Current state of SR U and N moguls

I hope it is ok to group these five locos on one thread, but I am keen to know the current situation of them all.

Firstly 31806, that did so very well at the Spa Valley Railway Gala and following weekend, and I guess it is on its way back, or already back at Swanage after its use at the Mid Norfolk Gala last weekend.

I believe it had a boiler swap with 31874 to keep it in service, so does anyone know how much longer 31806 is expected to be operational under its current ticket etc please - usual caveats apply of course!

It will be great to see it out visiting near Kent again, but I do appreciate the very high cost of moving a tender loco around. Of course for me it is truly wonderful to see it as BR Southern Region 31806!

Then any updates on 31618, 31625, 31638 and 31874 if possible please. I have been to what I think are the relevant websites, but I wonder if there is any more recent news.

Many thanks in advance.

Bryan

 

31618 and 1638 are both in storage at Sheffield Park waiting for their overhauls.

31618 is planned to begin once the overhauls of Q 30541 and Schools 928 Stowe is complete

31806 has an active ticket (subject to usual caveats and annual inspections) till late 2030/early 2031

 

Was the three-cylinder U1´s timed faster than the two-cylindered?

 

31625 is/was tucked into a safe siding at Furzebrook on the Swanage Railway beyond Norden and just about visible if travelling onto River Frome and Wareham.
I remember seeing it when first arrived at Mid Hants around 1980 and travelled down to see a first steaming - around 96??

 

31618 is in storage in the Sheffield Park Carriage Shed. As mentioned above it is the intention of the Maunsell Society to overhaul this engine after the overhaul of Stowe has been completed in the late 2020s.

31625 is in storage. The engine is in the Imerys Siding at Furzebrook (opposite the oil sidings) and a potential tender tank is in storage at Arne Road RRI.

1638 is also in storage in the Sheffield Park Carriage Shed. Perhaps a candidate for overhaul after 1618 or 847.

31806 is the only locomotive in service, with the ticket due to expire in early 2031. As mentioned above, it was given a ‘speed overhaul’ in 2020/2021 after the N fell behind schedule. It has the boiler and tender from the N, giving it a slightly strange look with a narrow tender.

31874 is an interesting one. The frames and wheels are complete at Herston, and there is (unless it’s moved recently) a tender originally from 31806 in Swanage No 2 Siding. I don’t seem to remember hearing anything about the boiler from 31806 going for overhaul either.

 

Thanks one and all, some very interesting information. Nice that, all being well, 31806 has a decent ticket length ahead.

Bryan

 

Available sources suggest there was little difference between the 2-cylinder U and 3-cylinder U1 classes in performance - either speed or fuel efficiency. Both types could be rough riders at speed and were officially limited to 70 mph (112 km/hr), although sometimes recorded up to 80 mph. The 2-cylinder engines suffered much from frame cracking; some were fitted with new frames in the 1950s, but this was not found necessary for the 3-cylinder U1s.

These locos were not top-tier express engines but were sometimes used on fast trains, particularly in the 1930s - prior to more lines being electrified and prior to the arrival of Bulleid Pacifics. In the book "Southern Steam" by O S Nock, some fast run logs are included, mostly for the 3-cylinder engines and mostly on the line from London Victoria to Chatham. The book also has a photo of a U1 on an Eastbourne express - copy attached.

None of the 3-cylinder U1 engines has been preserved. Perhaps some forum members encountered them in their final days on BR?

 

I'm not sure what the future will be for 31874, and 31625, Whilst the mechanical overhaul of the N has been done, and finished for some time, the work on any of the boilers for it, has yet to commence, and of course, the big question is Money, money that the Swanage railway does not have,
All the other engines, are owned by trusts, or SLL, who of course fund the overhauls, Whereas the railway itself has to fund the boiler overhauls for the two U's and the N,
and on the face of it, donations appear to have dried up,
When the Railway took on the three engines, it was thought to be a good deal, but circumstances have changed, I suspect that 31806, will remain on the railway, until its ticket is up, but, the deal, if its like the one the MHR had, requires at least one engine to be operational, at the end of the loan arrangement so that means that one of the boilers, probably the one off 31806, will have to be overhauled, The one currently fitted to 31625 has issues with the barrel to tubeplate, join, either at the smokebox end, or firebox end, its clearly not right as the boiler when fitted to 31625 never fitted in the frames right, this originally being fitted to the N class, the original boiler that was on 31625, had a plate on the firebox side, that meant it would never be accepted for mainline certification.

 

Many thanks for your post.

I came across the various SR Mogul classes with some regularity on the Redhill Guildford Line when using the wonderful area 2 rovers, that covered London-Redhill-Guildford-Waterloo. On the Redhill-Guildford (Reading) route it was Ns and Us, and on all station trains the maximums I recorded were up to 60 mph. Annoyingly I missed a footplate ride one day as I only spoke to the crew after I left the train (an early one from Redhill) at Guildford, where they said they would have let me join them for most of the journey if I had chatted at Redhill.

I did have a very good run behind U class 31790 on a train I've never been able to identify - a 3 car train I joined at Woking that presumably had been an all stations from Basingstoke. I suspect a Basingstoke crew who grabbed the chance of getting out onto the up fast at Woking. A dreadful shame that we were not far behind another train as we got badly checked after a rip-roaring start I can still clearly remember, and checked again I think as we approached Surbiton - our stop there may have been a signal stop.

I photographed 31806 on an up Lymington Pier Express on a summer Saturday just after it had passed MP 31. I saw U1s occasionally, including once on a pick up goods on the Oxted line. Plus the N classes I saw on the Eastbourne to Tonbridge via Eridge and Groombridge trains. They were permitted to run from Grove Junction through Somerhill Tunnel to Tonbridge, but at a maximum speed of 40 mph; the Us were banned over that section: a good friend gave me that information a few days ago from his 1962 Route Availability Book!

Photos below: timing log of the 31790 run; 31806 on the up Lymington Express; 31900 up Pick-up-goods, Hurst Green Junction, April 1962: 31852 entering Groombridge, April 1962. That last photo shows why I was so very pleased to see a SR Mogul (31806) back on the Spa Valley Railway for the superb Cuckoo Line Gala a few weeks back.

Bryan

 

Thanks for your photos and recollections. The Maunsell Moguls played a substantial role in SR history and it is good that some have been preserved. They are also a convenient size for many heritage railway duties, so I hope that one or more will be kept in service.

The 3-cylinder N1 and U1 types, with their lesser width over smaller cylinders, were able to operate on the "Restriction 0" route from Tunbridge Wells to Hastings where the 2-cylinder N and U types were banned.

According to Mr Bradley's book on SECR locomotives, the majority of crews preferred the 2-cylinder locomotives, probably due to their fewer oiling points and simpler preparation and maintenance. The 3-cylinder types were thought better at starting heavy goods trains.

The different types of Maunsell Mogul tended to keep to discrete areas, with few sheds having more than one type. Attached is a chart showing the distribution in 1955, culled from an Ian Allan abc. The U-class were mostly at Western Section sheds east of Exeter, while the N-class were mostly Eastern Section but with a large batch at Exmouth Jct. The N1 and U1 engines were at Eastern Section London area bases. Some other sheds had allocations from time to time during the 1950s, but big changes followed the Kent Coast electrification of 1959-61. Many engines were displaced and withdrawals began.

 

So it must be the original 31625 boiler which had the patch that currently sits in 806's frames, as that boiler was very heavily overhauled by an outside contractor including a lot of work to the firebox. It was originally going to be fitted to the N but was instead swapped out with 31806's boiler that was overhauled at Ropley back in 2011.

 

Yes, thats correct, at the time when 31625 was being overhauled, and the decision was made that it would be registered for mainline operation, the original boiler which had a firebox patch, would not have been acceptable, so the boiler off 31874, was instead swopped, and it was this boiler that seemed to have the alignment issues in the u class, I'm wondering was 31625, ever derailed and twisted its frames? because its strange how the same boiler when fitted on 31874, never had stay issues, where as on 31625, it was plagued with stay issues and the boiler never seemed to fit true.

 

Did it go to Germany for repair by any chance?

 

Four N 2-6-0 shots .31855 arriving at Ilfracombe with a train from Exeter ./1952 . 31841 on 72A Exmouth Jnc shed .07/08/1955..31874 Mid Hants /1979.. 31806 Moorgates NY Moors.25/09/2015.

 

A pedant / peasant (take your pick) writes:
1806 is a U class (rebuilt K class).
Pat

 

I seem to remember reading somewhere that its the boiler that was on 31874 that is out of alignment, the barrel not square to the firebox. It was concluded that as it was a Woolworths (Woolwich Arsenal) that scrutiny over the build was not that good and that over the years 1874's frames had spread slightly to accommodate it. Really if 1625 is ever to steam again, the boilers should be swapped back or a very expensive rebuild of the boiler will be required.

 

I'd have thought it unlikely that 31874 carried the same boiler throughout its 39 years service life. So the misalignment explanation seems doubtful due to poor build quality back in 1925. Also the loco would have had quite a few General Overhauls over the years and any misalignment issues with the frames would have most likely been corrected. Don't forget also that 31874 had new front end frames back in 1957.
Without knowing the fitment history of the boiler and record cards, we won't know whether it had broken stay issues with other locomotives that it was fitted to prior to 31874 and subsequently 31625.