'Lew'

Just to add one thing to Gareth's characteristiclly excellent posting. We are not comparing a machine with C19th. draughting to one with the benefit of the latest ideas. No. 85 always steamed excellently but prior to modification was a noted fire thrower. Re-draughting enabled an effective spark arrestor to be fitted without impairing this capacity and also reduced fuel consumption.

Paul H.

 

Hi Paul,

Understand about the Irish NG six-coupled, which is why I said "about the first" - the screw couplings would have both prevented the breaking of inertia by starting each loose-coupled carriage in turn, the same 'snatch' which so often led to broken couplings and hence produced screw couplings! There may also have been the "fire-hose effect" on reverse curves, where the flanges would lock against the inside curves, with the longer the train the greater the effect.

The only way we will ever know for sure just what these locos were capable of is to build another. That was the intention of Project Yeo, to build another Manning Wardle in 1935 condition to aid our understanding (and give us the experience of being hauled by an original-standard Manning Wardle.)
Lyd is a fine locomotive, but as a comparitor it has no relevance.

Later locomotives improved upon the L&B design, but that does not mean that the original was poor, in the same way the Stephenson Stars did not rubbish Rocket!

 

Hi Roger,

I have nothing against your sentiment about wanting to build a 1935 condition Manning Wardle. The only problem I see is getting enough people to support that concept. LYD is the loco for the railway of today and we have a very different market to that of the old L&BR. I would like to see a fleet of Manning Wardle's for North Devon, but I can't see that happening unless I win the lottery.

 

Just to return this thread to its title role all that this search needs is time, money and people. Even though the L&B is going strength to strength with it rebuild we should learn either the whereabouts or the fate of this loco as if it is still in existence its a key part of history and as seen with the penrhyn locos she could be re imported, instead of a one man band search a group would probably get much further.
thanks
Patrick

 

All of which could be much better employed in view of their finite quantity.

P.H.

 

Isaac is coming along nicely at Blodge. If its sister Bagnall Gelert's performance up the 1 in 40 to Beddgelert a few weeks ago is anything to go by, it will be a very useful loco indeed for the L&B.

 

Thanks for the update Andrew. Any, even very rough, estimate of completion date for Isaac?

 

Amen to that. It's silly things like this particular wild goose chase that puts me off from the Woody Bay railway.

Sorry guys. Now, who wants to start a thread on the re-chassis'd carriages?

Andy

 

Good point, well put. Even if Lew was discovered, it would never run again, unless you wanted to throw away 90% of the loco, and thus destroy the originality. Even as a static item, the purchase transport, recondition and housing would swallow most of £250,000, and for what?
It wouldn't affect the profitability or otherwise, of the new L&B, and there are a lot cheaper and more effective ways of drumming up support.

As for the carriages, well, when I had my chance of influencing things at the L&B I strongly urged the remains of the coaches to be reconstructed, like Yeo, in 1935 condition. This was to provide continuity with the past. Beyond this heritage train format I strongly urged more powerful locomotives, and coaches like the Winson Welsh Highland vehicles, with corridors that trolleys can patrol, and spaces for 20th Century things like baby buggies for the day-to-day services.
The reconstruction of Axe, the rebuilding of coach 17 and the re-rebuilding of coach 7 were all initiated in 2003. With that lead-time in mind, one wonders how long before anything else appears, and whether it suits the longer journey times of Blackmoor - Caffyns.
Toilets?

 

Andy - it's a shame you're put off Woody Bay, when none of the folk running the railway are interested in wild goose chases such as finding Lew...
The amazing progress in the last year or two demonstrates we're none of us chasing geese

 

Unless you know of the whereabouts and condition of Lew, your statement about it can have no validity whatsoever.
Whilst I do not believe that the locomotive still exists after all this time, I see no wrong in anyone trying to prove or disprove its existence or what happened to it if they are interested in doing so. It is research and, by its very nature, much research will end up in disappointment or failure. Either way, it shouldn't stop people from doing it.

 

Unless you know of the "whereabouts and condition of Lew" your position, in turn, has "no validity whatsoever". It is spending money time and effort in searching for something, whatever its condition may be if it still exists, which seems incredibly wasteful to me.

The frames of an uncompleted Manning Wardle are in existence. Dare I say "get on with it"!

P.H.

 

I guess, as often with these types of arguments, it depends whether doing one activity ("trying to find Lew in the jungles of South America") cannibalises money that would otherwise be spent on another ("building a replica"), or whether actually the two activities are so different that they appeal to different types of enthusiast. My own gut feeling is that the search for the original is a romantic dream, but probably one that will appeal to very few people if it got beyond "that would be nice" into the realms of "give us some money". For the very few people who would go beyond romantic dream to actually fund a search, I suspect they are so committed to that end that they probably wouldn't be happy just funding a replica. So I doubt doing one is actually detrimental to the other.

That said, for any narrow gauge railway: their stated objective would be to "run trains". So while I'd be happy if a suitable railway chose to fund a replica as a means to that objective, I'd worry if one chose to fund a search. But no-one is suggesting that, are they?

Tom

 

A thoughtful posting as ever from this source.

However, an earlier correspondent has said he has been dissuaded from becoming involved with the L&B on account of the "Lew" speculation. I don't know whether the L&B has actually gone public with a statement along the lines of "nothing to do with us mate" but, if not, perhaps it is time they did.

P.H.

 

Thankyou Paul, you are too kind!

As I say: if one or two individuals speculatively want to hunt for Lew in deepest darkest Peru or wherever, then good luck to them, and I don't suppose it will materially affect any railway preservation or new build scheme in this country.

If on the other hand, a particular railway wanted to fund such a search - or even were assumed to be materially supporting such a search when in fact they weren't - that would be a worry.

Tom

 

Lew is worth more undiscovered.

the story value, the excitement for kids for adventure, the USP of the railway etc.
if it's found... Well it's found. No mystery, just a lump of rusted metal and no imagination.

 

I like the idea of Lew hiding in deepest darkest Peru, maybe it is shunting a marmalade factory sidings for a certain bear.......

 

Maybe they'll find Lew in those crates in Burma, instead of Spitfires...!

 

Turn up in most places and announce your looking for Lew, they will point you to the gents down the corridor.

 

Frankly, I don't think any of us felt this was necessary. Railways can't keep running out with statements to deal with things no-one but a few misguided folks thinks they are involved in - surely...? I am really, really gob-smacked that anyone could come out with a statement that they don't support a railway because of some speculation by people not associated with it about a long lost loco. D'oh!!