Plans for a new-build LNWR express loco

Several magazines have reported a scheme for a new-build LNWR express engine, either a 4-4-0 or 4-6-0.

There is a good deal of merit in the argument that the LNWR is poorly represented in preservation, particularly the post-Webb era, with only 49395 surviving.

The claim by the originator of this scheme is that after Webb, Whale and Bowen-Cooke really turned the LNWR round and produced some first-rate express engines, which unfortuantely didn't last long enough to be considered for preservation.

At the risk of provoking a fearsome debate between proponents and antagonists of the GWR, I would like to ask just how good were the 20th Century LNWR express locos? Were they as good as Churchward's "Stars"? - after all, it took the LBSCR's I3 class to convince the LNWR of the merits of superheating when the two companies ran some exchange workings in 1909.

Was it not the LNWR Churchward referred to when, on being confronted by a GWR official about the cost of his engines compared with those of another company, he said, "it's because one of mine could pull two of their ..... engines backwards", or words to that effect?

I would hasten to add that if one has to "take sides" regarding allegiance to a railway company, I would probably call myself a Southern man and am therefore neutral - I would just be interested to hear from more enlightened people.

And whatever the final verdict of any debate about the quality of LNWR expres locos that may ensue on this thread, I wish the originators of this scheme well. A front-line 20th Century LNWR express engine has long been identified as one of the most significant preservation omissions - along, of course, with the A1 pacifics..........

 

As a GWR enthusiast I might be expected to enter a debate but I won't (well not yet!). What I would say is that the LNWR is indeed very poorly represented in the UK's railway collections. Part of this is due of course to historical events, notably the modernisation of the pre-grouping locomotive stock that transferred to the LMS upon that organisation's formation. The GWR, as the least affected of the "Big Four", was able to keep its pedigree to some extent but the LNWR and the Midland factions of the LMS were not happy companions if you look at the historical records. This, coupled with the arrival of the Stanier locomotives which swept away so much (in some cases rightly so), meant that we don't have any of the LNWR "flagships". The article that caught my eye was to build a new 4-4-0 "Precursor" which, having a non-belpaire boiler (which early ones had) and being non-superheated, would be a relatively (important word!) simple locomotive to build from new. If a student of Britain's railways was to study the evidence available today, he or she might be forgiven that most locomotives were built by Stanier, Ivatt, Bulleid, Churchward, Collett or Riddles. There are several important "missing links" in our loco heritage and, although some brilliant people are working hard to put that right, there is still the remaining question, "why aren't there any really good examples of the "Premier Line" left for us to see?" I for one, would welcome the chance to see and hear an LNWR "precursor" or 4-6-0. It could be done, its just the simple matter of aligning willpower with finance!

 

Personally I think that Churchwards comment re the pulling power of his engines was a bit of hype when he was under pressure from a clique of directors. The 'Claughtons' have been proved to be every bit as powerful as the 'Stars' but were no where near as economical either in coal and oil or their maintenance costs because of poor detail design by the Crewe D.O. Detail design and the integration of many threads of engineering design that were new to British railways was very definitely Churchward's forte. In a global sense he was no originator, but he was an absolutely brilliant integrator.

Having said that, and I write as an LNWR devotee, I would be delighted if a project was started to re-create one of the Whale or Bowen-Cooke express engines and I would definitely contribute. But I would suggest that if the engine didn't include many of the features that Churchward and Stanier introduced to the GWR and LMS it shouldn't go mainline!

Regards

 

I would love this to happen, but preferably a George 'V' 4-4-0, we don't have enough classic British 4-4-0s and as had been said the LNW is sadly under represented. By reputation the LNW built them cheap and thrashed them hard, leading to high fuel and maintenance costs, but you can't help but be impressed with those archive photos of relatively modest 4-4-0s pounding through the north London suburbs with 14 or 15 coaches in tow!

Lordy
PS one of the features removed by the LMS to save money on the 4-4-0s was a centre bearing on the driving axle, with this gone they knocked themselves up even more.

 

1976 I rode along the Cumbrian Coast from Carnforth to Sellafield. The train was double headed with one of the locos being ex LNWR "Hardwicke". Rather than produce a new loco, I'd like to see funding available for retuening that particulargem to the main line.

 

I seem to remember a project by a resident of Southport in the 70s to build a Dreadnought (I know not LNW but close)
What became of the project?

 

It will be interesting to see if this scheme goes further. I hope so, although at the moment there are a good few new-build schemes (or semi-new build like e.g. 6880, 84030) and only a finite number of us to dig into our pockets.

Out of interest, is the LNWR better represented carriage-wise? Pictures I have seen suggests that it built some very good quality vehicles, but have sufficient survived for any preserved railway to offer anything like a rake of LNWR coaches for an LNWR loco to pull? The Bluebell could cobble together the rather incongruous combination of the Observation Car and the Semi-Royal saloon (the mind boggles!) I would hope some other line could do better.

Agree with an earlier post about Hardwicke, although in reality, engines like this and Midland Compound 1000 are unlikely ever to grace our main line again. Still, both are fondly remembered and, one hopes, might be restored for heritage line use one day. Like the T9 and City of Truro, both these pre-grouping NRM engiines have a history as "runners" in the preservation era.

 

Well, if it's 4-4-0s we want to see, I think that a Caledonian Dunalastair class would be as important as any mentioned here (and I'm not even Scottish). Would the Premier Line have been so premier if they hadn't had these beauties handling the Carlisle - Glasgow section, which of course includes climbing Beattock, before the First World War?

The boiler would be repeatable using the experience of Riley's in Bury on the 828 0-6-0 for the Strathspey Railway. I wonder, though, if a full set of drawings still exists in Glasgow.

And Caley Blue, imo, looks a darn sight better than LNWR black.

 

Ever since seeing an image of one in a pub at Euston (head of steam? Remember seeing a Pannier numberplate) i've always thought the Claughton was a very handsome locomotive, even in black!

 

John raises an interesting issue here. Are we too focussed on raising the number of 60-75 year-olds using the mainline, when we might recreate railway history better by running more 100-year-olds, or new locos posing as such, on heritage lines? Railway heritage doesn't start in 1923, does it?

NRM have arrangements with several lines to keep some of their locos in working order, they must be delighted with what the GCR has achieved with Ollie, Sir Lamiel and the O4, and 15 years ago, whoever thought they'd see City of Truro running again? So why not force the pace (i.e. apply to the lottery) with the T9 Greyhound appeal? why not ask SVR to tell them what it'll take to get #1000 fit for 25 mph running? and why not give Hardwicke to the same people who restored CoT?

One good thing will have come out of the NRM's 4472 fiasco; they must by now know who they can trust to (re-)build a loco, and who not.

 

Or even 1948 in most places!

Fully agree though, I love pre-1923 locomotives such as City of Truro, and it's a great shame relatively few are running compared to much younger locomotives. That said, of the replica locomotives under construction, pre-1923 is fairly well served;

'Bloomer' at Tyseley
Didcot's Steam Railmotor
Didcot's Saint
NER G5 project
GER F5 project
NRM York's new 'Rocket'

and of course the Bluebell Atlantic

What i'd really love to see are more Victorian era locomotives, particularly those 'bridging the gap' between the pioneer stuff like Locomotion, Steam Elephant, Rocket etc and the more familiar late Victorian locomotives such as 4-4-0's

 

19th century locomotives

Interesting discussion. Adding to the early designs there's Planet as well.

One engine I could dream of being steamed is Lion but I know for certain reasons this is unlikely to happen. The alternative dream would I guess be a replica of sister locomotive 'Tiger'.

Anyway just a thought.

Regards

Duncan

 

Whist filling a gap, is the expense of building what are in effect replicas (and I count Tornado in that bracket) the wisest policy at this time. We seem to have a shortage of locos for heritage rail. See the current plight of ELR. However, we have a shed load of locos languising in varying states of disrepair across the country. How about getting that backlog up and running first before new builds. I'm not aginst new builds but would like to see some of the rotting hulks brought back to life and into heritage use.