Castle & Star discussion ex Dean Goods thread

Going off on a bit of a tangent, how much work would be required to put a No1 boiler in some Castle frames and creat a "cut n shut Star" ?, the thought occurs that if people don't like the idea of sacrificing a Castle, that if it's not major surgery needed, it need not be a permanent conversion.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Tyseley explored that possibility many years ago and I believe still have the No 1 boiler (ex 28xx) earmarked for the project. The donor Castle has since been restored. IIRC the changes required and the reasons for abandoning the project were discussed here fairly recently. Ray.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Its significant: the Star frames were shorter at the rear and needed to be extended for the Castle conversions, so you would need to cut the rear of the frames and make a new drag box. There are also inside cylinder variations and frames to consider. The early Castles would require fewest changes, but are also the ones that are arguably most precious. Thornbury Castle->Thornbury Abbey would require a lot of changes.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

I wouldn't want Thornbury Castle to become a Star. Its the last surviving castle named after a location in Gloucestershire, which probably sounds a trivial objection to anyone who isnt a Great Western enthusiast who lives here. The Welsh are well catered for, gas axe one of them if you will.

Building an entirely new Star, well I think that ought to be considered. Its not like NRM are ever likely to let Lode Star be restored to running condition. As much as I admire and desire the recreation of a Dean single (or a 47xx) I cant help but think a new Star is rather more likely to come closer to paying its way.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

It does sound especially trivial if the proposal were to turn it into a Star named after a location in Gloucestershire. However my understanding is that its the last surviving Castle that the owner fired in his young days, which is a much more cogent reason why a conversion is unlikely.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Fair point, but he isnt getting any younger. Sooner or later the remnants of that locomotive, if he doesnt restore it first, will end up in someone elses hands. Id rather they restored it as a single Chimney BR built Castle, which we dont actually have in preservation.

Hmm, still wouldnt be happy about it. I can entirely understand why Didcot kitbashed a Hall to get a saint, particularly as one of the latter didnt even exist. You cant really use that excuse for a Star. If the requirement for a star is that bad, lets barrage the NRM to let Tyseley have a go with Lode Star.

Besides, the last Stars were named after Abbeys, none of which was in Gloucestershire. Malmesbury Abbey I think was the closest. A trivial reason perhaps, but considering how synonymous the Castle was with the Cheltenham Flyer, it would be good to retain one named after at least one castle in the county of its origination, if only for reasons of pure sentimentality. Half of the others are unpronounceable. I mean, just how do you pronounce an Edgcumbe anyway?

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Be patient! The boiler is there ready, and sooner or later one of the Castles will need a new cylinder block and wheels as their originals wear out. Once the patterns exist for components needed for repairs they'll be available for new builds. New frames are relatively trivial, as are the various other bits. Note I used the word "relatively" before jumping on me!

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

And by then the young team who have cut their teeth on the "simple" Dean Goods new build will be ready to take on the more complex Star new build

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

How many stars tho? We have plenty of no1 boilers on 28XXs which will never steam. Build 4 stars at once and you could have a mix of stars/abbey's. One for tys, one for Didcot, one for gwsr and one for wsr. Lol. Ok thats probably over the top now.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Not sure that's what railways mean when they say they'd want a Star Loco

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Lets not let our enthusiasm run away with us The Stars were wonderful locos in their day, and it would be good to see one out, but on the mainline you'll be better off with a Castle - especially if you're the loco crew - and on a preserved line better off with a 28.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

A Castle in theory has more sustained power, but I do sometimes wonder if its as much as advertised. For example, I do recall someone mentioning that a Star (or was it a Saint?) once equalled the time of Tregenna Castle on the Cheltenham flyer. Im sure a lot depends on locomotive condition, and skill of firing, but it does make you reflect on what WA Tuplin once wrote, that he wasnt sure that the GW didnt build a better locomotive than a Saint....

I guess worst comes to worst, you can always double head with Lady of Legend on Railtour.

If we are discussing small GW locos for work on preserved lines, what others might be suitable? Perhaps a 470 would be a good idea, particularly as elements of them can be measured off surviving 14xxs. 16xx Pannier tank? Always thought it regrettable that more of those didnt survive.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

The Castle has a bit more boiler power and a bit more room in the cab, which is no bad thing in these days when there are more than two on the footplate. A Castle with a Std7 boiler would be better of course, but it was never built...

To drift durther off topic, I reckon you can make a good argument that the first batch of Castles were never intended as a separate class - they were just a further batch of Stars with an uprated boiler and a bigger cab. The numbering was of course just the next batch of Stars, and even the naming was compatible with that used for the Stars.

However given Felix Pole's gift for what he called propaganda, the rest was history[grin].

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Yeah the more room in cab may turn out to be very important, particularly if in cab signalling gets any more extensive. At the very least you are going to have to consider making it waterproof.
You may well be right at that. I gather the first attempt at making something akin to a Castle was by Churchward himself. He apparently considered mounting a no7 boiler on a Star frames, and got foiled by the GWR permanent way department. One wonders what he would have called it. Supposedly Kings were due to be named after English Cathedrals if I remember rightly, till Pole suggested that something more regal would suit the publicity department when on tour in the US. He was probably right.

Ive often wondered if a replica of 'The Great Bear' would prove feasible for modern railtours, particularly in light of drawings of its boiler turning up at the NRM. Alright, the cab is hopeless, but there is enough development room in the boiler to perhaps get 225psi out of it. Presumably the main limitation would be to come up with something that would fit under the GWML electrification.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Weght diagrams certainly exist for a Std7 boiler on both the Star and 28 chassis. It seems to me that Churchward may well have known that the structures people were working to a new 22ton axle loading limit when replacing bridges: after all if the pressure to increase the limit didn't come from him, then from who else? From working in a large organisaion myself I can easily imagine the heads of the locomotive department and structures department getting together and agreeing a new limit to future proof the organisation, but not telling the bean counters and the general manager because such people have a habit of expecting a return on the investment immediately. If it was being kept a little quiet that would explain why Pole was in ignorance of the new weight limit. [are folk familiar with the tale Pole tells in his book,or should I post it?]

The boiler proportions are right up the chute: you'd need to start again. When you compare the boiler proportions with what was shown to work later on its all out of balance: the tubes are far too long and the heating area in the box far too low. The wide firebox seems to need the combustion chamber in front to increase the heating surface and all the rest of it, as Stanier found. Ironic really in that Churchward had that feature on his first wide box design with the Krugers. Another thing that's striking when you look at the numbers for the Bear as built was that she had a colossal superheater for the era, although it was considerably reduced later.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

My father worked inside in the late 50's early 60's used to spend a lot of his lunchtimes speaking to the trials drivers etc. He always says that when you spoke to them they loved the castles, but would go al misty eyed over how good the Saints were!

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

It was interesting watching a BBC film on Swindon in the early 60s featuring Sir John Betjeman discussing the development of the GWR, and the effect of 'modernisation' upon it. One chap was talking about locos they build and nearly 10 years after they withdrew and scrapped the last one, and he was still talking about 'how good the 29xx was'. Im so looking foward to seeing Didcots example done. It will be good to see what the fuss was about at long last. Hopefully they will run it on the mainline at some point.

Fair point JimC. It would be interesting to see if an improvement could be achieve in similar dimensions, but it would be a terribly expensive experiment to find out.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Jim C post though implies the cylinder block is different between the Stars & Castles?

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

Yes I too am looking forward to this! The Saints inaugurated the 'Cheltenham Flyer' , but cant remember for how long without looking it up.

 

Re: GWR 'Dean Goods' no. 2516 - suggested restoration in Steam Railway issue no. 401

the cylinder block is even different between Castles and Castles isn't it? Or is that just an external casing? Certainly 5013 up were externally different on the inside cylinders... Or was that just cosmetic?
I'm no expert, but reading through RCTS there were inside and outside steam pipe Star outside cylinders, presumably eventually varying between 15" and around 16" depending on state of rebore. Castle cylinders started at 16", but I don't know if the cylinders were the same castings or new. But the original Star cylinders were 14.25", I find it hard to believe that there was enough metal to bring them out to what must have been around 17 on a end of life Castle cylinder, so surely they must have changed the castings at some time at least once?