The next newbuild

What a rubbish argument. Frames altered, valve gear altered, wheel arrangement altered, exhaust arrangements altered, drive arrangements altered etc. Anyone who thinks that 2001 and 60501 were the same loco had clearly been at the vino.

 

But the same connecting rods. And as everyone knows, those are the only true indicators of loco/class identity.

 

Yes it was. No. 18. And you could legitimately have one with both air and vacuum brakes, if you built it in turn-of-the-century condition. There is a photo of 596 so fitted in 1908.

 

If you'll forgive me for drifting off topic, this poses an interesting question: what 1946 numbers would the P2s have carried had they not been rebuilt as Pacifics?

Surely, it would have made no sense to number them with the A2s in the 5xx series. I suggest they would have most likely been slotted in between between the A1/2/3 (0-162) and A2 (500-539). Assuming the LNER would have wanted to leave space to allow for potential future Pacific construction, I reckon the 4xx sequence is the best bet, starting with 400 Cock o'the North.

So...60406 Prince of Wales?!

 

Is there any long lost class with outside cranks that could be recreated by using 08 wheelsets?

 

Maybe some GWR 0-6-0ST/PT, 1016 or 1076 say, but the the wheels are really a bit small, because although say the 1076 had 4'6" wheels when new, they went out to 4'7.5 when thicker tyres were introduced. But by the time you've converted to crank axles and got eccentrics on and all the rest of it, not to mention that the above were double frame, how much effort have you really saved?

 

Class 13

 

Not another NEW newbuild but ...
a much quicker win would be the already-90%-finished Bloomer at Tyseley. They are on record as saying that they would love to finish it but have to concentrate on maintaining their own operating locos and doing paid work for other organisations. With funding now being found for so many other projects, fund raising to finish the Bloomer ought not to be terribly difficult: it just needs someone to organise it. (But not me: I am not an organiser.)

 

If they had not been rebuilt as Pacifics, then it's a safe bet that would have been because Thompson never made LNER CME. I believe he was behind the 1946 renumbering so without his input, who knows what if any renumbering system would have taken place. Why this obsession with BR numbers anyway? The P2s as built were LNER locos and never carried any number than those there were given when constructed. This 2007 is more than appropriate for a Gresley loco.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I much prefer pre-1948 liveries and numbers. But I always find it interesting to speculate on the might-have-beens of railway history!

Indeed, the idea of Thompson never becoming LNER CME is an interesting proposition in itself. Who would be the most likely alternative?
One idea springs immediately to mind: what if the LNER had somehow persuaded Bulleid not to go to the Southern in 1937?

Under his leadership the 1946 renumbering - if it had happened - would have been very different...

But then, without Thompson or Peppercorn ever getting the top job, there would have been no A1s...and therefore no Tornado!

Nonetheless, I still say that this would be a good pretext for a Bulleid pacfic owner to paint their engine apple green or garter blue...

 

How do you know?...... I don't!

BUT then again, you might be right..............

But I get the feeling that Bulleid would've built what the board wanted, SO a Bullied A1 could very much have been on the cards, whether or not it would look anything what Peppercorn came up with is anyone's guess........

 

i think you would have got a 2-8-2 A4 with boxpoc wheels and semi streamlining , he would have used Gresley's designs as a starting point but have introduced thermic syphons and welded fireboxes

 

Maybe, or maybe not, we'll never know.............

But my gut feeling would be that he would initially toe the company line, and if his designs proved themselves he may have been given more of a free rein, BUT as somebody mentioned to me this week, he didn't see any project through to its natural conclusion - only completing 7/8's of the whole.......... ie NOT going back and ironing out all the flaws - don't get me wrong I have rather a large soft spot for Bulleid's, but I think the Southern just let him have a complete free rein as CME given his tutelage....

 

Bullied Mr. Druid? And you a BBLS member as well. Shame on you.

 

Post amended.

Call it fat finger syndrome, or watching the footie..... or both!

 

Not the ale then?

 

Cheeky sod, you've amended your post!


"Duty Druid


Post amended.

Call it fat finger syndrome, or watching the footie..... or both! "

"Not the ale them? "

I was going to say.......... and you???? Lol!

Lets just say yesterday was a very long and seriously hot one........ so fatigue most likely!

 

Getting back to subject, which ever new build is planned next, I hope it will be an engine built with the benefit of modern design and manufacturing techniques and which improves the original design. We need engines which can perform with reliability, economy, ease of crewing and maintenance, and also flexible enough to be used through the heritage/NR system. To provide an engine which proves the ability of coal fired machines to match the modern traction requirements, even if the speed abilities are discounted, would be the ultimate achievement in my book.

 

The problem is quite complicated. If you want a true new design build then you will find that there is very little support in the enthusiast community for such a venture. The production of an express passenger design that will totally eclipse any design that has been produced for the UK to date presents no great difficulty. However the enthusiast community that unthinkingly place their childhood favourite on a plinth, would never forgive the individual that financed the true new design.
Building a design that never survived into preservation is a totally different issue. So many deserving causes and so little time (or money). For those given to the mainline experience, the range of options is less substantial. And the question has to be asked about the long term future on the mainline without hugely improved engines. For preserved line use, well, what do you need? Or miss? Or more importantly what can you fund?

 

Which is why people build new Spitfires with 1950s vintage Rolls Royce Merlins rather than modern ultra efficient 21st century power plants. Whilst such a design may interest the engineers of the world, it wouldn't grab the attention of many others.