Dowlais Ironworks Locomotives

[Gibbo675]

But why put it in a comparatively vulnerable place, at the other end of the loco and below the tank level? Surely a filler on the bunker top would be easier, more secure and less prone to potential leakage.

Interestingly the photos I've seen suggest the tube is only on the front end of the 040t, not on the rear and not on the six coupled locos.

It does look like there's something between the frames it connects to, but that's where the cylinders are, so whatever it is can't be that big.

 

Is there a possibility that the pipe is an outlet of water/steam for some reason?

Hi Folks,

 

I wondered if the pipe was there to be used as some sort of mobile steam supply also. There could be a connection to the steam chest and the supply could be operated from the cab using the regulator so long as the locomotive is in mid gear, brakes on with the drain cocks shut.

 

An oil tank filler is also quite plausible but it would have a shut off or non return cock just behind the connections or the head of oil within the pipe would drain out upon disconnection and such valves are not evident.

 

Gibbo.

[Osgood]

Quite possibly a steam connection for tipping slag ladles?  Would explain why the pipes were at the end away from the cab.

 

Edit:  No idea why Dowlais should not have used the conventional chain technique for tipping slag ladles, so perhaps another form of tipping device - e.g. molten metal duties?

Edited August 16, 2018 by Osgood

[Ruston]

But why put it in a comparatively vulnerable place, at the other end of the loco and below the tank level? Surely a filler on the bunker top would be easier, more secure and less prone to potential leakage.

Interestingly the photos I've seen suggest the tube is only on the front end of the 040t, not on the rear and not on the six coupled locos.

It does look like there's something between the frames it connects to, but that's where the cylinders are, so whatever it is can't be that big.

 

Is there a possibility that the pipe is an outlet of water/steam for some reason?

I did say that it could possibly be an extra tank, so the main tank would stil be in the cab and be filled from above.

 

But thinking about it, the whole idea of them being oil-fired, apart from the bunker and window design, doesn't add up. This is South Wales in the period before the First World War when coal was plentiful and mined locally, so it couldn't have been cheaper to import oil to run locomotives on than to use local coal. Neither is there an operational reason tto use oil - It's an iron works, not a paper mill or anywhere you wouldn't want sparks coming out of the chimney.

 

I suppose the idea of supplying steam to some fixed plant is plausible but why would you tie up a locomotive to do this and not have a stationary boiler? Don't such works have plenty of steam available from stationary boilers anyway? Steam would have powered machinery in the processes at the works, wouldn't it?

[Ruston]

I think maybe the oil-firing idea isn't so silly after all. http://www.alangeorge.co.uk/Images_D-H/DowlaisWorksEngine_No25Gwenllwyn_HeatherSmith.jpg

There appears to be the same type of pipe under the buffer beam as on king George V, Queen Mary and Sandyford, here on this long-boiler Kitson. The sandbox has been put above the coal bunker, so if it was coal-fired, how do you get coal in there now?

[brack]

I think oil fired could be plausible, although they did work in an environment where coal wasn't exactly in short supply (perhaps why the bunker dimensions are so miniscule). I just don't understand why you'd put the filler pipe there if thats what it was (and why have a filler on both sides- did the locos get turned that often? - a central filler on the front footplate would be easier). The idea of a steam (or water) supply does sort of make sense, and the pipes at least go to roughly the right place.

 

Either way, your model is coming along well. are there no later photos of the locos in service?

[Nick Holliday]

Just a note that September's issue of Railway Bylines has a selection of seven loco photos taken around 1931.

[steves17]

On 11/10/2017 at 15:23, sir douglas said:

2 loco photos i've got for Dowlais

Neilson - unknown

Wheel configuration aside it looks very similar to a Dublin & Drogheda engine built in 62 which had a three foot four and a quarter inch boiler dia.

https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/File:Im1925EnV139-p318.jpg

https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Neilson_and_Co

Edited July 3, 2020 by steves17

[lanchester]

Just a late thought about the mystery pipe : it couldn't be for a steam lance as in de-icing pointwork etc? it gets pretty wintery up at Dowlais.

[DayReturn]

I don't think it's an outlet at all, but for shunting using a cable rope or chain in confined spaces.  Assuming the steel rope ends with a loop or eye splice, or the chain ends with a large link, both of which are commonplace, the cable can be looped onto that bar and kept in place by the flange over which the loop cannot slip.  The other end is attached to the wagon's horse-shunting hook attached to its solebar, directly, or via a capstan.  Using that bar instead of the drawbar hook means the cable is less likely to foul the track or motion or other wagons, such that for example wagons can be shunted on the same track with other wagons in between.  Normally you would use one or two horses for that sort of work, but perhaps either these wagons are extra heavy or shunted in multiple, or the absence of clear space or suitable ground underfoot, or the environment is unsuitable for horses.

Edited August 27, 2021 by DayReturn

[Ruston]

16 hours ago, DayReturn said:

I don't think it's an outlet at all, but for shunting using a cable rope or chain in confined spaces.  Assuming the steel rope ends with a loop or eye splice, or the chain ends with a large link, both of which are commonplace, the cable can be looped onto that bar and kept in place by the flange over which the loop cannot slip.  The other end is attached to the wagon's horse-shunting hook attached to its solebar, directly, or via a capstan.  Using that bar instead of the drawbar hook means the cable is less likely to foul the track or motion or other wagons, such that for example wagons can be shunted on the same track with other wagons in between.  Normally you would use one or two horses for that sort of work, but perhaps either these wagons are extra heavy or shunted in multiple, or the absence of clear space or suitable ground underfoot, or the environment is unsuitable for horses.

I really don't think it's that. Where is the flange that you mention? I see a screw cap at the end of the tube, not a flange.