Saint Class 135 ish mph

Why would anyone in their right mind want to run a light engine at that speed anyway - what possible purpose could it serve? It makes no sense to me at all.

Peter James

 

Why would anyone in their right mind want to be on a light engine at that sort of speed?
I'm sure that we've debated this topic before, though; haven't we?

 

High speed is achieved by much more than raw horse power though.

 

In the case of 5000 in 1927 it was investigating reports of rough riding. Another run was described by Adrian Vaughan...

On 16 May 1928, No.6004 King George 111 built July 1927 was run 'light' from Swindon to Didcot - turned on the Didcot triangle and
returned. This was done twice that day. The maximum speed was 102 mph on the DOWN journey, 2nd run.
Driver 'Clem' Crook and Fireman Humphries. Swindon men.

The purpose of this was to see how hot the leading axle boxes of the bogie became under extreme speed.

However in the case of 2903 Collett stated they wanted to prove that a loco could be taken out from the works and run at 100 mph without being run in - ie as a demonstration of the quality of build and detail design - but you have to think it was also for thrills.

 

As Courier has stated, the run with 2903 is very well documented.

The fact that Collett was on the footplate participating I have always thought throws an interesting insight into Collett's character. Churchward was of course still in charge at the time.

There is some evidence that Collett revelled in the above exploit, and was quite happy later to confirm same in print.

Also due to Collett was the lifting of the embargo on the remaining details of City of Truro's exploits in 1904.

Cheers,
Julian

 

Apparently at the end of the long 1:300 downhill there was a long 1:300 uphill section to give a little assistance.

 

I'm in 2 minds about this, so how's about the next time there's a possession on the East Coast let's have a Top Gear Style drag race with 2999, 6229 60163 and 35028? I mean how hard can it be?

 

I can not make a "power comparison" but would add the Pennsylvania Railroad Lindbergh Engine an E60 class Atlantic with 80" drivers was said to have hit 115 mph on it's famous run for the Lindbergh movie film from Washington to NYC. Average speed was 74 mph over a 216 mile trip. The engine was only pulling two coaches so in my estimation that tempers the feat somewhat. Also the engine crew said the throttle or regulator was not fully opened which I take with a grain of salt. They had one mishap during the trip in which they lowered the tender water scoop apparently at high speed and it broke so it cost them time at a water stop at the next available standpipe. Most if not all American steam speed runs were not precisely timed and if one exists I would like to hear about it. Because of #460's moment of fame when the PRR was done with her in 1955 she made it into preservation. Last of her kind and is safely inside the Pennsylvania RR museum at Strasburg Pa

 

These things Claims seem like the sort of comments about motor car performance given by partisans "down the pub"

P.H.

 

Quite hard. You need to build 6299 first. And do you also have to build 6258-6298 to fill the gap?

 

which is exactly why Mr Collett's involvement makes it so much more interesting. I can't see why he would have claimed a higher speed than it did and can think of a couple of reasons for him to play down the actual (higher) speed. I think there's a lot of doubt over the 135 figure but a very high maximum looks a certainty, particularly if there was difficulty shutting down a runaway.

 

I find it hard to reconcile that people doubt Flying Scotsman achieved 100mph when there is documented, authenticated evidence backed up by the LNER dynamometer car...

...but that people can believe the totally ridiculous account given by Tuplin. Aside from the point often made that stop watch timings have higher degrees of inaccuracy than the LNERs dynamometer car, apparently we are to accept a Saint class locomotive with nowhere near the level of safety put in place (as per the LNER with their tests) did 120mph.

Total and utter claptrap.

 

Bloody pedants! I meant 6229!

 

Who doubts that ton by 4472 then ?, I don't think there's any doubt there, The question is whether it was the first or not.

 

There wasn't any claim of 135. Signal box times to nearest 30 secs have such large margins of error that its not sensible to regard them as anything but a vague indication. At very best Collett would have had a 1/5 second stopwatch, and possibly even only accurate to the nearest second. And if they got say a 15 second half mile with a 1 second watch that only means between 112.5 and 128.5 even ignoring the possibility of operator error. If those were the circumstances its easy to see why they didn't want to make any claims public.

The runaway thing - even the supposed secrecy from Churchward - is purely Tuplin speculation. I think we should put no more credence in that than we would in my theories about what watches they might have had. Maybe even less! As far as Churchward not knowing - it seems to me just as easy to imagine Churchward saying if you want to break your bloody necks don't do it when I'm about.

 

...but that people can believe the totally ridiculous account given by Tuplin.

Total and utter claptrap.[/QUOTE]

So the letter that Mr Collett ( the CME of the GWR ) wrote to the Railway Magazine for publication
giving details of this run is what in your opinion ?

 

I think the Lindbergh special run is one of the more credible American claims. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to have been that accurately recorded as the exercise was for the International News Reel Corporation to get the film of Lindbergh landing to New York quicker than the other companies which had chartered planes. Maximum speed was therefore incidental rather than an objective in itself.

 

May 1906 saw the high speed run of Saint class 4-6-0 No 2903. This locomotive, then unnamed, was new out of Swindon Works and was taken 'light engine' to Stoke Gifford, turned on the triangle, and then fired up for an unofficial test run which G J Churchward was not made aware of. In fact, it was suspected that the trial had taken place on a day when Churchward was nowhere near Swindon.

Part of the purpose was to see if an ex-works locomotive could immediately run at a speed of 100mph. On the footplate with Driver H J Robinson were C B Collett (then Assistant Works Manager), Locomotive Inspector George Flewellen and Shop Foreman Evans. The loco was stopped at Chipping Sodbury on the return trip until it received 'line clear' for the 20 mile stretch as far as Wootton Bassett. It was then driven at high speed down the long 1 in 300 from Badminton past the nine mile descent 'racing ground' through Hullavington and Little Somerford. Those on the footplate took stopwatch readings from mileposts and some of their results showed that a speed of 120mph might have been reached for some distance.

It wasn’t until 26 years later that Collett owned up to the trial and he felt that a speed of 120mph had been achieved from his timings. The 4½ miles between the signal boxes at Hullavington and Little Somerford were covered in two minutes according to times recorded by the signalmen, and this gave rise to speculation that 135mph may have reached at one point! Certainly a speed of well over 100mph was achieved, an impressive result for a new light engine.

In April 1907 the locomotive was named 'Lady of Lyons' and she worked until withdrawal in November 1949.

 

So where are these signal box records now - or any other records pertaining to this event from 1906 itself. This all sounds like hearsay from 20 years later, possibly encouraged by the well known GWR publicity department. Looks like the GWR invented fake news long before that Donald chap thought of it.

Peter James