10 most important / noteworthy UK steam designs .your views and why

One of the ironies surrounding the adoption of effective automatic continuous braking is that much of the kicking against its introduction came from the wealthier or faster running lines. The L.B.S.C.R., neither wealthy or rapid was, by contrast, an "early adopter".

PH

 

With the density of London suburban services in the days before electric tramways, operating rakes of 4-wheelers with no continuous. brakes must have been "interesting". The chain brake (as adopted by the North London) was apparently quite effective, if a tad limited. The Great Eastern had pretty intensive services too, but I'm ignorant of their approach to braking before the 1889 Act.

Could you imagine the effect on braking if lineside vegitation had been allowed to grow as it does these days? It doesn't bear thinking about.

 

One of the main factors affecting todays tree infested railway is the almost universal adoption of disc and electrical braking, so nothing to clean the wheel tread. I would not be too surprised if a tread braked train would be little affected in the leaf fall season.

 

Indeed, and likewise the LCDR - even more impecunious, but prepared to pay the Westinghouse royalties for air brakes. By contrast, the so-called “Premier Line” was monkeying around with non-automatic vacuum long after they should have realised the game was up.

Tom

 

whoa!!! brakes are a new wormcan

trains would have multiple brake vans , and a "brake whistle" to alert the brakesman
the LNWR Clarke &Webb chain brake was an abomination , perpetuated by Richard Moon of 40 mph fame
braking on goods trains was scarcely worth the name . how the crews coped is a mystery
the companies all prevaricated against the vacuum brake , but ultimately had to comply
the above is a gross oversimplifaction of a huge (fascinating)subject . I feel thread drift coming on .

lineside vegetation was largely controlled by fires set by locos . I remember sitting on an embankment (frequently) in the early '50s among the charred vegetation

 

Absolutely so. With the current fashion for "revisionism" in looking back at railway engineering of the past, how long before we can expect a "Webb was right about brakes" campaign to start?

PH

 

I think different, though less severely. More to the point, vegetation control went with the emission of sparks, which is more or less inevitable with steam power.

 

1850-1899 locos proved quite a difficult challenge . here is my list .

Kirtley MR 0-6-0 from 1854 ish rebuilt and updated lasted to the end of steam

Ramsbottom DX Goods 1st mass produced loco . updated by FW as the Crested Goods , which lasted until early '50s

Gooch Iron Duke class 4-2-2 good for 80mph on the broad gauge
Ramsbottom Bloomer similar performance on the narrow gauge . contemporary with the Iron Duke class

Webb LNWR Jumbo . fast cheap effective - culminated in the KGV class of 1911

Dean Single ,3031 class . could have been the Stirling Single , or the Johnson Spinner , but the Dean is the best looking .

Dean goods . 0-6-0 . better than an Ivatt 2-6-0 ????? dunno but they lasted 70 years ish

McIntosh Dunalastair . 4-4-0 . transformed the Caley rebuilt and enlarged ,lasted till 1960

Jones Goods . 1st 4-6-0 and not a bad engine either .

Webb LNWR 1st heavy 8 coupled . lasted till the end .

Stroudley A class 0-6-0 Terrier . built for the LBSCR suburban traffic . and we still have 3?

Beyer Peacock tank family 1854 ,still building 100 years on . builders for the Empire .as did others , but pre 1899 BP were the boys

OK that's 13 but I wouldn't like to leave any of this lot out .

best designers not mentioned -W Kirtley ,Adams,P Drummond, J.Stirling

 

not with brakes he wasn't

 

When you look at the comparative trials done between LCDR and SER locos, and the subsequent design history of the SECR under Wainwright, I think you’d struggle to get James Stirling into any list that doesn’t have William Kirtley considerably higher up.

Tom

 

..... at least where the whole train enjoys continuous brakes!

 

not if you take into account his work for the GSWR

 

That would even things up a bit but IMHO Tom is still correct. We are able to make direct comparison between the capabilities of machinery produced by both men at the end of their careers.

PH

 

Skye Bogie would certainly make my.list of the ten most beautiful classes I wish had survived. But not the most useful. Personally I'm not so interested in new builds for the mainline, but for preserved railways, where people can actually afford to ride behind them. A small 4-4-0 is not the optimal type for that service, although for looks....

 

He certainly wasn't right about brakes. There is some evidence that Webb was turned against air brakes because George Westinghouse offered him a bribe (or at least an inducement) to introduce them. This story crops up on various accounts, but I've never found the original source.

 

Look , i've put WKirtley in front of J Stirling

are you happy now ?

 

I never quite believed that story. Railway companies would sometimes go to almost ridiculous lengths to avoid using someone else's ideas, particularly if this involved paying out royalties. As an L.N.W.R. employee, Webb would not have been entitled to royalties for the use of the chain brake on that railway but would get them from any other line that did. Thus it was certainly not in his interest to do any favours to a competitor with a superior, if more expensive, product and encourage its use by so doing.

PH

 

FW registered many patents -, as you say , the NW got to use them FOC if they wished .

not to sure how he would have fared with the Clarke & Webb brake tho . Clarke and Wilkins co .had designed the brake and FW modified it - probably to reduce royalties
The man who really resisted the use of a better brake , was Sir Richard Moon who was a strong believer in watching the pennies .Capt. Tyler had many harsh words regarding the chain brake
the vacuum brake when adopted was another Clarke & Webb confection

 

With regard to the sleeve valves fitted to the Paget locomotive and then to Leader, were there any big differences in the design? Or was it simply a case of "by failing to recognise the failures of the past and simply repeat them, you are again doomed to failure"?

 

When the Paget locomotive was being schemed out there was little, if any experience of sleeve valves in internal combustion applications. By the time the Leader was being designed, there was considerable such experience. Their use was largely confined to high end motor cars which is about as different from the grit strewn world of the running shed as can be imagined. An environment less suited to a device like a sleeve valve which required exceedingly precise standards of manufacture is difficult to think of.

By 1939 it was broadly true that those car manufacturers who had used them had either given them up or gone bust.

PH