If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

What Ifs, and Locos that never were.

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Jimc, Feb 27, 2015.

  1. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,089
    Likes Received:
    2,722
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There is significant drag from coupled wheels, not just the rods, but also differences in wheel speed.
     
  2. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Apart from the reasons given by @Jimc, there were theories at the time about the dangers of very long coupling rods. Both the classes of Drummond double singles had an exceptionally long wheelbase - 11'0" between drivers (a T9 was 10'0" and the other 4-4-0s were generally 9'0"). That extra length between drivers allowed a bigger firebox to provide the extra boiler power that would be needed for a four cylinder engine. As things turned out, it seems the boilers weren't sufficient and in time the cylinders were lined down to smaller diameter. Feels like one of those innovations where everything makes sense on paper as a way of packing a more powerful engine into a given size, but in practice ends up as less than the sum of its parts.

    Tom
     
  3. 30854

    30854 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    5,138
    Likes Received:
    5,137
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Another reason for 'double singles' would seem to be 'hammer blow' (though AFAIK the term had no currency during either Webb or Drummond's respective tenures), imparted by coupling rods. Without those additional forces, balancing driven axles must surely have been both simpler and rather more effective.

    Though I've never seen it specifically mentioned concerning 'double singles' , I'd imagine the increase in train weights around the turn of the 20th century, occurring with the introduction of heavier stock of more modern aspect, provided a damned good excuse for weeding out these oddities.

    I know something of Mr Webb's less orthodox machines, and their rapid withdrawl under his successor, but rather less about the performance, service lives or demise of Mr Drummond's. Any information would be greatly appreciated
     
    Cartman likes this.
  4. Cartman

    Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    672
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I believe a few of Drummond s efforts just made it into Southern ownership after the grouping but didn't last long on the SR. Tom will no doubt confirm.
     
  5. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,089
    Likes Received:
    2,722
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There's nothing in the records I have found about why they were ordered. There isn't anything on motive (for almost anything) in the GWR minutes I have seen.

    There are a lot of myths though. What I have found is that the 94s were ordered to replace a whole lot of pre group locomotives, including many 0-6-2Ts, that were withdrawn over the period they were ordered for. Basically they were not a more expensive alternative to more 57s, but a cheaper alternative to more 56s. A heavier engine would have more brake power for coal trains down the valleys. A lot of the work was traffic rather than shunting, which the diesel shunters of the time could not have done. I have seen a suggestion that the big order was post war job creation, but I haven't seen any evidence pro or con.
     
    Cartman likes this.
  6. Gwenllian2001

    Gwenllian2001 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    2
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Maesteg
    It is often forgotten that these locos were also used on passenger services in South Wales. They appeared on all sorts of services away from the regular interval valley lines. They could be seen on passenger trains at Dowlais; Pontypool Road - Neath; Llantrisant - Penygraig occasionally; Western Valley occassionally and double headed on Newport - Barry Island. On the latter, they showed a fine turn of speed on the main line. They popped up in all sorts of places, probably more than I have mentioned. The problem was that the coal traffic was shrinking much faster than expected.
     
  7. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,089
    Likes Received:
    2,722
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    [deleted - no valueadded]
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  8. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There were six Drummond double-singles: a solitary prototype built to order number T7 in 1897 No. 720, followed by five more with detail differences built to order E10 in 1901, following experience with the prototype. Actually, it was greater train weights that led to their introduction, the idea being to harness the undoubted free-running properties of a single (which had come back into vogue following the introduction of steam sanding) but with increased power needed for heavier trains. Sadly it didn't work out that way.

    Class T7, No. 720

    The T7 had four cylinders 15" * 26*, 6'7" driving wheels, a cross water-tube(*) firebox (but as noted before, quite long, fitting in the space afforded by the large wheel spacing); Stephenson valve gear on the inside cylinders and Joy valve gear on the outside cylinders; steam reversing. The tender was the prototype of the Drummond double-bogie design, and was fitted with feed water heating from the exhaust steam.

    The loco spent a lot of time on test and also a fair amount of time in the works: evidently a degree of tinkering was underway. Interesting amongst that was work on the blast pipe; then lining the cylinders down to 14"; then in 1905 (by which time the loco had been lain aside for 15 months) a new, larger boiler. This also had the cross water tubes, but more obviously so with the inspection covers visible.

    The work on the blast pipe, larger boiler and lining down the cylinders all point to a loco shy of steam.

    After fitting the larger boiler, the loco underwent a series of steam trials in comparison with a pair of T9s, 282 and 728. The trial trips were the 2.00pm Waterloo - Bournemouth and 6.55pm return, for which 31lb/mile of coal was allowed (the suggestion was that that was a tight allowance to try to encourage economy of driving rather than out and out performance). Indicator diagrams were taken.

    The results were as follows:

    720 (T7) - 2,483 miles run, actual consumption: Coal - 41.4lb/mile; Oil - 4.25 lb / 100 mile; Tallow - 10.2lb / 100mile
    282 (T9) - 2,798 miles run, actual consumption: Coal - 33.1lb/mile; Oil - 4.25 lb / 100 mile; Tallow - 6.1lb / 100mile
    728 (T9) - 3,147 miles run, actual consumption: Coal - 32.4lb/mile; Oil - 4.25 lb / 100 mile; Tallow - 6.0lb / 100mile

    From those figures it is obvious that the T9s were far more economic on coal; the higher tallow consumption of the T7 is also notable, no doubt a direct consequence of being four rather than two cylindered. Moreover, the T9s were recorded as losing no time, whereas 720 lost a cumulative 17 minutes attributed to poor recovery from stops. The indicator diagrams showed that at 45mph, the inside cylinders delivered 59% of the power which maybe explained a propensity for the leading driving wheels to slip and the bearings to overheat. Given two entirely different geometries for the valve gear, it is not obvious to me how you design it so as to give even valve events at all cutoffs; no doubt there is a degree of compromise in layout and operation accounting for the variation in performance between inside and outside cylinders.

    None of which is really to the credit of the loco. Thereafter it was removed from the harder mainline duties to spend most of its life in the summer on the less arduous duties around Salisbury and Bournemouth; and in the winter it was used for carriage warming at Clapham. There was a plan in 1914 to rebuild it as a conventional 4-4-0 which seems to have been stopped by the war; after which it lingered on in SR days, where somewhat surprisingly it received a general overhaul and repaint into SR livery, before being withdrawn in 1927, having run only 357,207 miles.

    A trivia note for @Jimc: somewhat unusually for the time, the build record notes that it was a replacement for a Beattie 2-4-0 No. 017 "Queen", and the scrap value of that loco was credited to the cost of construction of 720; it appears to be the only Drummond loco in which that kind of note was made, though they were common in the Adams era.

    Class E10 Nos. 369 - 373

    Notwithstanding the less than illustrious career of 720, five more locos were built to order E10 in 1901. They differed from 720 primarily in having the cylinders reduced to 14" diameter; the boiler was similar to that originally fitted to 720 (not the later, larger boiler) but with visible access panels to the cross water tubes; the fireboxes were marginally larger than that fitted to 720. There were a few other detail differences.

    As built, they tended to be used on relatively easy duties; a regular was a Waterloo - Southampton via Alton service, which was lightly loaded and easily timed. Even so, they tended to be mainly used in the summer, being put in store during the winter - this led to a nickname of "butterflies" because they only appeared in the summer, when there was more pressure on the motive power fleet. Again, not exactly a ringing endorsement of their usefulness. Coal returns show somewhat similar figures for coal, oil and tallow as No. 720, i.e. rather less economic than a T9 or similar 4-4-0. As with No. 720, Urie considered a scheme to rebuild as conventional two cylinder 4-4-0; once again, nothing came of it though they did receive new fireboxes at that time with the cross water tubes removed.

    By 1922, No. 371 was lain aside and never steamed again, though it wasn't formally withdrawn until 1926. The others all ran in SR ownership, though only 372 and 373 received Maunsell livery, and they were all withdrawn in late 1926 / early 1927, having run comparatively modest mileages of between 323,743 and 419,611. Four of the boilers were repurposed for stationary use at Eastleigh, Lancing, Longhedge and Battersea; the fifth was sold to Blackpool Council and used for heating greenhouses.

    All in all, not one of Drummond's better efforts, and that's in a crowded field of dog-awful Drummond locos ...

    (*) It wasn't obvious as such since it lacked the prominent inspection covers that later such fireboxes had.

    Tom
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  9. Cartman

    Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    672
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Thanks Tom for another detailed and interesting update. Drummond locos seemed to be either very good (T9, M7) or very bad (double singles just discussed and various 4-6-0s)
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  10. 30854

    30854 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    5,138
    Likes Received:
    5,137
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    @Jamessquared many thanks for the comprehensive reply Tom. I confess to being a bit surprised to learn any survived until grouping, let alone steamed under Southern auspices and outright amazed any ever received Mansell livery! All in all, probably not a design too near the top of anyone's 'new build list'.

    I recall a few other classes with differing valve gears, with actually getting the gubbins to fit always seeming to override engineering norms (or common sense) and IIRC none so fitted were, unsurprisingly, considered an outstanding success.

    Although his 4-coupled output was certainly up to snuff (as was the '700' class) and build quality of his kit was the stuff of legend, number me among those somewhat bemused by the reverential status accorded by so many to Dugald Drummond.
     
    paulhitch likes this.
  11. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I'd count myself foremost amongst critics of Drummond as a locomotive designer; even his "good" designs (T9, M7, 700 goods) don't really seem much in advance of those produced by pretty much every Loco Superintendent of the time; and the T9s really owe at least some of their fame to their rebuilt form from Urie. When you consider that he must have had ample opportunity (at Basingstoke, Salisbury, Exeter, Plymouth and elsewhere) to study Churchward’s locos at first hand, it must have been blindingly obvious that his 4-6-0s were disastrous.

    That said, the case for the defence. At that time, the Loco Superintendent was not just responsible for locomotive design, but also loco running (being essentially the manager of all the drivers, fireman and shed staff) and for the operational performance of the workshops for new construction and repairs. When you add in those duties, Drummond was well respected by his men. Moreover, he oversaw the transfer of the LSWR's main loco workshop from the crowded, old-fashioned works at Nine Elms to a new green field site at Eastleigh with plenty of room and modernised workshops. He achieved that seemingly without significant industrial unrest from those men who were having their lives upturned; and without significant operational impact on the repair or construction of locomotives. Compare that - in extremis - with the situation on the neighbouring LBSCR which was permanently hamstrung by the crowded and inefficient works at Brighton, yet where Drummond's contemporary Marsh never resolved the issue, and seemed to foment industrial unrest whenever he tried; meanwhile the LBSCR was perpetually short of locos which rusticated at country stations for want of facilities to repair them.

    So my view of Dugald Drummond was that whatever his failings as a locomotive designer, his masterminding of loco affairs of the company - and particularly the development of Eastleigh - are his great triumph.

    Tom
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
    jnc, Bluenosejohn, 35B and 2 others like this.
  12. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,089
    Likes Received:
    2,722
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The job of the loco superintendant was really to outline the spec and approve the designs. The problem is surely a failure to recognise that your drawing office staff are not up to the mark and fail to recruit better.
     
    30854 and Jamessquared like this.
  13. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Perhaps I should have said, rather than "locomotive designer", "person who oversaw locomotive design". In the end I don't think it massively matters: however it arose, the process of locomotive design was a weak spot for Drummond (at least by time he reached the LSWR), but compensated in particular by his organisational ability in pulling off the move of the works from Nine Elms to Eastleigh. Even there, I suspect that, in project management terms, he was probably essentially the "Senior user" on the project board rather the pacing out the ground at Eastleigh to work out just how big an erecting shop they could fit in ...

    Tom
     
    30854 likes this.
  14. 30854

    30854 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    5,138
    Likes Received:
    5,137
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Self evidently true, as far as it goes, but on occasion D Drummond certainly exhibited a penchant for adopting some pretty novel (and by no means entirely successful) innovations which could not reasonably be laid at the feet of any D.O. Sows ear / silk purse and all that.

    Of interest, was Urie's accession marked by any significant changes of personnel at Eastleigh?
     
  15. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,089
    Likes Received:
    2,722
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Its interesting, while we're on this particular tangent, to note how one of the aspects of Holcroft's career was that he kept being taken off locomotive work to be given lead roles in planning works changes and the like. It was clearly an ability that both Churchward and Maunsell valued and presumably he must have been very good at.

    Well, we can't know how much the tail wagged the dog can we? Drummond certainly bears the responsibility for failed innovations, where the buck stops and all that, but whether they were his ideas or came to him from or via his chief draughtsman we'll probably never know.
     
  16. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The really significant one was that he recruited TS (“Jock”) Finlayson as leading draughtsman; Finlayson had previously been leading draughtsman at North British Loco. He became a dominant figure on the LSWR and later the SR, sometimes at odds with the more progressive regime at Waterloo.

    As for Urie, he had spent time as a draughtsman, and had been the leading draughtsman on the Caledonian Railway under Drummond. However, he then became works manager at St Rollox and, when Drummond moved to the LSWR, Urie followed him as works manager at Nine Elms and then Eastleigh. So by time he became CME, he had nearly twenty years of works manager experience, most of it at first hand on the Drummond locos he had in his charge in the LSWR; and he must have been aware of which features of them caused undue time in the workshop. It’s notable that in his time as CME, he stripped out Drummond features like the cross water tubes as quickly as possible; started renewal of the four cylinder 4-6-0s along more conventional lines; and for his own locos, put a premium on simplicity and accessibility. Holcroft could be quite scathing about the relatively pedestrian nature of those Urie designs, and there is the notable weight comparison between a Castle and a King Arthur; but Urie was undoubtedly ahead of his time in realising that the key to reducing operating costs lay in the repair costs rather than eaking out the last fractions of performance - which in any case were pretty illusory with the Drummond locos.

    Tom
     
  17. 240P15

    240P15 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,214
    Likes Received:
    1,103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Norway
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    Maybe not relevant, but I`m glad the 94s were build. Lovely looking engines!:Happy:

    Knut
     
    2392 likes this.
  18. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    18,820
    Likes Received:
    32,361
    Location:
    21C102
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You’ll be needing this:

    https://www.specsavers.no/

    Tom
     
    jnc, paulhitch and 2392 like this.
  19. 240P15

    240P15 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,214
    Likes Received:
    1,103
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Norway
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    I`ve already have glasses Tom;) (had it for many years)
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  20. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,555
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Apprentice Rail Engineer, MNLPS Treasurer, Author
    Location:
    Sidcup, Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    This could be applied to a number of C.M.E.s, I dare say, including one L.N.E.R. one...

    It is fascinating how the breadth of opinion is that enthusiasts focus on the ultimate in performance, historians tend to look more closely at the nuances of everyday working environments. Urie's engines clearly were very good in so much as they remain simply built, rugged, straightforward machines to maintain and repair in comparison with the more complicated locomotives around them.
     
    Jimc likes this.

Share This Page