BR Standard locos

Morning All

With the new format offered by Smugmug i have started sorting out the steam collections into a more viewer friendly appearance

Final collection is the BR Standards section these can now be viewed by Loco class
Just click on a collection to view

Britannias
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias

Duke of Gloucester & Standard Clans
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Duke-of-Gloucester-Clans

Standard 4-6-0 locos
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Standard-Class-460

Standard 2-6-0 locos
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Standard-Class-260

Standard Tanks
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Standard-Class-Tank-Engines

9F’s
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/BR-Standard-9F-2-10-0-92

Austerity WD class
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/WD-Austerity

Neil

 

I'm a little unsure whether to put this on here, the Hengist thread or the Duke of Gloucester thread. I'm sure a moderator will move it if it is inappropriate to post it here.

After the first 10 Clans were completed names were allocated for the proposed next 15. 72010 being Hengist and further "proper" Clans from 72015 onwards. Not withstanding the destruction of 46202 at Harrow and Wealdstone in October 1952 allegedly created the reason to build the solitary BR standard class 8. Were any names proposed for further Class 8 engines i.e 71001 onwards? Or can anyone suggest an appropriate selection.

Additionally was any reason ever given for 70047 never being named?

 

There were no plans for further "Duke" Class locos because it was built as a replacement for LMS 8P 4-6-2 46202 Princess Anne which was written off in the Harrow crash of 1952. Up to that point the LMS had sufficient Class 8P locomotives and - at the time - it was considered a cheaper option to build brand new rather than seek to repair a badly damaged locomotive.

The intriguing question - which I have raised before - is whether Harrison (an LNER apprentice) designed the LMS loco to be designed on LMS or LNER principles within the general framework of "standard" designs initiated by Riddles.

 

I believe Riddles, given a free hand, would probably have built more Class 8 Standard Locos. 71000 was a prototype and whilst undergoing some testing cant have been properly assessed otherwise the firebox dammper issues would have been found. 71000 does have shortcommings, as may prototypes have, which would no doubt have been resolved in series production.

That no series production was done has as much to do with the publication of the Modernisation plan im 55 less than a year after 71000 completion, than any shortcommings. The plan heralding the premature demise of the steam loco on the railways of Britain. The plan effectivly scuppered any notion Riddles might have had to furthur develop his standard designs.

 

I'm not sure that Riddles would have developed the Standard designs given that he actually supported electrification. In the early days of BR there was little money to spend and faced with an immediate demand for locomotives to make good losses incurred during WWII he had 3 choices; of the 3 choices available he reasoned (1) diesel was in the early stages of development and needed further testing; (2) electrification was a costly process to implement given the necessary infrastructure costs that would be incurred; (3) steam locomotive technology was immediately available and giving the work to BR workshops would help employment as well as retaining expertise.

Although Riddles hoped steam traction would last 40 years he also hoped that Government funding would become available within that time to then replace steam traction by a continual process of electrification starting with the WCML.

Even the BTC only adopted diesel traction as an "interim solution" until funds could be released to allow electrification with expectation that once proved on the Crewe - Liverpool / Manchester routes electrification would extend to London then northwards to Glasgow and the WCML expected to be fully energised by the mid 1960s.

Sadly Government interference, including the malevolence of Marples as he sought to expand road / motorways at the expense of financing railways, saw all plans go awry and Riddles didn't live to see the electric railway network he really wanted.

 

Fred - I totally agree with your take on electrification. Arguably the only region that got it right was the Southern. Maintain the steam service which was a known quantity and, apart from the odd few, go straight from steam to electric (Bournmouth Weymouth was an exception and Salisbury route dictated by WR)). Interestingly it was only the GWR/WR who had not experimented with electrification.. The other 3 had at least some electrically worked services at nationalisation.

If EE had not developed and tested the Deltic what would have happened to ECML passenger numbers. Many of the diesels otherwise available were either underpowered, unreliable or both. The WCML north of Crew was arguably only saved by the 50s prior to the much delayed electrification to Glasgow.

To compete railways had to accelerate their services and higher power outputs were requred on many workings so if steam had been retained I believe more class 8s would have been required for secondary services. To an extent this has been realised with what remains of passenger loco haulage in the hands of above 2750HP locos (typically cl 47 or better) , equivalent to class 8 steam.

 

I think only "partially right" in that history has proven that 25Kv OHLE is the way to go. Having said that the state of the art wasn't as well developed when the Southern's 3rd rail system was being rapidly implemented.

Even the Deltics were not without their faults. It took a long long time before they produced their hoped for 3300HP reliably.

But would those class 8s been more of the 4-6-2 71xxx family or perhaps a 2-8-2?

 

Louis - agreed 25kV AC is technically superior to 750DC but OHL systems have their weaknesses if unsuitable catenary systems are deployed. See the problems which the ECML has had with dewiring incidents. However the question posed is I think should the 3rd rail system have been extended?

The Southern Railway inherited the LSWR 3rd rail DC and LBSC AC OHL and the SECR proposal for 1500DC side contact. The LBSC system used German equipment, a political problem. SECR proposal was just that. This left 600V dc as the pragmatic choice (voltage increases would occur as power consumption increased) for electrifying the suburban commuter network on all 3 divisions during the 1920s. The question is should Brighton have got the third rail? The answer for compatabiliity with the suburban network is yes. Trying to run two systems on the same tracks is frought with difficulties. These issues reared their heads again when Thameslink was opened and there were massive issues imunising the systems and the signalling from each other. I was told at one time the southern was earthing the whold Bedpan line.

Having extended the 3rd rail suburban services into west Kent, Sevenoaks, Gravesend etc and given the SECR restricted loading gauge doing the Kent Coast electrification in 1959 to 61 in 3rd rail DC was probably the cheapest at the time as no significant civils are required. The system can also deliver the power, at a cost, with 3000HP available for the typical 12 car train.

We now have Kent, Sussex, London and most of Surrey electrified 3rd rail. Whils arguably a pragmatic choice going to Bournmouth 3rd rail starts to make sense. at the time. Most new SR stock with the EP brake could inter operate so extending this interoperability west again maks sense, as a pragmatic decision.

Perhaps without WW1 the LBSC system would have been extended and eventually raised to 25kV. We will never know.

 

I suspect the "electrification" discussion may be worth a separate thread as there seems to be a good discussion developing that detracts from the original discussion re Standard steam locomotives. The introduction of electrification to that thread was that Riddles wanted electrification which the BTC / Government couldn't afford, the railways needed new locomotives urgently to replace war losses therefore political needs called for steam locomotive orders which Riddles accepted by designing the Standard classes and neither Riddles , BTC or BR ever saw diesel traction as anything but a stop-gap solution until full electrification.

Sadly this was another case of Government short-term planning as had the changeover taken place during the 1950s there would be less problems today about the construction of either HS1 or HS2; perhaps Marples would have been unable to hi-jack Transport policy for the benefit of his road construction company ( another discussion thread separate from the original ?) but we are where we are and can only consider what might have been - i.e. would the Duke ever have had his Duchess ?

 

Just how many locomotives (steam) did the railway loose during the war? The loss of 4469 Sir Ralph Wedgwood along with B16 925 in April 1942 during the Baedeker raid of York is well documented. How many others were complete write offs? Of course, some were exported never to return; but some did.

Perhaps a good choice of Class name had a BR Std 2-8-2 been developed. Now we're in the realm of "might have been"; what number range would those 2-8-2s have carried?

In answer to "Growing OLD is unavoidable". But it's better than the alternative.

 

The 2-8-2 if developed would still hve been intended as a general purpose loco, would probably have been Lined Black ( except on the western region), would probably have been unnamed. The numbering is anyones guess as there are gaps in both the 7x,xxx and the 9x,xxx series. As originally conceived the 91xxx i guess. but developed along Riddles later thinking ( 20 inch cylinders, caprotti, 5foot 6"+wheels) perhaps not...

 

The standard Programme was not just to replace war losses but also to eradicate many of the pre-grouping designs which were still at work. Stanier had already started this with his Class 4 2-6-4T; Class 5 4-6-0; Jubilee Class 5 4-6-0 and Class 8 2-8-0 which were designed to replace many of the pre-grouping designs; the 2-8-0 in particular to replace many of the 0-8-0 designs. On the Southern Region the BB/WC was designed as a "standard" class to be replacement for the many small classes of various wheel arrangements inherited from the pre-grouping companies; their use on main line duties (both freight and passenger) was thought to justify the excess of branch line operation as often occurred on services in Devon and Cornwall. On the Western Region standardisation and re-cycling were already by-words in the Swindon engineering lexicon.

The LMS was by far the most up to date on "modern" locomotive design and therefore it was no surprise that the Stanier 5 was remodelled to create the 73xxx series, the Ivatt 4 2-6-0 remodelled to create the 76xxx series, the Ivatt 2 2-6-0 remodelled to create the 78xxx series, the Ivatt 2 2-6-2T remodelled to create the 84xxx series and the Stanier 4 2-6-4T remodelled to create the 80xxx series.

Sadly the 2-8-2 was melded into the 2-10-0 after Riddles experienced the German 2-10-0 designs in post-war Europe and - I suspect - that no 2-8-2 would be built despite Riddles' original promise to do so.

The background to much of the Standard class design was the hope of Riddles to oversee electrification in the knowledge that the high up front (infrastructure) costs would need external (Government) funding that might not be made available but the need for locomotives was current and had to be met. Sadly most commentators tend to ignore the critical state of the economy in the immediate post-war years; shortages of capital restricted many investment projects and the railway's need for locomotives was only one of the demands for Government funding that could not be met.

If there is any question regarding the Standard classes, I think the rationale (if any) of the Clan 72xxx 4-6-2s is one that merits consideration especially when the 73xxx series proved such an excellent machine; perhaps a Pacific version of the 73xxx might have been a better option than a less powerful Britannia design.

 

I'm curious as to what the benefit of that would be. Surely the benefit of a pacific over a 4-6-0 is primarily the ability to use a wide firebox? In which case a 4-6-2 version of the 73xxx with the narrow-firebox Standard 5 boiler wouldn't present much advantage; and building one with a new boiler smaller than a Britannia is, well, pretty much what the Clan was, wasn't it?

Tom

 

The Clan design as originally conceived was just that, a class 5 4- 6 - 2 quite quickly identified as being a bit of a white elephant
As a design in its own right there is nothing wrong with the Class 6 Clan, but apart from its lighter axle weight as a USP there wasnt much of a gap between the Class 5 and the Class 7 for it to fill.
Fortunately for the Britania class the Chassis was just about strong enough to handle its large cylinders for the 10 years or so service they gave. It could be argued that the Brits would have been better as three cylinder 'almost class 8' machines and the Clan design pitched to be 'almost class 7' but hindsight and conjecture are at the end of the day just that.

I dont know that Riddles ever promised to build the Bond/Cox proposed 2-8-2 during his tenure, but his hindsight was that such a machine would have been an ideal for Block fitted freight and Passenger services on a system where all traffic needed to be moved at higher speeds, just as Bonds hindsight was that the 2-10-0 was the right loco for the time

 

http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-7BG6VXj = Crewe
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-xRCvksW = 31B March depot
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-5dsjr8D = Doncaster
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-vctkKzc = 70005 John Milton at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-w4dDGzT = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-f7k9FjN = 70006 Robert Burns at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-TLXbmmZ = 70006 Robert Burns at Southport
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-GdtcWfJ = 70008 Coeur de Lion + 70000 Britannia at 31B March depot
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-VbpCXTk = 70009 Alfred the Great at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-W2hCxbL = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-Z3sSgZs = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-TbjSFNk = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-kZTQz9D = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-QPtwP8p = as above [duplicate entry ?]
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-PTC9DD5 = as above [duplicate entry ?]
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-zjhKfT5 = 70010 Owen Glendower at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70000-70010/i-xxcvD47 = as above

 

http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-QdzgBVk = 71000 at Crewe Heritage Centre
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-BmchjMd = Crewe Works Open Day
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-g7hGGgk = Old Oak Common ?
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-jtqZTFD = as above ?
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-W4hmWsR = Loughborough Central [GCR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-b8zhxXq = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ster-Clans/71000-Duke-of-Gloucester/i-VzhtGqf = Carnforth [WCRC]

 

http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70021-70030/i-8Z5KphP/A = 70022 Tornado at Birmingham New St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70021-70030/i-tHMCFCD/A = 70023 Venus at Preston
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70031-70040/i-bVXTKq6/A = 70031 Byron at Crewe
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70031-70040/i-rxVNSX4/A = 70036 Boadicea at Kings Cross [Kings Cross - Cleethorpes]
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70031-70040/i-XQq7T3H/A = 70037 Hereward the Wake at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70031-70040/i-ZHZ8JbN/A = 70039 Sir Christopher Wren at Grimsby [Kings Cross - Cleethorpes]
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70041-70054/i-rn3vTd4 = 70041 Sir John moore at Liverpool St
http://railway-photography.smugmug.com/BRStandardSteam/Britannias/70041-70054/i-F4CJr8G = 70041 Sir John Moore at Kings Cross

 

http://railway-photography.smugmug....ss-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0-73/i-4bJzxbW = Ropley [MHR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ss-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0-73/i-56m2pZd = Cowlairs Bank ?
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ss-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0-73/i-pm45rX4 = Edinburgh Waverley [Edinburgh Princes St (CR station) open at time thus need to differentiate]

http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-L9jK4z5/A = Paignton [P&DR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-p3wXtps/A = Glyndyfrdwy = Llangollen Rly
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-NKLjfGg/A = 75069 at Highley [SVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-Gh8Hcxd/A = 75078 at Haworth [KWVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-M9cVpg4/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-jXJNPCX/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-jzzshsL/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-6RKVwNW/A = 75078 as 73081 at Haworth [KWVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-WRw2T4L/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-3phjP3f/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-hwQBGWV/A = 75078 at Haworth [KWVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-z7jFmsz/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-hpjp4KP/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-mbLBqJ9/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-JrZ4ZXQ/A = asx above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-rpFWp8X/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0/i-WtdnhfJ/A = as above

http://railway-photography.smugmug....-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0-75/i-JVdhJvz/A = 75063 at Kettering
http://railway-photography.smugmug....-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0-75/i-qS8ZNMk/A = 75078 at Waterloo
http://railway-photography.smugmug....-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0-75/i-LG8bG6N/A = 75077 at Basingstoke ?
http://railway-photography.smugmug....-460/BR-standard-Class-4-4-6-0-75/i-QvnFW4v/A = 75078 at Basingstoke ?

http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-zRmrLvv/A = 73050 at Orton Mere [NVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-PPpzKpX/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-3vj8HQF/A = Near Wansford [NVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-XQ2Kz49/A = Wansford [NVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-Ts4bQWt/A = 73129 at Midland Railway Centre Butterley
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-460/BR-Standard-Class-5-4-6-0/i-g5jGbCv/A = as above

 

http://railway-photography.smugmug....andard-Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0-76 = 76001 at Ayr
http://railway-photography.smugmug....Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0/i-sx7tRhk = Bury Castlecroft [ELR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0/i-wvqzBjj = Swanage
http://railway-photography.smugmug....Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0/i-WGr9tdG = Hampton Loade [SVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0/i-bKxb8fT = Newton Abbot
http://railway-photography.smugmug....Class-260/BR-Standard-Class-4-2-6-0/i-b85jxPL = 76079 as 76022 at Appleby

NOTE : Some of the images have been loaded more than once !

http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-7r8CMd4/A = 78022 at Haworth [KWVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-MbhzwPL/A = 78019 at Loughborough Central [GCR]http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-fdLknH8/A = 78019 at Barrow Hill
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-T372Q7f/A = 78019 at Loughborough Central [GCR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-h2W6jr9/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-NcHNMPW/A = 780129 at Quorn & Woodhouse [GCR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-6GfF7B7/A = 78019 at Loughborough Central [GCR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-HTpNzNk/A = 78022 at Haworth [KWVR]
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-vQqWPKw/A = as above
http://railway-photography.smugmug....ass-260/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0/i-NcXfN7m/A = as above

http://railway-photography.smugmug....60/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0-78-1/i-qGQvrfp/A = 78041 at Southport
http://railway-photography.smugmug....60/BR-Standard-Class-2-2-6-0-78-1/i-57SQ24p/A = as above

 

The second & third ones from the bottom stated at Loughborough Central are in fact at GWS Didcot.