New-build steam strategy coordination?

Not quite sure what you mean, but my understanding was that the specific problem with the GWR stud was not weight related RA, which covered the ability to go over things, but the ability to go under things - ie squeeze down the available holes, which is a subtly different issue, if equally vital.

 

"so many" might be better than "any".
Looking at my late 50s Observers book I reckon there were about 50 LMS Pacifics, 200 LNER pacifics and 140 Southern ones, plus 60 odd BR ones, mostly on the ex LMS and LNER lines with about 15 on the WR and 2 on the SR. (can anyone correct that?) So if I got my finger counting right then on the face of it the Southern had disproportionally large numbers of Pacifics, especially with their generally shorter distance runs.

OTOH you could argue that as the Southern didn't have a good lighter weight 4-6-0 class, building one class of light pacifics had its advantages over building a smaller number of light Pacifics and a new 4-6-0 as well.

 

140 probably was excessive - though you can also argue that working on the Southern lines, shared with both mainline and suburban electrics, placed a high premium on acceleration - so a powerful, but relatively small-wheeled pacific was a probably a better post-war concept than an updated larger-wheeled 4-6-0 such as a King Arthur would have been.

Tom

 

The reason why it had a WC rather than a MN was that it was routed via Maidstone East and the pilot was needed for Berstead Bank. MNs were restricted in Kent to Victoria to Dover via Ashford, not sure if they were allowed via the Catford Loop

 

I disagree slightly ..... and agree in other ways. A V2 is a very capable machine, 41.25 sq ft grate and a shortened A3 boiler, 33730 lb tractive effort. Fit a Kylchap, as a very few had towards the end, and I don't think there's a steam working on the SR they couldn't have competently handled, if perhaps not quite so easily as an MN.

Of course, Bulleid would never have been allowed to build them because the Southern Railway Civil Engineer was famously allergic to leading pony trucks on fast engines after the Rivers. They would also have been limited to the same sphere of operations as the MNs with their 22 ton axle load, so they couldn't substitute for the West Countries on a lot of workings. Given that the main heavy duties on the Southern were the Pullmans, a 4-6-2 makes more sense for fast running.

But, I bet a fair few shedmasters wouldn't have minded having V2s in place of the original pacifics, just as they welcomed the rebuilds when they came around, for bringing some semblance of maintainability to the fleet. The MHR put up some photos a while back of a valve and piston exam on 34007; if I'd designed something where a routine exam was that tortuous I'd be ashamed. Add in that the rebuilds only needed that exam at 48000 miles instead of 36000 miles, without digging out the smokebox floor, in the prevailing conditions for recruitment of skilled shed staff at the time...

 

So now you've alienated everyone!

It is actually possible not to live life ruled by the simplest of binary oppositions. One is allowed to enjoy the sight, sound, smell and sensations of steam, diesel and even (whisper it) electric all at the same time, without needing counselling or corrective action from those of an immaturely narrowminded disposition.

 

What exactly was the incident with 92184??

 

At 22T axle load it damn well should be: according the numbers in my old Observers book the V2 is getting on for 20 tons heavier all up than the light Pacific.

Mind you, there are those who would suggest that if fast acceleration from a standing start is your priority the light Pacific is not the weapon of choice...

 

Not just from a standing start, but also from a rolling start - a lot of precise working between junctions.

As for a pacific not being the weapon of choice: it wasn't Bulleid's weapon of choice either - he wanted a 6'2" 2-8-2...

Tom

 

What was ER;s response?

 

Agreed, which is why when Tom suggested that the Southern had a definite need for bigger engines than V2s and B1s, I thought he was underplaying the V2 a little. They're pretty big, and capable in proportion. The B1, on the other hand, doesn't really offer much the Southern (even the LSWR) hadn't had twenty years before. Needs must when 140 of your newest locos have to be hurriedly despatched to the works...

 

This ban appears to be in theory only. Doncaster and New England 9Fs continued to be used as rescue engines on passenger trains, replacing failed locos. Indeed a few were recorded taking trains out of Kings Cross.

 

Oh yes, that is all broadly true. Nevertheless any chance of MNs remainining in service unaltered ended the day Bulleid left. Jarvis knew his rebuilds were heavier etc. But his business case was based on reduced running costs - and the board agreed.

 

I suspect the timing of the rebuilds is down to the structural reorganisation of BR in Churchill's government as much as anything else.

If you look at it from that angle: as soon as the Regional management had the power to authorise the rebuilds locally, the locos were rebuilt very quickly.

 

Anyone who has any doubts about the justification for the rebuilding should go to the document kindly provided by The Crimson Pirate http://www.national-preservation.com/attachments/new-section-1-pdf.8735/ and read the report.

 

Looking at the photos, I'd say that the person head down under the smokebox was me - except I don't do Wednesdays. I did have to assume that position the next time I was there to complete removing the vacuum pipe which runs through that space. The fun comes when you have to actually get your whole body into that hole to deal with the drives to the outer valves. Not to be attempted with Claustrophobia.

eh, what's wrong with Kettle? I'm a steam fan myself, but kettle is such a fundamental description of a steam loco, I just can't get het up about it. I don't care that diesel lovers think they're being disparaging, it's so true that it doesn't matter.

As to diesels - what's wrong with box? they are - at least the latest ones are. In fact they're more like containers. I also like diesels - at least some of them, and I really don't care if the diehard steamfreaks call them boxes. As to diesels behind steam specials - maybe necessary - but a bit of an Oily Drag?

Didn't 92184 get on an express because it had taken a passenger train from Kings Cross to Grantham on a Saturday and had to get back? Summer Saturdays were a lean time for locos at Kings Cross, and almost anything would be sent out if it could turn a wheel. See P Townend's book

 

The crew were Kings Cross men. It has not been confirmed why it came on the train at Grantham, but the rostered Pacific could have failed on Grantham shed and the crew given 92184 to do the job..

 

V2s are every bit as complex as Bulleid's Light Pacifics, and a bloody hang sight heavier! V2s were a fair bit slower too, 90mph was about all they could do, Light Pacifics (like their 'MN' big brothers) were timed well north of the ton...

MellishR, your link doesn't work. However, I prefer to listen to what the crews have to say: both ex-BR and (in the WC/BBs' case) modern mainline and heritage crews have told me or stated on public record that they prefer(red) the unaltered Pacifics of both kinds - more powerful, faster, gentler on track and much easier to keep clean and lubricated. The one thing that seems to have been a definite improvement was the provision of firebox dampers. The change to a mechanical wheel reverser was definitely retrograde, although the specific type of steam reverser used on the Bulleids (derived from the Drummond design found on the M7, T9 etc, I believe) seems to have been troublesome on some examples. Bulleid claimed he wanted the SER James Stirling type, but that Eastleigh insisted on using the Drummond type.

Anyway - trying to drag this thread back to the original tack - what would actually be useful to a majority of lines, that does not currently exist (or at least not in sufficient numbers)? I know the Patriot group have said they want to do a Fowler 4P next. I did suggest earlier, as the SR U and N classes are a known quantity, that further examples of that Maunsell family be constructed - starting perhaps with the Metropolitan L2, as the Maunsell answer to the Fowler 4P...