Waddon arrived in Canada 50 years ago today

Hi Julian,
One other odd thing you might be able to shed light on is the builders plate. It says Brighton Works 1875, yet I have read that it was built in 1876. Were these just an old pair of plates that were available, or were the works and number plates removed, when she was sold to the SECR perhaps, and put into storage at Brighton waiting for a day when they would be needed? Or are they replicas as well as the Chimney?


Cheers,
Owd Sweedy.

 

I can see no reason for them to drill the holes for the condensing pipes, as the engine wasn't intended to run again in condensing form. I would suggest that both Fenchurch and Boxhill will be lacking the holes too. I suspect that there is no provision in the smokebox for the condensing gear either. Looking at the pictures I've found online, it seems Waddon lacks more than just condensing gear, but some cab fittings too.

Out of interest, does anyone know how the condensing gear worked in the smokebox? Presumably there was a valve that diverted the exhaust into the tanks when in condensing mode? Also I imagine there was a pipe inside the side tanks to divert the steam down into the water?

Daniel

 

Listed as December 1875 in http://www.semgonline.com/steam/a1x_dat.html I would doubt that Works and Number plates would have survived at all, being of no use once removed, and being removed well before there was any thought of preservation or the enthusiast market. Remember that no engines were preserved by the LBSCR themselves, and we are very lucky that Gladstone was preserved by the Stephenson Locomotive Society in 1927. At least Gladstone would have been worked on by ex LBSCR staff in the correct works.
Daniel

 

Waddon was given an SE&CR boiler of Wainwright design shortly after being bought by the SE&CR. So at some point, probably in the 1930s, it got an LBSC boiler back, no doubt without condensing gear, hence the lack of holes in the smokebox.

As for the condensing gear: it came from the exhaust through one condensing pipe to one of the tanks where it condensed on the surface of the water. Any excess steam went via a steam balance pipe adjacent to the cab (visible on the famous early photo of Fenchurch) to the other water tank where it could be condensed. If there was still excess steam, it returned via the second condensing pipe to the smokebox where it was exhausted.

Apart from the obvious problem about oil contamination of the water, one significant problem was that, under heavy braking, water sloshed from the tanks to the smokebox, where it was ejected up the chimney in an oily sooty shower, to the obvious detriment of anyone standing nearby. Experienced passengers learnt not to stand to near locos with condensing gear. Experienced drivers carried out what, in military circles, would be called a "field modification" with a large hammer, hammering the condensing pipes shut in the smokebox! This was officially frowned upon...

Tom

 

Would have to look up the record of renumberings etc, but generally, when the Terriers were renumbered into the duplicate list (so, 54 becomes 654) they were given wooden numberplates as a cost-saving measure rather than cast new brass ones (as currently sported, in replica form, by Fenchurch). (Some locos, such as Stepney just had the number painted on the bunker side in plain numerals).

So I'd imagine that the original "54" plate either went to the new loco that took that number or was melted down to recover the brass - I can't see that, at that time, there would have been any incentive to keep the original. So I'd be pretty certain that the number plate at least is a replica. Less sure about the works plate.

Tom

 

hi Owd Sweedy,

D L Bradley's Locomotives of the LBSCR Part 1 RCTS states WADDON was built in 1875, which would make sense as STEPNEY (55) the next loco was also built 1875. Don's book is the 'bible' and he had access to much original documentation which didnt survive the closure of Brighton Works.

as tom states when the numbers were required for newer locos (the LBSCR had a strange numbering system using old numbers already in use for new locos) the terriers had a 6 added in front of their numbers on what was known as the 'duplicate list'. the original numberplates were removed, and could have been reused on the new locos. the terriers then had painted numbers or wooden plates fitted in the 6xx series. the Stroudley type brass numberplates survived till D E Marsh became Locomotive Superintendant and introduced a change of livery with painted numbers. the LBSCR was always a bit strapped for cash so i wouldnt be surprised if the old numberplates were re-used on new locos. the LBSCR had a very strong enthusiast following (rather like the GWR subsequently had/has) and i know that quite a few original numberplates were snapped up by enthusiasts in the early years of the last century.

the new loco number 54 was a Billinton B4 4-4-o express loco completed may 1900.

but i think WADDON's like STEPNEY's are replicas. the blue background is a little light for my liking - it should be a deeper blue - Revel gloss enamel 55 being an almost exact match.

the works plates survived on lots of locos well into the Marsh era and beyond. later Brighton works plates were of a different type and design.

i have pics of WADDON in 1925 and 1932 showing the Brighton works plates had been removed. the chances of finding the originals or works plates of 1875 in 1963 must have been remote so im sure these are also replicas.

cheers,
julian

 

Thanks for the explanation Tom. I've had plenty of experience with condensing steam plants, but always in marine or stationary applications, not railways, hence the curiousity. I guess based on what you've written that the Terriers were continually condensing in the early years, even when used on lines where condensing wasn't needed? If this was the case, they must have been right sods to fire with so little draft on the fire. A terrier chimney may be tall by railway standards, but it ain't tall if its needed for natural drafting under big loads.
Daniel

 

hi Daniel,

extensive tests were carried on the first batch of terriers after construction, and they proved to be extremely efficient locos. all Stroudley locos were noted for their soft exhausts, but the boilers and draughting were designed accordingly. the terriers still had a 'bark' hence their later nickname. most of the terriers had their condensing apparatus removed when fitted with new Robert Billinton cylinders, only to have the condensing apparatus replaced for those that survived from 1905 onwards to be used on 'motor train' working in the Marsh and Lawson Billinton eras.

the main purpose of the condensing was to heat the feed water in the tanks, not the tunnels on the East London Line. all Stroudley locos originally had condensing apparatus even the big express locos such as the GLADSTONE B1s - this is why they originally had feed pumps rather than injectors as the feed water was too hot for injectors to work.

the only comment i can find re firing on the early locos was that fireman fired at station stops on the east london and south london lines, as it wasnt easy to fire them 'on the run'! (an early accident report quoted by Bradley provides full details of firing technique).

ive never fired a terrier, and i would be very interested to hear from tom what it's like to fire a terrier and what techniques the drivers and firemen employ on the Bluebell. the Havenstreet drivers (or some of them) 'notch them up' a bit too far for my liking!

cheers,
julian

 

Thanks for that Julian. Would be interesting to see one returned to condensing form , and compare the two variants. In order to have a 'bark', some of the exhaust must have gone straight up the chimney, proper condensing plants have no exhaust noise (ie my steamboat engine only makes chuffing noises when the drain cocks are open).
Daniel

 

hi daniel,

originally the drivers could reduce or block off the exhaust when they wanted to via a flap and linkeage that can be seen on the right hand side of the smokebox in early pics. later, this was removed for the reasons given by tom, and the pressure of the exhaust on the exhaust side of the cylinders provided the momentum for some of the exhaust to go into the tanks. the tanks have separate outer plates to keep the beautiful Stroudley livery unaffected by the heat of the tanks - all the preserved terriers still have this double layer of outer plates to the tanks.

the rounded end stopped pipes sticking up on the tanks at the front are the 'exhaust domes' into which the condensing pipes were turned upwards to try and avoid any carryover from the tanks to the cylinders when water surges in the tanks. STEPNEY had her's removed plus the condensing pipes in the early 1930s.

cheers,
julian

 

Completely off topic and unrelated, but this week I'm moving into my home a short distance from Waddon Station.

The name Waddon is supposed to derive from an ancient chalk pit called "Woad Hill", and local ponds that developed called "Waddon Ponds". The area was developed in the 19th Century, and a pub named "The Waddon" sits just by the station, which is served by frequent commuter services running in a balloon shape from London Victoria via Clapham Junction and Sutton back to London Victoria.

 

Thanks again Julian, all making sense now. have found the picture Tom referred too http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/~uhaa009/bb/pics/brps/72_brighton_1872-h.jpg which also shows the flap linkage if I'm looking at it correctly. Curious that having gone to the trouble of making Fenchurch look like an A1, they didn't make up a dummy link pipe between the two tanks to finish off the illusion.
Daniel

 

hi daniel,

that might be because FENCHURCH is in the later Marsh Umber livery. the pipe connecting the top of the tanks in front of the cab spectacle plate was removed quite quickly from the first batch of terriers, and wasnt added to the later terriers. this pipe would only be 'correct' with terriers of the first batch in Stroudley livery and with wooden brake blocks etc. WADDON and STEPNEY are from a later batch and never had this pipe fitted. there is evidence to suggest re this pipe that FENCHURCH still has her original tanks!

cheers,
julian

 

As I recall, the comment (which emerged after an accident, when the fireman was questioned on his technique) was that it was normal to add a couple of shovelfuls under the door at each station, then not fire while on the move. I've fired Fenchurch a few times and never found a particular problem firing while running, though our speeds are lower and I've only done it on a light load.

I assume that the original firing technique had more to do with the fireman's other duties, i.e. braking. On the original East London line, the stations were an average of less than a mile apart, and as originally built (see the photo of Fenchurch linked by Daniel) the locos only had a handbrake and wooden brake blocks, and no continuous brake on the train. So I assume the fireman added a couple of shovelfuls in the station, then unscrewed the handbrake, the driver set off and the fireman adjusted his pumps to add any water required, and about a minute later the fireman would be winding on the brake again for the next stop. (In those days, the fireman was responsible for stopping, not the driver). Obviously, when so occupied, he wouldn't be firing. Then, once at a stop in the next station, add another couple of shovelfuls and repeat the process. So I get the impression that the reason for not firing on the run was more due to the fact that the fireman was otherwise occupied with water and brakes, rather than any inherent difficulty or unsteadiness at speed.

Birch Grove is also built like that! Even though it never had condensing gear and therefore the water in the tanks never got hot, I assume that it simply became the "Brighton way" to design them that way even when the original reason had been lost.

Tom

 

Interesting that. As I understand, "Terrier" was mostly a twentieth century nickname; when originally built they were "Rooters", hence the "Rooter shed" at New Cross. I wonder if the Terrier nickname came about as a result of a significant change in sound when the condensing gear was removed?

Tom

 

Any idea how the steam was transferred from one tank to the other without the balance pipe? I'm sure you are right, and that photo of Fenchurch is the only one I have seen in that condition (I think I've got photos of D-tanks with a similar pipe), but it does beg the question of how excess steam got from one tank to the other. Or maybe there was never any requirement because all the steam was condensed in the first tank?

Tom

 

Re the chimney on Waddon: Bradley says that it was new construction, made at Eastleigh during the restoration.

As for its later history: 54 was sold to the SE&CR with a Stroudley boiler in 1904, but that boiler was fairly quickly condemned and a new boiler was constructed to an entirely new design in 1910. The loco then pottered round the SE&CR in various roles until coming back to the SR in 1923. It then went to Battersea as shed pilot until no longer needed by 1925; spent three years stored at Preston Park; then went to Eastbourne as a stationery boiler for the hopper producing pulverised coal for the U class A629. Finally it went to Brighton works in September 1932 for overhaul, at which point it was the last surviving loco on the Southern still carrying pre-grouping livery, nearly ten years after the grouping. It emerged from Brighton still with the Wainwright boiler but a Drummond chimney (flying the flag for all three major pre-grouping constituents of the SR!), numbered as 680S in the departmental series, where it was Lancing carriage works shunter.

The Wainwright boiler was condemned in January 1937, so 680S went back into the works and received a Marsh pattern boiler (ex-678 "Knowle" and ex-E735, the LSWR Terrier), but retained a short, Stroudley-pattern smokebox and above-the-running-plate sand boxes; as such it was a kind of hybrid A1 / A1X. It also got coal rails at that time and, remarkably, iron brake shoes for the first time: it had lasted until 1937 with wooden brake shoes!

Thereafter, she remained at Lancing except for overhauls until 1962, when she was presented to the Canadian Historical Association. There followed an overhaul at Eastleigh when she was returned to, as close as possible, Stroudley condition, including manufacture of a new Stroudley chimney. As far as I can tell from the top photo on this page: http://www.semgonline.com/steam/a1x_08.html she still carries a Marsh boiler, so is still a kind of hybrid A1 / A1x. (The obvious external distinguishing feature of the two boilers is that, when viewed from side on, on a Stroudley boiler the dome is in line with the tank fillers; on a Marsh boiler, the dome is slightly ahead of the fillers. See e.g. http://www.flickr.com/photos/iow_sparky/3453748224/ - not my photo).

The old LB&SCR track sent to Canada with Waddon, incidentally, came from a siding at Lancing.

Tom

 

hi tom,

very interesting replies! the Stroudley boilers had the dome in line with middle of the tanks (and filler), and the Marsh A1X boilers had the dome inline with the driving wheels, the Marsh boiler having one ring on the barrel. no Marsh boilers were actually built until Lawson Billinton took over. yes, WADDON definitely has an A1X boiler and is therefore a hybrid like FENCHURCH now is. the only truly A1 is BOXHILL which has an A1 boiler. interestingly BOXHILL steamed in preservation. ive pics of her in steam at Guildford shed and Dorking in the late 1940's after 'preservation' by the SR. arguably she still might be able to steam!

i am pretty sure that after the removal of the balance pipe early on between the tanks, the exhaust emitted into both tanks independently. this would make sense.

i will have to check the origins of the terrier name - it is well documented in Bradley with the first date of use. it might have something to do with the loco's small size and rapid acceleration and speed rather than the exhaust 'bark' i referred to! from what i recall the terrier name was very soon after the 'rooter' nickname ie well before the turn of the last century.

i am quite sure that BIRCHGROVE originally had condensing apparatus and feed pumps hence the double sided outer tanks.

how did you get on firing FENCHURCH? and any technique involved?

cheers,
julian

 

Does anybody have a link to a photo of Waddon in SECR livery? Can't quite picture it-was it the fully lined out style like the P class? Had a quick look online but no joy myself...

 

Hi Tom,
many thanks for this, and to all who have contributed on this thread, most interesting.
I have one more puzzle you may be able to answer.
I read (Fred Rich again, he was there), that Waddon's wheel set's were swopped for Boxhill's at Brighton works in March 1949. This left Boxhill with left leading wheels . I can say that Waddons wheels are right leading, but I can't say if they were Boxhills. I took some photos back in 2005 of the various markings on the axel ends and perhaps there may be some clues that members of this group can interpret for me. Poor old Waddon really is a bit of a cobbled together misfit.
The middle image is turned sideways for clarity and is
clearly in different light than the others.
Cheers,
Owd Sweedy.