LNER V2s at Swindon Works.

Apart from the LMS who took Stanier and his skills and knowledge from Swindon.

 

or the Southern

 

I suspect the SECR learned quite a lot a decade earlier - took the basic Chruchward template and then improved it by making everything more easily accessible for repair and maintenance and with better cab ergonomics

Tom

 

I'll stand in the naughty corner gents!

 

But what did the GWR ever do for us.....

 

Mind you, even Stanier came to realise that not everything from Swindon was suited to LMS conditions. Low superheat and vacuum pumps to name but two items.

 

Exactly he learnt a key part of being a great engineer is to not be afraid to accept some ideas from others and reject others during his time with Churchward....

 

Is it time for another round of 'our CME's better than yours'?

 

From memory C1956 Trains Illustrated or Trains illustrated Annual, nothing else was available to me at the time.
After 60022 was exchanged for 60033 for the exchange trials, when Seagull arrived at Paddington from Plymouth the footplate inspector on board was heard to say "we have nothing to touch this"
I have very fond memories of 32 Gannet, 33 Seagull, 149 Amadis, and 156 Great Central heading north through Wood Green on train 266 down Scotch Goods to Niddrie, a wonderful sight and sound.

 

that's a spur of the moment comment from one person, not Gospel.

 

It would be rather sad if a 165 ton 1935 4-6-2 were not more capable than a 135 ton 1927 4-6-0.

But as Hawkesworth is reported to have said [Summers, Swindon Steam] there wasn't a need for a 4-6-2 to run the GWR services.

 

And as posts #38-40 on here have already noted somewhat more nuanced than it appears......

 

As the comment seemed to mainly relate to steam raising capacity (see posts 38-40) it was potentially due to the wider firebox, the narrow long firebox on the King always being its Achilles heel, I understand from anecdotal stories from my father that many BR (W) firemen were not fans of the king due to the firebox proportions and the problems therein.

 

A "spur of the moment comment" after Seagull's excellent performance over the Devon Banks and the climb of Hemerdon in particular. Given the parochialism of British railways, it's going some when a "foreign" loco gets praise from a top footplate man of a rival company.

 

it might not even be true. Not the performance, I mean, the quote.

 

I am afraid I find your response quite offensive. This is not a spur of the moment comment but something I have been thinking about for a few weeks. This was only my second post on this forum. I shall think long and hard before posting again.

Of course its not gospel for it to be that the participants would be approximately 130 years old.

I am merely trying to answer a question somebody raised earlier on this thread, you seem to be suggesting that I am making this up. I can assure you that I read this in TI in the mid fifties. I am afraid that due to their constant use the rusting staples and poor quality paper in those days these magazines disintegrated and were consigned to the dustbin by my mother many years ago.
By the way I come from Newton Abbott, in case you think that I have an LNER bias

 

Wasn't it true the LNER was close to bankruptcy by nationalisation ?, no point building huge new loco's if there isn't an operating need, unlike Grayrigg or Beattock which last for some distance, the South Devon Banks are short and stiff so adhesion is a bigger factor than sustained high output.

 

.....spur of the moment comment from the Loco Inspector .....

 

I think it's widely accepted that the Castle could do almost everything a King could. I guess it's why they were still being built in 1950 and there were only 30 (or 31) Kings.