'Super D' 49395

Hmm, maybe not entirely true...NRM own it and have a stake.
for instance isn't 70013 not allowed to be any guise without NRM permission ?

 

(4)9395 was only just an LNW loco, being built in 1921. Its round-top firebox boiler was replaced with the belpaire type and the cab altered to fit the LMS composite loading gauge. When it was fitted with a Stanier pattern chimney, smokebox handle and dart and LMS buffes, I don't know, but whether LMS or BR, the most probable livery in service would be filthy dirty!

David

 

Mike didn't say crews are deemed incompetent! A Freudian slip on your part, perhaps? :smile: Your statement though, invites the question as to whether ELR crews have to be passed out on individual locos?

 

Steve, I am sure you will agree with me that 49395 is not the easiest loco to drive, hence the need to pass out crews to drive it.
Even Piccolo Pete Johnson had difficulty with one on Crewe South shed.

 

Correct

As for the matter of crews, there are very few people passed to drive it - and it is on an individual basis after being taken through the engines' foibles.

 

Anthony, thank you.

Could you expand on the foibles? And I've always wondered why the Super Ds and the Coal Tanks (and possibly other ex-LNWR types?) didn't carry BR smokebox numberplates if you/others happen to know?

Kind regards,

Toby

 

Well, it is different! Good fun, though.....

 

Thats interesting, when we had it at the Churnet Valley a couple of times we were just left to it like any other loco. To be honest it wasnt any different to operate than any other loco once you knew that the regulator worked the opposite way etc.

 

As LNWR locos, a cast cabside number plate was fitted for identification. In early LMS days, under the orders of Derby, identifying numbers were painted on the tenders and a smokebox number plate was required. In 1928 Derby changed their minds on livery, with the loco number painted on the cabside and LMS on the tender. It was then that Crewe got a dispensation to remove the smokebox plates and revert to their LNWR ways, but with a number painted on the cabside instead of the cast plate. As you know this situation lasted into BR days.

 

I've often wondered: the SR also painted locomotive numbers on tenders, along with the front and rear bufferbeams. When locos were shopped, how common was it - if at all - that locos from either the LMS or SR emerged with mismatched engine and tender numbers, as a result of a tender swap and the tenders not being repainted?

Tom

 

Seemingly quite common at the ex LNWR (Crewe) & LYR (Horwich) works where tenders were overhauled separately and there were less tenders than locos. Swaps at sheds were quite common, too. There are quite a few photos around showing differently numbered locos/tenders. It would be a cheaper and quicker option to swap the smokebox number plate than repaint a tender but I guess that never happened. Or did it?

 

I doubt it: records of mileage and days in steam had to be kept for washouts and other routine manitenance schedules to be kept. Up to the Claughtons, all LNWR tenders were interchangeable so simply using the number on the tender as the engine number would usuaully transfer the engine into a completely different class. The real problems arose when the engine did not have a smokebox plate, its LNWR cabside plates had been removed and it was then given a tender with a different number. The shed or works probably had records to show its true identity, but to the casual observer there would be nothing to tell the engine's real number!

 

Hang on, didn't 4472 have the number painted on the tender when she was built, so possibly the preserved loco may not be 4472 at all and the NRM have bought a dud? - That will give Wilcock months of new material for SR?

 

To answer your query about its foibles, we can start with the handbrake; if you wind it too far it falls to bits as ther's no stop on the screw. 7 turns max. The regulator opens the opposite way to virtually every other regulator so it is easy to get it wrong if you don't think. It also has a tendency to not shut on occasion!
The reverser has no scale on it so it is a bit of a guess as to where you put it although some paint marks have been put on the linkage to indicate when you are in mid gear. The vacuum brake control is different from other locos with one handle to control the ejector and apply/release the brake - quite good when you get used to it but not exactly in the best ergonomic position to operate and look out when you are shunting/coupling up. Lubrication is fairly straightforward although some of the Joy valvegear is awkward to get at. The axleboxes are fed by Fountain lubricators and the RH one gets a lot hotter than the LH because of its location and tends to empty quite quickly and you have to keep a careful watch on it. Then there are the injectors, which are of Webb's patent design, probably one step improved from Henri Giffards original. They are not self re-starting if they knock off and you can't see the overflow when you are on the footplate so you have to 'sense' by touch and sound that they are feeding properly and not wasting water. The tender water valves are easy to catch and knock open if you're not careful. The boiler water level tends to drop quite alarmingly when you go over the top of a gradient so you need to keep it well up in the top nut of the glass - and higher - when going upgrade. Unlike most mainline locos, the firebox has a flat grate so it won't self feed and the fireman has to place the coal all around, as required.
There are probably more things but I can't think of them at the moment

 

yeah, but apart from that? .........

Thanks for the info Steve.

 

They were universally hated by non-LNWR men, e.g. ex-L&Y. It was not unkown for such men to book sick if they knew they were going to work one.

LNWR men generally had a grudging respect: despite being so awkward to work on, they were strong, free-steaming and sure footed, an excellent 'Traffic' loco, in fact.

 

Fascinating - many thanks to all!

Tobbes

 

49395 certainly did the job whilst as the NYMR and quite a few crews came to like it but there were those who hated it. It was free steaming once the fireman came to realise that it was not a Black 5, Standard or an S15 and adopted a totally different method of firing. I found it best on little & often all around the box fired thinly and always leave the doors open and use the flap.

 

If any preserved line is hiring in the D, it's well worth looking through Eddie Talbot's book on the LNWR eight-coupled engines first: full of information and useful hints as to how to drive, fire and maintain them.

 

Maybe the NRM should put a copy in the cab?

Richard