentially a Maunsell Q with a new boiler, and so Ashford called it a Q1, SECR-style ...

Tom

 

On a tangent (possibly), what did the 'A' suffix indicate after the 7P 5F (for example) on SR-allocated loco cabsides? Was this a continuation of the LSWR scheme under BR?.

 

Brake capacity.

There were two - A and B, and were related to the stopping power of the loco for use with unfitted trains. (The nemonic is A = Awful, B = Better).

A Bulleid pacific was a 7P 5FA. A Billinton E4 radial tank was 2P 2FB.

Tom

 

The Southerns classifications were interesting and a bit random somehow I always thought. You got two different types with the same designation, two different R1 classes, and D1s. A few numerical ones, like 700, etc. Then with the EMUS they had a lavatory fixation, 2NOL etc.

The LNERs were very precise, the GWR s were numeric, based on the the number of the first class member, the LMS just didn't bother at all!

 

Weren't the LNER the only one of the big 4 that systematically reclassified all of its pre-grouping constituent locos (using essentially an extension of the GNR scheme?)

Whenever you are classifying things, the key point is "what problem are you trying to solve?". I suspect that that is why Stroudley classified locos based on capabilities, not design. In an era when locos were stripped down and rebuilt at overhaul using the same components, interchange hardly mattered, but "how many passenger tank engines do we have?" was easily answered - all the "Ds", whether "D tanks" (0-4-2T, Stroudley) or "D bogies" (0-4-4T, Billinton).

Tom

 

Thank you Tom .

 

As the GWR were the only ones not to have all their locos renumbered after nationalisation, they obviously had the best system.

 

No. The BTC just funked the pain of getting those cab plates off. Useful scrap if they had done .
Pat

 

I believe that the Adams "Jubilee" 0-4-2s wee also known as 527-class. It is certainly odd that they should acquire the Classification A12 instead of E1. As you suggest, perhaps someone misunderstood the peculiar system and assumed it should go A1, A2, A3 .... rather than A1, B1, C1..... Order No A12 should have been reached only in 1903-4, coming between Drummond Classes S11 and L12. Would have been appropriate for a batch of new boilers for the Jubilees, which by then were up to 16 years old.

H16 appears to be the final Class designation to be introduced by the LSWR under this system. The GER, who had been using the same system for longer and had a larger loco fleet, reached H88 in 1922 for the "Super-Claud" 4-4-0, re-designated D16 by the LNER.

 

Ostensibly the last LSWR new build was 755, the last Urie Arthur, built to Order N16, and their tenders to Order O16 (and turned out in LSWR livery). In reality there was a backlog of orders. There were 2 outstanding orders for rebuilding G14 and P14 classes to H15 spec; another for dealing with the 330 (F13) class. Consequently LSWR orders that carried over to be completed by the SR extended to C17.
From Bradley (op cit.):
L16 - Urie N15 746-750;
M16 - 5000 gallon tenders;
N16 - Urie N15 751-755;
O16 - 5000 gallon tenders;
R16 - H15 473-477;
S16 - 5000 gallon tenders;
T16 - H15 478, 521-524;
V16 - 5000 gallon tenders;
A17 - H15 330-334 (tenders reused from F13);
B17 - Eastleigh N15 453-457;
C17 - Eastleigh N15 448-452. (No idea about the tenders for B17 & C17).
E&OE
Given that this was Eastleigh's output in 1923-25 (less then 30) it is easy to see why the big order went to the Combine (NBL).
Pat

 

It would appear that the removal of number plates on GWR locomotives had little to do with BTC. Any GWR aficionado that the will tell you that the GWR carried on as though nationalization was nor fully relevant and therefore they carried on more or less as usual.