'King Arthur' tenders

With the withdrawal and scrapping of the N15X 4-6-0s on the Southern Region of BR, I understand that a tender from one of these engines together with some from withdrawn Urie N15 4-6-0s, an H15 and an S15 were used to replace the worn out Drummond 'Watercart' variety coupled to the early 1925 Maunsell 'King Arthur' 4-6-0s in the 448-457 number series? I further believe that some of the later 'Scotchmen' may also have been re-equipped?
I have been trying to find out if a record was kept as to which 'King Arthur' inherited which tender from the withdrawn engines? I do know that 30451 'Sir Lamorak' inherited the tender from the N15X, but which N15X?
Anybody out there that can help? I would be much obliged for any information.
Cheers all
Sir Hectimere.

 

Hi saggin'
Possibly, that's one version anyway.
It must be remembered that 30453 was one of the early 1925 batch of the Maunsell Arthurs, a closer copy of the earlier Uries than the later 'Scotchmen.' As such 30453 retained the larger domed 'cathedral' type cab which was only acceptable within the range of the South Western lines of the Southern. These engines together with the Uries were very much out of gauge on the Eastern and Central section lines and we never had them. I would guess that the height of these cabs also precluded them from excursions on other main lines other than the GWR, (they often travelled to Oxford via Reading but no further). With the consequential low route availability this would have proved problematical in preservation terms, even haulage to York museum. The Ashford cab, fitted to the later 'Scotchmen' was within the gauge limitations of all three sections, and the main lines of other companies.
Cheers
Sir Hectimere

 

SIr Lamiel was also responsible for the fastest ever Salisbury to Waterloo run, wasn't it? Here is a photo of Sir Dinadan at Woking, taken from the bedroom window, and carrying the later type of tender.

http://nick301.photos.us.com/p39252666.html

Unfortunately my dad refused to mount the bed on stilts so I could see the trains without getting out!

 

I read somewhere that Sir Lamiel was regarded as one of the best of the N15s anyway, and that run to Salisbury seems to bear this out. It also has the 'Ashford' type cab, which was within the tolerances of the then new composite loading gauge of the Southern Railway. I'm fairly sure that the resultant increase in route availability over the wider railway network may have been taken into consideration in the 1960s, just in case there was a possibility of it steaming on the mainline again (notwithstanding the eventual 'ban').

 

That was the reason why 30777 was the one chosen for preservation. Likewise 925 was chosen because it was the mascot of the RCTS.

The list of Southern engines for official preservation was drawn up in the works managers office at Eastleigh, in response to a request by the late John Scholes, curator of the new Clapham Railway Museum that was being created. The T9 and 737 had already been kept back at that point. The rest of the list were personal preferences and obvious candidates. Although the assistant works manager at the time was an enthusiast and therefore gave a reasonably balanced view, and knew very well about the reputation of 777. I do remember him saying that there is no way he'd wanted to see an M7 on the list, but they succumbed to lobbying in the end and it was added on. It's possible another engine was removed from the list to make way for it, but I don't know what that would have been. One engine that was to have been preserved but didn't make it was Beachy Head, but it was cut up at Eastleigh by mistake, and that mistake wasn't discovered until several days after work had begun.

Another engine that would have been preserved was an L1, but because a closely related engine, was already preserved it wasn't allowed. A private buyer came forward who wanted the L1 that had been stored at Fratton. But he had already bought another engine and was short of funds. There was to-ing and fro-ing for several years before patience ran out and it was scrapped. Mike Johns, who is currently writing articles about Eastleigh was very involved in that, and maybe will give the story an airing in due course. 31625 was also a Fratton for a while, and may have been the one that was eventually dropped in favour of the M7, or may have simply have been dropped anyway. But all's well that ended well in that case because it ended up at Barry, and then the MHR. There was a lot of pressure to reduce numbers, because there was perceived to be no space to store the preserved engines. Not a new problem actually. There was a collection of old engines kept at Derby works in the 1920's and early 30's until Stanier discovered they were taking up valuable space and he had them scrapped. Again after Staniers time there were three LNWR engines at Crewe, all last of class including the last Claughton, which they scrapped simply because no knew what to do with them and they were in the way.

 

i wonder, are any of the tenders that are currently behind the s15s that are preserved former arthur tenders, i am sure that they got swapped between engines quite often , and as the arthurs were withdrawn earlier than the s15s, did the tenders get taken from withdrawn engines to replace some that had 6 wheel tenders (eastern section i believe)

 

I am sure there are ways of finding this out, but without the tender numbers and their original allocations as-built, it would be difficult.

 

I'm sure if I remember correctly, that there already was a railway museum at York, long before the NRM came into being, and also before The Clapham Tram Depot was considered?
Cheers
Sir Hectimere

 

Oops sorry saggin'
You've already said that haven't you?
Cheers
Sir Hectimere

 

Hi nickt
You could always spot an 'Arthur' that had been originally fitted with a six wheel tender. When latterly fitted with an 8 wheeled tender there was a distinct difference in the bottom of the cab height and the frame height at the bottom of the tender, perfectly illustrated in your photo of 'Sir Dinadan'.
Cheers
Sir Hectimere

 

Thanks Hecti. I am glad I got out of bed to take the photo! It was taken with a Brownie 127, so "perfectly illustrated" is rare praise indeed.

 

with the eastern section arthurs, what was the reason why some were fitted with 6 wheeled tenders, whilst on the south western most as far as i know had the urie / maunsel bogie type would it have been anything to do with the size of turntable that was normal for the former south eastern depots i ask this because i cant think of a single secr design that had a 8 wheel tender

 

Hi Martin
The 'Arthurs' normally associated with the Eastern Section of the Southern were also fitted with the standard Urie pattern 8 wheeled tender in the normal course of events. The six wheel tender variety were primarily for use on the Central (ex L.B.S.C.R) section whare a small engine policy had always been traditionally sufficient for their needs. Their turtables were indeed a little shorter than the Eastern and Western sections, and a large tender was also found to be unnecessary for the short main line runs associated with that company. A certain degree of crossover was inevitable when Central section engines were used on the Eastern section, but the reverse although not unknown, was not the norm.
Cheers
Sir Hectimere