If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

LSWR T3 563

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by nick813, Mar 30, 2017.

  1. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    62,487
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Yes, quite common for passenger locos of that era only to have a single link at the front end - they weren’t expected to haul trains in reverse! Couplings both ends even on passenger locos became more common in the early years of the twentieth century.

    Here’s a loco of similar era from a quick search: https://flic.kr/p/2mfKoXY

    Tom
     
  2. Dunfanaghy Road

    Dunfanaghy Road Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2019
    Messages:
    1,358
    Likes Received:
    1,718
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Alton, Hants
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    It was certainly a LSWR thing. 3 photos (courtesy of Bob Urie):
    335 at Nine Elms 1907 (Mr Drummond's Turkey);
    335 at Eastleigh 1914;
    492 Eastleigh 1921 (on the back of a shunting loco.!).
    Pat
     

    Attached Files:

    Jamessquared likes this.
  3. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    62,487
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The three main constituents of the SR all did different things on their main passenger locos.
    Going further back, the LCDR used a three link screw coupling - see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCDR_M3_class#/media/File:LCDR_M3_class_No._23.jpg I think what became the SE&CR and then SR pattern four-link screw coupling comes from the SER, via Wainwright and then Maunsell taking it on as a standard design. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SER_A_class#/media/File:SER_A_4-4-0.png (not super clear, but on a front line express loco).

    Tom






    Tom
     
  4. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,766
    Likes Received:
    5,744
    How do you use a single link coupling? I would think it easiest to ignore it and use the coupling of the other vehicle.
     
  5. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,661
    Likes Received:
    7,717
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    The only use I can see for any of the single links is if you needed to rescue the loco by towing it with a rope/witre
     
  6. Spinner

    Spinner Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    238
    Occupation:
    Public Servant
    Location:
    Australia
    The T3 has drawhook couplings at both ends. How else could it run as second locomotive in a doubleheader? By what means could it haul empty stock when running tender first. The single D Link on the coupling hook is merely provided to give a weight to hold the screw coupling or 3 link coupling onto the drawhook.

    It is the same for any other locomotive.
     
  7. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    62,487
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Not sure I understand what you are saying there by "The single D Link on the coupling hook is merely provided to give a weight to hold the screw coupling or 3 link coupling onto the drawhook."

    Of course the loco has a draw hook at each end. But what it doesn't have at the front is a screw coupling. So the consequence is that when it is drawing carriages tender first, it has to use the coupling shackle from the carriages. That is unconventional (though prototypical for the era portrayed); normal practice when coupling is always to use the locomotive's own coupling, but that can't be done on the T3 when running in reverse.

    If you look at photos of the loco in later life, it had gained a conventional coupling by the 1930s. But as built, and as currently preserved, it has a draw hook, a single link and two safety chains at the front.

    Tom
     
  8. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    4,839
    Likes Received:
    7,415
    I think that @Spinner is saying is that the D link is placed over (ie rests on top of) the screw/3 link shackle on the draw hook to prevent it from bouncing off the draw hook. Not a problem when the coupling is under tension but can (and does) happen when the train bunches up. Presumably that is why very early locos also had safety chains. Later on it was realised that the safest way to remove this risk was to fit the shackle permanently to the locos draw hook so it cannot bounce off.

    I'm open to correction on this but that is how I interpret the situation

    Peter
     
    Spinner and Jamessquared like this.
  9. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    4,839
    Likes Received:
    7,415
    To illustrate the above I have found a very poor picture that I took in December 1971 in @Spinner's back yard. It shows a pilot loco in Port Waratah yard, Newcastle NSW with the D link resting above a 3 link coupling on the locos drawhook 71-12-17 11.45 (2) 1904 Port Warratah yard.jpg

    The loco is an 1877 built product of Beyer Peacock and when withdrawn the following August it had achieved a service life of 95 years. However much younger locos than this ran with a similar coupling arrangement to the very end of steam in NSW in early 1973.

    And for @Spinner 's benefit here is apicture I took the following day of his avatar
    71-12-18 14.46 (2).jpg

    Sorry for the thread drift - back to the T3

    Peter
     
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    62,487
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There do seem to have been all sorts of variations. Looking for photos, I found an X2 (larger-wheeled variant of the T3) in SR days with a three link front coupling; and also a T3 in SR days with its own screw coupling, but an additional screw coupling hung over the draw hook.

    I think the general point though was that passenger locos weren’t expected to pull trains while running in reverse, so needed no front coupling; the LSWR of the era seems to have driven the point home by therefore not providing one!

    Tom
     
  11. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    12,469
    Likes Received:
    11,217
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    When hauling mk1 coaches there’s no coach screw coupling though. I’ve found a photo of 563 on the Swanage Railway thread showing it with an emergency screw coupling hanging from the draw hook so that answers the question for this.
    I can understand the comment about the D shackle being used to stop the coupling from coming off. Screw couplings can become uncoupled if they are not screwed up and are left loose. I’ve had personal experience of it happening when shunting on the NYMR and I’ve seen it happen elsewhere. This is why I insist on screw couplings being tightened when shunting. Three link couplings won’t do this as they can’t form a strut, unlike a screw coupling . I’ll add, though, that on both occasions the coupling hook in question was not an RCH type with an override lug on.
     
  12. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,766
    Likes Received:
    5,744
    I struggle to believe that the single link's job is to stop the actual coupling from falling off. If that were a significant risk, would it not have happened frequently with loose coupled freight trains? And would the weight of the single link on top really make much difference?
     
  13. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    12,469
    Likes Received:
    11,217
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don’t believe it is,either but I do believe it could be used by footplate crew as an unofficial means of preventing it.
    As I said earlier, 3 link couplings won’t simply uncouple as they can’t form a strut, unlike screw couplings.
     
    flying scotsman123 likes this.
  14. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,638
    Likes Received:
    18,577
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Indeed, that all makes sense to me. I always tighten screw links when shunting as a ground shunter, apart from the obvious about shackles riding up, and stopping some of the rough shunting if left loose, it usually makes life easier as you can often then get away without having to squeeze up to uncouple.
    Still puzzled as to what the 'official' use of that single link was though!
     
    Steve likes this.
  15. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,661
    Likes Received:
    7,717
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The latest Railway Modeller has an article on T3's
     
    Sunnieboy and gz3xzf like this.
  16. Spinner

    Spinner Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    238
    Occupation:
    Public Servant
    Location:
    Australia

    Yes, that is exactly what I meant. By the way, 1904 still exists today, stored at Dorrigo. You all should know that RVR 5 (formerly Mersey No 1) also exists, stored undercover at Thirlmere.

    Brett
     
    torgormaig likes this.
  17. Dunfanaghy Road

    Dunfanaghy Road Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2019
    Messages:
    1,358
    Likes Received:
    1,718
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Alton, Hants
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    On the subject of front couplings (or non-couplings) I have just obtained from HMRS a copy of the GA for the semi-mythical Drummond 4-cylinder 0-8-0. A 3-link coupling is clearly shown. So, you pays yer money and takes yer choice!
    Pat
     
  18. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    12,469
    Likes Received:
    11,217
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don't know the loco being referred to but, being an 0-8-0 and 4 cylinders at that, it is likely to be for heavy mineral haulage and probably not going to have a vacuum brake and therefore going to have a rusty coupling. (That's the technical term for a 3 link coupling:)) Why fit a screw coupling when you don't need it?
     

Share This Page