USATC S160

While they only operated on the main line for a couple of years in the UK, several have now run in preservation in the UK for some years.

Firstly how do they compare with UK locos? I understand that there are /have been issues with the gauge glasses and, stay bolts.

Secondly was there ever an attempt to retain them in the UK after WW2 or to incorporate some of their features in a UK designed loco? Thinking about it I suppose the 'high pitched' boiler of a 9F is similar to the S160 but this may simply have been a way of making the design work rather than adopting the feature from the S160.

 

I always thought the Ivatt class 4 2-6-0 looked like it was inspired by the S160, maybe the standards too.

 

there was no need for any to be returned to the UK after WW2 as there were plenty of Austerities to fill the need and they were badly needed where they were designed to be, mainland Europe. Besides, they belonged to the Americans and we couldn't afford to pay for them, having mortgaged the Country to them already on Lease Lend

 

The WD 2-10-0 was desired,designed and manufactured after the US locomotives had started working on UK railways.
Without the S160s, there would have been no WD2-10-0s and thus no 9Fs.
The important message was that wide fireboxes over drivers could run UK.
The WD2-10-0s were loathed by the old CMEs who made sure they were not rebalanced and could be just as usefull as 9Fs and much cheaper.
It is interesting to speculate what if BR after grouping ,had decided that standard steam meant five feet drivers and wide ,roundtop fireboxes only.
9Fs proved that five feet drivers were fast enough for 99% of postwar UK steam-trains and if a few had been three-cylindered 100%

 

Yes I see where you are going with this, but dont follow your reasoning, why would the arrival of an American 2-8-0 prompt the design and build of a 2-10-0. ? the WD 2-8-0 had already been worked up by the time the s160's arrived and surely the 2-10-0's staring Britain in the face would have been German. The only obvious detail that the WD 2-10-0 from the s160 is a wide shallow firebox over the top of driving wheels. The original design of the 9F didn't have this, perhaps what you are trying to say is that this feature allowed the 9F to evolve from 2-8-2 TO 2-10-0.

 

Wikipedia says that a WD 2-8-0 was swapped for a S160 in an exchange between the WD & the USATC, if so what happened to the 'British' S160?

 

Never knew that, that would be interesting.

 

Surely that point had been demonstrated 40 years previously?



Source: https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/information-leaflets/the-decapod

Tom

 

I know and it was rebuilt into some strange animal.
It was not mind changing.Did no usefull work.
US S160s were and did.

 

I tend to take Wackypedia with "a pinch of salt". AFAIK the only S160 to remain in Britain was the one at Longmoor. I've also never heard of a WD 2-8-0 going to the U.S. but it is thought that a DR class 52 'Kriegslok' was taken there for study. FWIW there was a long running thread with a lot info. re S160's here:https://www.national-preservation.com/search/43197068/?q=s160&o=date&c[node]=16&c[user][0]=26144
Ray.

 

The gentlemen that have worked and fired all three types heritage are longed for here.
Four maybe
US S160,WD 2-8-0,WD 2-10-0 and 9F

 

J. W. P. Rowledge in his book on the WD 2-8-0s and 2-10-0s notes that 2-8-0 79189 'disappeared' in January 1946, so this possibly is the one that went to the USA in exchange for the Longmoor S160.

 

Well, I've driven three of the four on a number of occasions; two examples of each. The 9F is streets ahead in all respects. Personally, I prefer the S160 over the 2-10-0 Austerity but there's not too much to separate them.

 

They may have got up to 90 mph but it didn't do much for the valves and pistons. Hardly a good idea to base your motive power policy on this premise.

 

A three-cylinder 9F with three 18 times 24 inch cylinders have same piston speed for same train speed as a Britannia and will be nicer for crew during run.
Acceleration will be much better than Britannia.
One can argue that in 1948 there was enough pre-grouping pacifics to run the fast trains.

 

If the WD 2-10-0 is given same balance as 9F what will then be different?

 

An awful lot!

 

Also apparently they were close to the point where the balance weights would start to lift the wheels off the rails, which is why there were the only British class of loco ever given a general speed limit. (after the 90mph exploits)

 

What was the general speed limit for a 9F?

 

From Cox: 60 mph but they were not given speedrecorders as far as I know.