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.

WW2 locomotive building.

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Eightpot, May 26, 2017.

  1. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    1,028
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The 2P crew would be drawn from another link within the shed system rather than the No 1 link, or whatever it was called.

    The 2P's driver, possibly a passed fireman, would have signed the road between the start an finish points, again using Euston = Rugby as the example; he would not necessarily have signed to Carlisle, or even Crewe. I'm not sure how the2P was returned to its home depot, but probably piloting an up working as Assistance Not Required.
     
  2. MellishR

    MellishR Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,504
    Likes Received:
    811
    Wasn't that only on the Great Western?
     
  3. Hunslet589

    Hunslet589 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The GWR took the view, contrary to that elsewhere (no change there) that because the lead engine would inevitably be in control of the train, the train engine should always lead and any assisting loco be attached 'inside'. That was the policy - this was not always adhered to however if a pilot was attached/detached at some intermediate point in the journey e.g. Newton Abbot for the south Devon banks. Shunting the pilot out from behind the train engine would just take too long in that circumstances and so the pilot was attached in front.

    When double-heading it is normal practice for the lead engine to be in charge of the brake. However - it its still the responsibility of the driver of the 'inside' engine to observe signals and speed limits and he can (rule books generally say he must) intervene with his brake if he considers the lead driver has got it wrong.
     
  4. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    1,028
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Spot on - and you beat me to it!
     
  5. Eightpot

    Eightpot Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    5,260
    Likes Received:
    649
    Location:
    Aylesbury
    They had one of those pathetic 2Ps at Watford (1C). I gather that the only useful work it did was to haul the District Engineer's coach on inspection tours.
     
  6. LesterBrown

    LesterBrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    263
    Location:
    Devon
    The GWR policy is well known and oft quoted but, as you suggested, in practise a lot of photos show what is clearly the assisting engine leading. Was there much double heading over significant distances (not just on specific banks) on the GWR? Perhaps mainly as a way of moving locos around without a light engine working.
     
  7. Hunslet589

    Hunslet589 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Other than in specific areas (like Newton Abbott - Plymouth) double heading was indeed fairly unusual - certainly compared to some other lines. It did happen - and there is photographic evidence to prove it - and getting an 'out of place' engine back to its own depot was one reason. But if a loco worked a special (a produce train up from Cornwall perhaps) a return working would normally be found in preference to double-heading.
     
  8. MellishR

    MellishR Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,504
    Likes Received:
    811
    Thank you for the clarification.
    Edit: In the words of Eccles "You learn something new every day."
     
  9. paulhitch

    paulhitch Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,883
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hayling Island
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I think the North British Railway did the same thing. Fine if the assisting engine is to remain for the whole distance. However, if it is to be detached at some mid-point, the process is more complicated and time consuming.

    PH
     
  10. Copper-capped

    Copper-capped Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2017
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    680
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Stanthorpe, QLD, Australia
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Were there places on the GWR network where double heading was required as regular practice as opposed to banking? Seems silly to go to the extra trouble of putting the assisting engine inside unless it was for an extended run, although the safety of having your most experienced engine crew up front would be a plus. It would be interesting to know the story behind any pictures of double heading as to know the reasons behind having two engines. Certainly extra heavy services such as holiday traffic perhaps, may have necessitated double heading, but would that not have been from start to destination?

    I wonder what effect moving engines by double heading rather than LE around the network and the associated extra time required for coupling and uncoupling had on services in relation to sticking to the timetable. Would such a thing if it caused delays be tolerated today? Heaven forbid any lateness! Perhaps movements such as these were better done on certain services - making up time would be more feasable on expresses but not so compatible with public expectation on a stopping service. (???)
     
  11. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    1,028
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Alternatively, is there a point of having the driver with the greater local knowledge leading? If the driver had signed the road, then he was capable of working all trains over it. In practice, the pilot engine's driver would work other traffic over the same route without a 'most experienced' man to guide him then, and his route knowledge and train handling skills had to be good enough for that.
     
  12. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    12,560
    Likes Received:
    12,667
    Location:
    21C102
    I'm going into the inner reaches of my memory here, but didn't the GWR require that an assisting engine was coupled inside after a derailment caused by attaching a small loco to assist a heavy train? I vaguely recall after that thereafter it was a requirement that assisting engines on the GWR without a leading pony truck or bogie (as might frequently be the case) had to be attached inside.

    I might be talking ballcocks, of course...

    Tom
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2017
  13. Cartman

    Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    288
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Oddly, Ive never seen any photos of 2Ps piloting Duchesses or Princesses on the West Coast main line out of Euston, plenty of them with Jubilees out of St Pancras
     
  14. Cartman

    Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    288
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes, ive heard that, and seen a photo of, I think, a Collett 0-6-0 coupled inside a Castle
     
  15. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    1,028
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You wouldn't. They were the overnight trains, long after the photographers had called it a day - or night!

    The daylight trains were considered within the abilities of the Pacific to manage alone. The men considered that the same applied to the night trains too.
     
  16. LesterBrown

    LesterBrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    263
    Location:
    Devon
    Any idea of the approximate date that was from? I'm sure some of the photos I recall were of 2-4-0s in front of larger Churchward locos such as Counties.
     
  17. Hunslet589

    Hunslet589 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Not certain by any means but this accident looks like a good candidate :

    http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BoT_LlanelliLoughor1904.pdf

    It is also likely that the policy was not the result of a single incident though.
     
  18. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    12,560
    Likes Received:
    12,667
    Location:
    21C102
    I had a feeling it may have been late 19th century, and arose from instability of 0-4-4T used as pilots west of Exeter.

    May have been this one: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BoT_Doublebois1895.pdf (see the closing remarks before the appendix).

    Edit: @LesterBrown: Just thinking about your comment re: 2-4-0s as pilots, which of course don't have a leading pony truck, but presumably do have some measure of "steering" into curves. It is possible the restriction was more related to being on locos "with leading driving wheels", and I have misinterpreted that to mean "without a leading truck", the two being not quite synonymous.

    Tom


    Tom
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2017
  19. Copper-capped

    Copper-capped Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2017
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    680
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Stanthorpe, QLD, Australia
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    This bloke seems to have some information on GWR practices:

    http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/in...g-pilot-engines-operation-brent/#entry2427323

    "Passenger Trains

    As far as assisting from the bottom to the top of an incline was concerned any type of engine was considered suitable subject to the various conditions listed at A B, and C below, also the assistant engine was to be placed in front of the train engine but again subject to conditions A, B, & C. Assistance of passenger trains in rear was limited to a very small number of locations - only 13 on the entire GWR network in 1920 with another 12 locations being added in 1924 -after the Grouping. only one of these locations (between Torrquay and Torre, added in 1924) was in the West of England; in other words under the 1920 Instructions assisting passenger trains in rear on gradients was a pretty uncommon event. In foggy weather the assistance in rear of passenger trains was prohibited and the assistant engine had to go at the front in accordance with the conditions shown below



    As we have already encountered, if the section over which the train was travelling also involved level track or falling gradients assistance at the front was mandatory - with the following conditions applying unless the assistant engine was of a larger type than the train engine which meant it could be placed in front of the train engine. Examples were given thus



    A. Tank engine assisting a tender engine - 0-6-0, 2-4-0, and 0-4-2 tank engines were to be placed inside the train engine

    B. Tender engine assisting tank engine - the tender engine must be in front of the tank engine if the latter is an 0-6-0, 2-4-0, or 0-4-2

    C. When a tender engine assists a tender engine or a tank engine assists a tank engine - subject Instructions issued by the Locomotive Dept (which I don't have a copy of)



    Note: A 4-4-0 with wheels at least 5ft 6" in diameter and fitted with a leading bogie may assist in front of any engine.



    The above also applied to double heading of trains irrespective of the presence of any inclines. It is of course instantly noticeable that 2-6-2 tank engines are seemingly ignored which suggests to that the Instructions were probably very similar to those of c.10 earlier.



    Goods Trains (they weren't called freight trains in 1920 - that came later)

    These Instructions also applied to empty passenger trains.



    In those cases where the train was assisted front the assistant engine was to be placed inside the train engine unless it was of a larger type than the train engine.



    Assistance in rear of freights was far more common and the locations where it was permitted weren't listed in the General Appendix - it was still permitted in foggy weather but in that case the assistant engine had always to be coupled to the train it was assisting.



    As will be seen when we get to them there was a degree of refinement and other changes between 1920 and 1935/6 and I might be able to date some of them from the minute books when I get a chance but it will be a major plod through.



    What is now emerging is information which starts to give lie to the oft spouted nonsense that 'on the GWR the assistant engine was always formed inside the train engine'. Clearly that was not the case as far back as 1920, if not earlier, and in fact it all depended on the relative size of the engines involved and in one situation on the size of the driving wheels of the assistant engine."
     
    LesterBrown likes this.
  20. Cartman

    Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    288
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    How far did the 2P go? they had less coal and water capacity than a Pacific, did they go all the way to Glasgow or Carlisle or wherever?
     

Share This Page