What was the past really like?

I wonder whether coming off worse in the war was actually an advantage? Clean sheet, it's all got to be rebuilt anyway, so rebuild modern whilst you're at it.

Fred - didn't the UK get an awful lot of money from the USA during the 50s from the Marshall plan though to help rebuild?

 

A further complication was that in the immediate post-war period the UK was exceedingly short of foreign currency with which it would have bought the oil to power them. Coal, on the other hand, did not need foreign currency.

Patrick

 

Unfortunately not only does that attitude persist, but many take pride in it as true Britishness.

 

I suppose the LNER board, clearly quite willing to get hold of the oil even if it meant importing it, did not have the same macroeconomic concerns as the Treasury did.

 

Given that the LMS & Southern diesels were well tried & tested by 1951, along with the GWR railcars, rather than a full dieselisation programme, instead a gradual roll out of diesel locos & DMU's concentrating on areas where the biggest savings could be made - for example banking over Lickey or the WCML beyond Carnforth might have made sense?

The UK Economy was hamstrung by massive defence spending circa 7% of GDP throughout this period as we tried to remain a 'Great Power' Had we realised the absurdity of this and abandoned oir Imperial pretensions things could have been much different.

 

Don't think so ! 10000 was released in 1947; 10001 released in 1948; 10201/2 released in 1951; 10203 released in 1954; Riddles only managed to trial all 5 in one pool in 1953 when the SR Bulleid Pacifics were covered by various pools including ER V2s and the 5 Diesel Locomotives. The quintet were subsequently transferred to Willesden and the pool was based there from 1955.

Flying Scotsman - and others noted :

Fred - didn't the UK get an awful lot of money from the USA during the 50s from the Marshall plan though to help rebuild?

Apologies as I understood that the UK contribution was a loan included in the Marshall Plan for convenience but added to the loan figure accumulated through WWII and which IIRC was paid off late last century during Maggie's term of office. I also have a feeling that the RAF bases "rented" to the US Forces was also part of the financial "package" thus making it a tricky web of finance to unravel.

 

And there were plenty of those in the 1950s.

 

don't be forgetting 18000/100 either which were promising but needed more investment which the BTC didn't provide.

 

I can't really agree with that. Gas turbines entered full fleet service with the Union Pacific, which had much better scope for continuous high power operation (which suits gas turbines) than the UK. They didn't stick; once crude refining processes improved there was no longer a cheap source of fuel to make their poor fuel economy viable and they were replaced with multi-unit diesels by 1970.

Edit to add: If you assume a similar, if not quicker, sequence of events in the UK, then they'd have been as bad an investment for the BTC as a lot of the pilot scheme diesels turned out.

 

isn't hindsight a wonder

 

looking back on it, yes.

 

I imagine after two major wars in thirty years, and the feeling (rightly or wrongly) that disarmament helped the rise of Hitler defence spending seemed pretty non negotiable. 7% is peanuts compared to what actually fighting an industrial war costs.

AIUI the trouble with Marshall plan money was that it pretty much had to be spent in the USA, which further boosted the US economy at the expense of the British. Britain bankrupted herself and lost her export markets fighting two world wars, and the US made themselves rich and snaffled the export markets.

 

As the saying goes:- 'It's the pace that kills'.

 

Then there was the Fell locomotive (10,800). It would have gone better without all the extra drive arrangements to that centre rail.

 

I would say at least the late 50s. The situation at Kings X & Haymarket sheds in the top links ,up to the early 60s, was that the pacifics were shared by two crews & were kept in tip top condition. There was also a sence of comradeship & pride in the job that pervaded these sheds . The same was true of WR main line sheds . Cant comment on the LM or Southern. Its good to read some of those ' footplate memories' books to find out a bit of what it was like in steam days from blokes who were actually there.

 

Wash your mouth out! 2006, by Gordon Brown during Tony Blair's term in office http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4757181.stm

Cheers

Patrick

 

up to the early 60s maybe ,and then it went downhill pretty quick.
In any case I think the problem wasn't so much with existing loco crews but with recruiting ancillaries such as fire droppers and labourers, and firemen and cleaners were leaving for better paid , easier jobs elsewhere .

 

Yes, thats true.