LSWR H16 tanks

Out of interest, how many boilers still exist for the S15s? There are seven locomotives in various states of repair. Only one is in use on the NYMR, and I have only seen one unrestored S15 boiler on a well-wagon when there are two other sets of S15 frames at Grosmont (30830 and 30841). Then there are the three boilers down on the MHR and that on 847, so I can only account for six boilers?

 

Dont forget there is a fourth S15 boiler belonging to 828 at the MHR.

If you moved a spare from the Urie group up to Grosmont then you would have two boilers and two sets of frames to match up, effectively replacing the one taken from 825 approx 32 years ago.

 

830's boiler is currently being worked on with a view to having it ready to go on 825 when required. 830's frames are less of a priority although some work has bee ndone on them, I believe.

 

That would explain it. So it seems we now have eight S15 boilers?

 

Well, the one on 847 was actually originally a King Arthur boiler (They were interchangable and swapped round at overhauls). So you could also add Sir Lamiel's to the mix, which makes nine...

But being serious for a moment - with all the engines owned by different groups, isn't it all a bit of a moot point - we aren't going to end up with a pool of eight engines and eight boilers and everyone swapping gaily between them to keep a core fleet in operation, are we?

Tom

 

I can only remember a patch fitted to the boiler on N class 31874 which is at the front of the fire box on the right hand side. But you could also be correct about the S15 boiler also having a patch fitted to it.

 

If my memory is correct, the original boiler off 30506 had seam defects than needed copper welding at the time that was thought to be uneconomic The boiler currently on 31874 was swopped for that from 31625 because the N had a better boiler, the patched one was off 31625 and as this would never meet mainline conditions had to be changed , only 31806 still has the same boiler that it was withdrawn with

 

Now you're mentioning another locomotive I'd like to see in steam... the N. I hope it does have its day again at some point in the future. Quite a revolutionary design for its time in that it was amongst, if not the first to dispense with a lot of the more 'showy' flourishes associated with Victorian and Edwardian steam locomotives.

 

Wasn't the first batch actually built by the SECR? i am sure i can remember seeing a works grey photo of the first N IN that livery yes they were the first real "modern" engine that company built

 

Yes, the first 16 were SECR-built, but one, 822, was modified to become the 3-cylinder N1 class during construction.

 

This thread is starting to drift onto things southern , prehaps its time to change the title to possible rebuilds of lost southern classes to allow a certain creep of subject?

Getting back to the N class, im shocked that one wasnt claimed by york when the last members were withdrawn,
31874 , whilst i would love to see her active again would need a lot of work, the firebox needs the patch removing and repairs to the inner copper box, ,probally a new box , the frames have a crack behind one set of drivers , and almost certainly will need the boxes and hornguides done and everything re aligned, given that the aggreement expires in 2014, there is no point in spending money and time to fix the defects if you dont get to keep the engine, if by chance, the engine were to stay after 2014, then thats a different matter

 

You shouldn't be shocked. The simple fact is that York (well the NRM, not the city!) didn't exist when the last N class was withdrawn.

 

OK, What i meant was that one wasnt saved for the national collection , being as they were the first engine that married midland design and GW thinking, ie long travel valves , and a tapered boiler, were they also the first mogol design with outside cylinders and walsherts valve gear?

 

I love the 'showy flourishes' of Victorian and Edwardian steam personally - each a declaration of confidence. Perhaps that exuberance vanished after a long and bloody war. but for me the inhouse styling of each company which made it possible to discern a LNWR loco from a LBSCR engine is what a significant part of fascinates me about the period - the corporate style.

 

It's a shame of course that an SECR N1 wasn't perserved nor a LBSCR K class mogul. Another fine engine with one almost saved by the nascent Bluebell if only they'd had the funds at the time.

Late SECR practice under Maunsell does look very similar to Deeley/Fowler practice on the Midland.

 

Each to their own. As an example, I'm personally not keen on smokebox wingplates put in for no reason, such as on the Drummond F13 4-6-0s, but don't mind so much when they are hiding a sandbox, such as on the M7; but then again, I believe the forward sandboxes were a later addition? Nor am I keen on the 'draw a line four foot above the rails and arrange everything around that' system that seemed to prevail in those days. No, give me 'naked' outside valve gear assembles any day, as I find them fascinating to watch when a locomotive is on the move. The one major exception to the rule is an unrebuilt Bulleid...

 

Gresley's K2/2s were introduced in 1914, beating the N Class by 3 years.
I must just say that this thread has been very interesting and informative.

 

The link was the chief draughstman (was it James Clayton?) at the time who came from Derby; hence a lot of the detailled design (which Maunsell largely left in the hands of the drawing office) bore something of a Midland feel. OS Nock compares the Ns very favourably with the GW 43xx class which were more or less contemporary and pretty similar in size, TE etc: similar principles in boiler design (even to the extent of the "dome" actually being a top feed, not a conventional steam dome) and valve events, but external valve gear making everything "getatable".

During the war, REL Maunsell was chairman of the Railway Executive Committee, looking at producing a set of standard designs. I think the N was chosen, but the scheme foundered. After the war, to prevent unemployment, the government got the Woolwich Arsenal to produce kits of parts for N classes as a way to prevent unemployment. Initially there were no takers at the price offered, though eventually the Southern took 50 of them at a knock-down price - hence the name "woolworths" given to the N class on the Southern. I think other parts ended up under some Metropolitan railway tank engines and others went to Ireland, so there is a confusing pattern of a big set of closely related engines - N, N1, U, U1, K, metro tanks, and an Irish design that all share a family likeness.

Someone with access to a refernece book can correct the details above!

Tom

 

And the W class 2-6-4T shared several components by re-using the K class bogies (after being subjected to a few modifications, such as brakes) and water tanks. Also used the same boiler as the K, K1, N, N1, U, U1 locomotives.