M7 No. 245 - a couple of questions

Tom, indeed. But if we're in LSWR 4-4-0 fantasy land, I'll have an uber-elegant X2 with the 7' 1" drivers, please...

 

I would certainly venture that it could do everything we would require of it. The most we operate as a service train is 6 coaches, and even that is on rare occasions (high days and holidays). The M7 certainly has no issue with 6; in fact, arguably the more you hang behind the M7, the better it seems to go!

 

Yes, but if we built one of those, they might show up the inadequacies of the Drummond 4-4-0s, which - the T9 and D15 apart - didn't have a great reputation, especially being rather shy steamers, so I believe. When Adams locos were reboilered with Drummond boilers, the results were almost invariably not favourable towards Drummond...

Tom


Tom

 

Tom, many thanks - I'd no idea. X2 was solely on the gorgeous couple of pictures I've seen of them - albeit in Adams rather than Drummond condition.

Pace Paulhitch, (and recognising that a Black Motor doesn't seem to exist in a OO catalogue or on a random fb page), I would support a proper project to build one; a missed class, a useful size, and a number of lines that could sensibly use one - all positives. Unfortunately, I'm moving abroad for two years next week, so it won't be led by me!

 

M7s couldn't have been too bad. They did last about 70 years in continuous service! (I know other classes did, but this is a discussion about M7s!!!!!)
Even seeing off certain classes that were supposed to have replaced them on some lines.

 

I think it probably had a bit to do with the duties - and in particular if they were called on to do sustained work or lots of stopping and starting.

The Black Motor, M7 and K10 were all, "under the hood", very similar - the same boiler, cylinders and motion. But the M7 and Black Motors were by any standards successful, whereas the K10 was pretty ordinary. Also worth remembering that several Drummond locos were given a new lease of life, and an enhanced reputation, by Urie, who fitted superheaters - notably the T9s and Black Motors. Though ironically, the one superheated M7 was considered a failure, being front heavy and unliked by shed staff. Which probably goes to show there is more to predicting the success or otherwise of a loco than simply comparing dimensions!

With regard longevity, assuming the loco is not a complete disaster and the duties don't change much over time, at least some of that longevity depends on the robustness and ruggedness of the frames, motion etc. One thing South Western engines could never be accused of was being frail: they were built like battleships and lasted accordingly!

Tom

 

So a superheated "Black Motor", then...

 

Yeah, I'd pay money towards that...

Tom

 

Tom, you sound like just the man to volunteer. Do you accept cheques?

 

Yes, but it might emerge shrunk in the wash to 4mm scale...

It's often struck me that, if as a movement we are going to do new build projects, a Black Motor would be a sensible prototype. About the right size for most lines, rugged, simple (so, in the grand scheme of things, cheap); you'd have commonality of parts with the M7 so could help prolong the life of that loco by virtue of sharing drawings, patterns etc; and if instead you fancied a small 4-4-0 for heritage line use, you could have a K10 instead again with lots of commonality of parts.

Plus (I'm not an expert) but I suspect there is probably a couple of families of very similar Scottish 4-4-0s, 0-4-4Ts and 0-6-0s that would also share a lot of parts. Compare for example the Black Motor (175psi boiler, 5'1" drivers, 18.5"x26" cylinders) with the Peter Drummond Highland Railway 0-6-0 (175psi, 5'0" drivers, 18.5"x26" cylinders) etc etc. Between them Peter and Dugald Drummond worked on the G&SWR, Highland, Caley and North British Railways, as well as the LSWR.

Tom

 

All joking apart, this feels like a serious proposal (where's Paulhitch to dissuade us?) which would bear working up. Unfortunately, I'm off to Africa....! (And no, not with any real railways, either).

Tom: I get the notion of "comparatively" cheap - given your Bluebell background, would you hazard a guess +/- 50%? £1m? £1.5m? It would also be interesting to see how much a series would cost if we could interest more than one railway (Swanage, MHR, Bluebell?)

Tobbes

 

Just the place to organise all the build and procurement from, then! Cheap engineering and suitable facilities still extant.

 

Well first, to paraphrase Paul, lets get one of the existing new builds finished first!

As for cost, it obviously depends how much you do yourself and how much you contract out. But order of magnitude, about £1m would probably cover it. What's the G5 costing? - that's probably the closest comparable new build in terms of size and complexity.

Obviously, some kind of series production would bring down the unit cost. But again, might be worth seeing of the 82045 project can make that logic actually pay in practice! Would also be interesting whether new technology could decrease the cost. For example, the Atlantic project chose to make fabricated cylinders, because for a one-off, that was cheaper than making a pattern and a casting. If you did a series, would fabrication still be cheaper even if you wanted lots of pairs of cylinders - after all, some of the really significant work was the design process that you only have to do once? Or, more radically, could you make the cylinders in conventional cast form, but produce the initial pattern by 3D printing?

Anyway, this is all getting a long way from M7 245! :focus:

Tom

 

Wait a minute. I am being traduced! If new builds are a good idea (and I think they are on balance) then this is just the sort of machine which ought to be built. Capable of hauling any train that will fit in the platforms at "yer avridge" heritage railway at the maximum allowable speed (and more) without needing a private coal mine or a workshop as big as Altoona to maintain it. The saturated version will be quite adequate for its duties. However, on form to date, some goon would want to use the same pattern boiler and cylinders to recreate the C8 with its large, expensive to make, driving wheels, lesser power and reduced adhesion.

There is a certain preserved railway which is in desperate need of a medium sized 0-6-0 (more than one loco. ideally) for which there is a suitable , historically authentic, prototype. Yet they are building something far greater in size which is less suited to the job in hand and will have far more difficulty in earning enough net revenue to finance future major repairs. I couldn't possibly comment as to which line this is but at least one contributor to this thread will know what I am getting at!

Paul H.

 

Paul, I have no idea what you are getting at!

Tom

 

I think you do, otherwise you would not have assumed it was you I was referring to!

Touche I think

Paul

 

Paul / Tom / Steve: all very interesting. I'd be up for returning to this in a couple of years' time - esp. after an opportunity to learn from the 82xxx and 84xxx builds/reconstructions. As you say, it would also support the M7(s - come on Anthony!), and could be useful on a range of lines nationwide, and historically accurate for most of the ex-Southern lines (though I doubt they got to KESR or the Spa Valley). Though it probably wouldn't be especially popular, it would be interesting to see how much Meiningen would charge to simply get on and build it - if nothing else, it provides a target price to beat here in the UK.

Changing the subject entirely, how is 32424 getting on? No website update since the summer, or am I missing something?

 

Ouch! In our defence, at least 32424 isn't a Bulleid! (Wasn't the Leader designed as the replacement for the M7? Now how about that for a new build...)

Anyway, :focus:

Tom

 

I think that is more to do with webmaster workload than an actual lack of progress, plus the project tends to prefer to announce new developments in its own members magazine first before putting them on the web, rather than the other way round - so the web is always a bit out of date even at the best of times. But plenty is going on, though the project is at the sort of stage where there are lots of small, and relatively unnoticeable, but expensive bits being made. So you spend a lot of money and effort for not necessarily a lot of visible progress. I'll try and dig out the latest magazine and do an update in the appropriate thread, but it may be a few days.

Tom

 

Yes, we have to be grateful for that. As you say, back to the topic but it has been fun and, I hope, salutory.

Paul