S.W. Johnson's Great Eastern Railway and S&DJR 0-6-0s and 0-4-4Ts

[Compound2632]

During his time as Locomotive Superintendent of the Great Eastern Railway, S.W. Johnson was responsible for the building of two classes of 0-6-0 goods engines, some 110 engines in total: the 417 Class built 1867-9 and the 477 Class of 1871-3. In many ways these were the precursors of his standard goods engines for the Midland Railway, although those engines were considerably larger, as he adopted Matthew Kirtley's standard 8'0" + 8'6" wheelbase.

 

Does anyone have to hand or know of a reference for the principal dimensions of the Great Eastern engines? It's the mechanical dimensions I'm interested in: cylinder and boiler dimensions in particular; wheel diameter and wheelbase would be interesting too.

 

EDIT to correct total number of engines - the GER Soc website appears to be wrong in saying there were 50 of the 417 Class. The Wikipedia article references Baxter: 20 built by Neilson and 40 by the Yorkshire Engine Co. 

Edited October 8, 2019 by Compound2632

[Caley739]

During his time as Locomotive Superintendent of the Great Eastern Railway, S.W. Johnson was responsible for the building of two classes of 0-6-0 goods engines, some 90 engines in total: the 417 Class built 1867-9 and the 477 Class of 1871-3. In many ways these were the precursors of his standard goods engines for the Midland Railway, although those engines were considerably larger, as he adopted Matthew Kirtley's standard 8'0" + 8'6" wheelbase.

 

Does anyone have to hand or know of a reference for the principal dimensions of the Great Eastern engines? It's the mechanical dimensions I'm interested in: cylinder and boiler dimensions in particular; wheel diameter and wheelbase would be interesting too.

British Locomotive Catalogue Volume 6 by Bertram Baxter has some very limited dimension details pages 40 and 42. Long out of print but second hand copies not too diffciult to find.

[John_Miles]

The GE society have records in the Essex archive in Chelmsford - may be worth a look online. IIRC Ahrons says something about these but that is the only place I have read about Johnson's GE engines.

[John_Miles]

The Ahrons articles on the GE locos were in Railway Magazine for 1918. I've had a look and can't find anything about these engines, he largely concentrates on passenger engines.

[Compound2632]

The Ahrons articles on the GE locos were in Railway Magazine for 1918. I've had a look and can't find anything about these engines, he largely concentrates on passenger engines.

 

"The Great Eastern goods engines do not require special mention." (I have all but Vol. 4 - Great Western &c. - of the Heffer 1952 reprint.) Ahrons does mention the thirty 0-4-4T engines of the 134 Class, with 5'3" drivers and 17" x 24" cylinders. That these engines were built by Avonside may be significant. The context of my question is that, having picked up a second-hand copy of D. Bradley and D. Milton, Somerset and Dorset Locomotive History (David & Charles, 1973), I'm intrigued by the relationship between the engines Johnson supplied for that line in the early years of the Joint Committee and his contemporary engines for the Midland itself. The S&DJR Avonside 0-4-4Ts form a sort of "missing link" between the 6 and 1262 Classes, which were tried out on the S&DJR, and the 1532 Class. But what's really got me going is trying to understand why the "Scotties" - the S&DJR 0-6-0s built first by Neilson and later in larger numbers by Vulan, were tender engine versions of the 1102 or A Class (also built by Neilson and Vulcan), rather than being straight copies of the standard goods engines, as was the case for engines built for the S&DJR and the M&GN in the 1890s. Part of the answer seems to be that the standard goods was only just becoming standard, in the form of the 1357 Class, Johnson's first 0-6-0s for the Midland being the smaller-wheeled 1142 Class.

 

John Miles won't need reminding that the 1102 Class 0-6-0Ts were built to satisfy an urgent need for engines to work the Midland's newly acquired route to Swansea - a long, heavily graded, single-track route not unlike the Somerset & Dorset line. The poor condition of the S&D's permanent way in the 1870s may also have contributed to a case for lighter engines.

[Edwardian]

The Mike Sharman Oakwood Portolio volume has 7mm scale drawings (taken from The Locomotive Magazine).

 

Very handsome they are, too.

 

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/sw-johnson/no-417

 

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/sw-johnson/no-477

Edited April 9, 2018 by Edwardian

[Compound2632]

The Mike Sharman Oakwood Portolio volume has 7mm scale drawings (taken from The Locomotive Magazine).

 

Very handsome they are, too.

 

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/sw-johnson/no-417

 

https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/locomotives/sw-johnson/no-477

 

Thanks - a nice cheap in print Oakwood volume too! I'd looked at the pictures. It's a shame the GER Soc pages don't give more technical detail.

[Edwardian]

Thanks - a nice cheap in print Oakwood volume too! I'd looked at the pictures. It's a shame the GER Soc pages don't give more technical detail.

 

No, but the years you need for the Locomotive Magazine are 1909 and 1910 - I assume that this would give some of the specifications you want

[wagonman]

According to C J Allen's book on the The GER the 417 class had 16.5in x 24in cylinders and 5ft 3in wheels and the 477 class 17x24 cylinders and 5ft 1in wheels. He gives the boiler pressure and the weight but not alas the wheelbase or external dimensions.

[Compound2632]

S.W. Johnson’s earlier six-coupled engines

 

Thanks to the contributions of wagonman and Edwardian – the latter for providing scans of the Locomotive Magazine drawings – along with the information from Baxter summarised on the Wikipedia page, I’ve built up the following picture:

 

GER 417 Class

The 20 engines built by Neilson (presumed Nos. 417-436) and the 40 by Worcester Engine Co. (presumed Nos. 437-476) seem to have had the same dimensions:

 

cylinders 16½” x 24”, driving wheels 5’3”, wheelbase 7’6” + 7’8”

boiler length 10’0”, diameter 4’2”, firebox length 5’3”, grate area 15¼ sq ft (estimate)

boiler centre line at 6’4” above rail.

 

GER 477 Class

All 50 engines had 17” x 24” cylinders, 5’1” driving wheels and boilers pitched at 6’9” above rail level but there seem to be some differences between engines from different makers.

The 20 engines built by Beyer Peacock in 1871 (including no. 477, so presumably Nos. 477-496) seem to have had the same sized boilers as the 417 Class, but slightly longer wheelbase, 7’6” + 7’10”.

The 15 engines built by The Yorkshire Engine Co. in 1873 (including No. 522 so presumably Nos. 512-526) appear to have had longer fireboxes, about 5’6”, giving an estimated grate area of 16 sq ft, and longer wheelbase to suit, 7’6” + 8’0”.

 

Note that the boiler and firebox dimensions are the external dimensions of the unclad boiler, for consistency with the dimensions quoted in Essery & Jenkinson’s Midland Locomotives [2], rather than e.g. boiler length between tubeplates. The Locomotive Magazine drawings show the external dimensions over cladding, so I’ve had to estimate making allowances for this. The 4’2” boiler diameter is a nominal figure as the boiler would be constructed from sections of wrought iron tube telescoped into each other and riveted together.

 

Midland 1102 and 1377 Classes

 

When Johnson moved to Derby in July 1873 there was a steady stream of Kirtley’s 700 Class outside-framed 0-6-0s (with 17” x 24” cylinders, 5’2½” wheels and of course 8’0” + 8’6” wheelbase) being delivered by outside builders so there was no immediate need for a new design of general purpose goods engine. He quickly identified a need for shunting engines to release tender goods engines from such duties and his first design was the 1102 Class 0-6-0T, although as noted above many of these went to work the newly-acquired Swansea Vale and Hereford Hay and Brecon lines. Construction of the first batch by Neilson was authorised in September 1873, with further batches being built by Neilson and Vulcan. These engines had some dimensions in common with the GER 477 Class, but shorter fireboxes and hence shorter wheelbase, along with smaller wheels:

 

cylinders 17” x 24”, driving wheels 4’6½”, wheelbase 7’4” + 7’8”

boiler length 10’0”, diameter 4’2”, firebox length 5’0”, grate area 14½ sq ft (class A boiler)

boiler centre line at 6’9” above rail.

 

After the 40 engines of the 1102 Class had been delivered, there were some detail changes for subsequent shunting engines, though the leading dimension remained as for the 1102 Class. This gave rise to a new class designation, the 1377 Class, the first batches of which were built at Derby, authorisation for construction being given in August 1877 [1,2].

 

Midland 1142 and 1357 Classes

 

Johnson had identified a need for more mineral engines, which resulted in orders for the first 50 of the 1142 Class being placed with Kitson and Dübs in May 1874. These had Kirtley’s 8’0” + 8’6” wheelbase but 4’10½” wheels. Johnson went for considerably larger cylinders than for previous goods engines, 17½” x 26”, and these engines also had what became his standard class B boiler, 10’6” long, 5’6” firebox, 17½ sq ft grate area.

 

After 100 of these engines had been built, there was a need for more goods engines, resulting in Dübs getting an order for the first 20 of the 1357 Class in January 1877. These engines had the same cylinders and boiler as the 1142 Class but reverted to the 5’2½” wheels of the Kirtley goods engines [1,2].

 

S&DJR Class G “Scottie”

 

The Midland and L&SW took control of the Somerset & Dorset Railway on 1 November 1875, the Midland taking on responsibility for the eclectic mix of engines and the L&SW for the fragile permanent way. For goods traffic, the only decent engines were the six nearly-new Fowler 0-6-0s Nos. 19-24. The Midland immediately lent a pair of Kirtley 240 Class 0-6-0s, Nos. 351 and 353 [3], and a pair of 1102 Class 0-6-0Ts, Nos 1127 and 1128 which had only just arrived at Kentish Town from the Vulcan Foundry [1].

 

Thus when a decision was being made about new goods engines for the S&DJR, Johnson had to hand drawings for both the mineral and goods versions of his new “big” 0-6-0 for the Midland and for the 0-6-0Ts, along with practical experience of:

 

1. work of the Kirtley 240 Class on the S&DJR
2. work of the 1102 Class on the S&DJR
3. work of the 1102 Class on the comparable Hereford-Swansea line
4. work of tender engines of broadly similar dimensions to the 1102 Class on the GER.

 

For whatever reason, the “big” engines were rejected – perhaps weight? It would appear that the tank engines were proving successful on the Swansea line, so why go for a tender version for the S&DJR? Weight again? Or perhaps faster schedules – the desire to avoid too many stops for water?

 

In the event, the first batch of six “Scotties”, ordered from Neilson in June 1877, made use of the drawings for the 1102 Class, 25 of which Neilson had built, whilst the remaining 22 “Scotties” built by the Vulcan Foundry from 1879, used the drawings for the 1377 Class. What’s not clear is why the 1102 Class drawings should be used for the first batch, when the 1377 Class drawings were already available.

 

References

1. S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives (Irwell Press, 4 Vols. 2000-2005).
2. R.J. Essery and D. Jenkinson, An Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives (Wild Swan Publications, 4 Vols. 1984-1989).
3. D. Bradley and D. Milton, Somerset and Dorset Locomotive History (David & Charles, 1973).

Edited April 10, 2018 by Compound2632

[John_Miles]

Thanks - a nice cheap in print Oakwood volume too! I'd looked at the pictures. It's a shame the GER Soc pages don't give more technical detail.

 

What is interesting to me about he GER locos is they had smokebox wing plates - rather Scottish and of course Johnson had spent time in Scotland. The 1102 class also had these at first and there were some 2-4-0s for the GER that had them. In all his later designs, there were no smokebox wing plates so he obviously decided locos looked better with out them - and I agree!!! IMHO there is nothing better looking in locomotive terms than a Johnson loco. Did his GER 0-4-4Ts also have wing plates?

 

Johnson was followed by Adams who later in his career built some very handsome 0-4-4Ts. I wonder if he was influenced by the Johnson engines?

[John_Miles]

The 4-4-0s that Johnson originally provided for the S&D were smaller than the current Midland engines and originally they were given 0-4-4Ts for the through passenger service. I am not sure if these were smaller than the Midland equivalents but there does seem to be a theme here. 

[Compound2632]

The 4-4-0s that Johnson originally provided for the S&D were smaller than the current Midland engines and originally they were given 0-4-4Ts for the through passenger service. I am not sure if these were smaller than the Midland equivalents but there does seem to be a theme here. 

 

Yes, that's exactly the theme I'm exploring. Hopefully I'll be able to report back on the 0-4-4Ts soon.

 

The engines supplied to the M&GN were standard designs - 4-4-0s of essentially the 1808 class IIRC and 0-6-0s of class M, but this was later - 1890s - rather than 1870s/80s.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

Yes, that's exactly the theme I'm exploring. Hopefully I'll be able to report back on the 0-4-4Ts soon.

 

The engines supplied to the M&GN were standard designs - 4-4-0s of essentially the 1808 class IIRC and 0-6-0s of class M, but this was later - 1890s - rather than 1870s/80s.

 

Stephen, you have a PM.

 

Great summary, thanks.

[phil_sutters]

Yes, that's exactly the theme I'm exploring. Hopefully I'll be able to report back on the 0-4-4Ts soon.

 

The engines supplied to the M&GN were standard designs - 4-4-0s of essentially the 1808 class IIRC and 0-6-0s of class M, but this was later - 1890s - rather than 1870s/80s.

Bradley & Milton's S&D Locomotive History says that they were smaller editions of bogie tanks built at Derby (Avonside built them - 9) The coupled wheelbase was similar but the bogie axles were more widely spaced. 8'0"+8'6"+5'6" = 22ft Coupled wheels 5'3", bogie wheels 3'0" The boilers @ 10'6" x 4'2"diam. were similar but the fireboxes were 6" shorter @ 5'0"

I was blissfully unaware of this when I used a standard MR 0-4-4T Skinley drawing when I cobbled together a couple of S&D 0-4-4Ts with rewheeled Triang M7 chassis in the mid '60s. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/image/85125-sdjr-no-14a-0-4-4t-bogie-coaches/

[Compound2632]

I've just got a copy of S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Volume Two: The Kirtley Classes (Irwell Pres, 1907) - I'd somehow failed to buy this when it came out, though I have his other volumes. I hadn't thought of this as being connected with my S&DJR reading:

 

 

However, on looking through it I realised something I ought to have picked up on from Essery & Jenkinson's Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives - the 4' wheels and 7'4" + 7'8" wheelbase of Johnson's 1102 and 1377 Class 0-6-0Ts, and hence the S&DJR Scotties, are not derived from Johnson's Great Eastern designs but come straight from the previous design of Midland 0-6-0T, Kirtley's 880 Class of 1871, built by Beyer, Peacock. Admittedly the Kirtley engines were built with 16" x 24" cylinders whereas Johnson's engines had 17" x 24" cylinders like his GER 477 Class engines.

 

I think this goes to show that there was not a radical change in Derby design practice as a result of Johnson taking office; he didn't arrive with a bundle of Stratford drawings under his arm, saying "right, chaps, this is how we're going to be doing things now". Rather, he brought in some modernising ideas (particularly in the area of boiler design) but was primarily building on the existing excellence of the Derby drawing office, much as Stanier was to be  doing sixty years later.

 

The passenger engines are a case in point. At Stratford, Johnson had experimented with inside-cylinder 4-4-0s. At Derby, his passenger engine design work was initially to build on Kirtley's 2-4-0 designs - the 890 and 1070 classes - with new boiler designs. Once he returned to 4-4-0s, all the features of these engines apart from the bogie came from the 2-4-0s. (I've not yet understood the relationship between his Derby and Stratford designs of bogie.)

 

There could be more of a case for direct development of the Midland 0-4-4Ts from Johnson's GER 0-4-4Ts. For one thing, his GER engines were the first of this wheel arrangement to have side tanks; earlier designs, such as Kirtley's, were well or back tanks.

[John_Miles]

I've just got a copy of S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Volume Two: The Kirtley Classes (Irwell Pres, 1907) - I'd somehow failed to buy this when it came out, though I have his other volumes. I hadn't thought of this as being connected with my S&DJR reading:

 

 

However, on looking through it I realised something I ought to have picked up on from Essery & Jenkinson's Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives - the 4' wheels and 7'4" + 7'8" wheelbase of Johnson's 1102 and 1377 Class 0-6-0Ts, and hence the S&DJR Scotties, are not derived from Johnson's Great Eastern designs but come straight from the previous design of Midland 0-6-0T, Kirtley's 880 Class of 1871, built by Beyer, Peacock. Admittedly the Kirtley engines were built with 16" x 24" cylinders whereas Johnson's engines had 17" x 24" cylinders like his GER 477 Class engines.

 

I think this goes to show that there was not a radical change in Derby design practice as a result of Johnson taking office; he didn't arrive with a bundle of Stratford drawings under his arm, saying "right, chaps, this is how we're going to be doing things now". Rather, he brought in some modernising ideas (particularly in the area of boiler design) but was primarily building on the existing excellence of the Derby drawing office, much as Stanier was to be  doing sixty years later.

 

The passenger engines are a case in point. At Stratford, Johnson had experimented with inside-cylinder 4-4-0s. At Derby, his passenger engine design work was initially to build on Kirtley's 2-4-0 designs - the 890 and 1070 classes - with new boiler designs. Once he returned to 4-4-0s, all the features of these engines apart from the bogie came from the 2-4-0s. (I've not yet understood the relationship between his Derby and Stratford designs of bogie.)

 

There could be more of a case for direct development of the Midland 0-4-4Ts from Johnson's GER 0-4-4Ts. For one thing, his GER engines were the first of this wheel arrangement to have side tanks; earlier designs, such as Kirtley's, were well or back tanks.

 

The 8' , 8' 6" wheelbase also came from Kirtley. Howveer you can't say there was otherwise a progression from Kirtley's 0-6-0s to Johnsons, so maybe these do owe something to his GER designs? Johnson may have chosen the same wheel diameter because the patterns existed so it would save money??

Edited April 13, 2018 by John_Miles

[Compound2632]

I'd intended to continue this thread with a discussion of the relationship between Johnson's early 0-4-4Ts: the Great Eastern 134 Class, Midland 6 and 1252 Classes, and the S&DJR "Avonside" engines, which form a coherent set of steps towards the standard form of the Johnson passenger tank engine, the 1532 Class. A year ago last April, @Edwardian kindly sent me copies of the outline drawings of the Great Eastern engines from the Locomotive Magazine. Prompted by recent discussion on his Castle Aching thread, I've returned to the topic but I lack the some mechanical data for the 134 Class: cylinder and boiler/firebox dimensions - length and diameter of barrel (external or between tubeplates), length of firexbox, grate area. Also, it would be interesting to know about the design of the bogie: Adams, or Johnson's own invention?

 

I've altered the thread title in anticipation!

[John-Miles]

Stephen

 

I have just read through this thread and I am going to digress slightly from your title. IIRC Johnson became CME of the Midland in 1872 and the order for the 1102 class was placed with Neilson in the September. So either he burnt a lot of midnight oil or there are two other possibilities that I can think of. The first is that the design was already largely completed when Johnson was appointed and he just tweaked it to give it that Johnson look. This is partially supported by the fact that when more 0-6-0Ts were ordered (the 1377 class) they were different in terms in various aspects. The other possibility is that Derby issued a specification and the detail design was done by Neilson. The only GA that I can find is a Neilson drawing not from Derby.

[Compound2632]

On 09/10/2019 at 15:55, John-Miles said:

Stephen

 

I have just read through this thread and I am going to digress slightly from your title. IIRC Johnson became CME of the Midland in 1872 and the order for the 1102 class was placed with Neilson in the September. So either he burnt a lot of midnight oil or there are two other possibilities that I can think of. The first is that the design was already largely completed when Johnson was appointed and he just tweaked it to give it that Johnson look. This is partially supported by the fact that when more 0-6-0Ts were ordered (the 1377 class) they were different in terms in various aspects. The other possibility is that Derby issued a specification and the detail design was done by Neilson. The only GA that I can find is a Neilson drawing not from Derby.

 

Matthew Kirtley died on 24 May 1873. The Locomotive Committee recommended Johnson's appointment (from a field of 26 applicants) on 2 July 1873 and Johnson was present at the next meeting, on 15 July; he was formally in post from 1 September. Kirtley had fallen ill early in the year; from 4 March, locomotive matters had been handled by a commission made up of Locomotive Department officers - Kirtley's nephew William, who was at the time Superintendent of Derby Works but the following year became Locomotive, Carriage & Wagon Superintendent of the LCDR, along with C.H. Jones and W.H. Adams. The latter two remained on Johnson's staff - in 1898 they were the two Divisional Superintendents. Throughout this period, 2-4-0s of the 890 Class were being built at Derby.

 

At the 17 June 1873 Locomotive Committee meeting a report was read that included the recommendation that ten tank engines were needed for the South Wales traffic - Summerson presumes that this report had been prepared by the commission of Kirtley, Jones, and Adams - this was a year before the SVR was leased to the Midland, so evidently there was some advance planning going on. Approval was given by the General Purposes Committee on 1 July. The earliest drawing for the class was dated 10 September, for the boiler, and the specification put out to tender on 23 September, with Neilson's tender being accepted, for delivery in August and September 1874; the order being entered in their book on 1 October. Delivery was late, the engines entering traffic between November 1874 and January 1875. 

 

Without knowing what other drawings were entered in the register, it's hard to know what design features were carried straight across from Kirtley's 880 Class 0-6-0Ts of 1870 - not the cylinders, which were 16" x 24" on the older engines but 17" x 24" on the 1102 Class, or the wheels, which at 4'6" were 6" larger; only the 7'4" + 7'8" wheelbase is common. It would be very surprising if the cylinders, frames, and motion, along with many other details, were not basically in the style of what was being done at the end of Kirtley's tenure, since the same draughtsmen were drawing them up. I think it's significant that the boiler was the first drawing entered in the register - new boiler design seems to have been very much Johnson's thing in his first few years at Derby, with many of the Kirtley 2-4-0s being given his "P" boiler even though their original boilers were only a few years old. 

 

Neilson's drawing office were certainly involved in some of the detailed design. Neilson had built batches of the 800 and 890 Classes and their drawings for these survive - I suspect that Neilson's practice may have been to re-draw in their own drawing office, possibly in the light of further instructions from Derby amending the tender specification drawings, but also to provide a GA incorporating the components designed in-house. The Neilson GA that James and Essery reproduce is dated 17 June 1874. James and Essery suggest that Neilson's chief draughtsman, Edward Snowball (he of the Drummondesque single No. 123), may have been involved in the design, along with the Great Eastern 134 Class 0-4-4Ts, the first batch of which had been built by Neilson. The wingplates are cited as a tell-tale feature of both classes. They point out that Snowball, like Johnson, had trained with Charles Beyer. They also suggest some design work may have been done by Vulcan, who got an order for a batch of 5 engines on 15 December 1874, alongside an order with Neilson for a further 15; Vulcan also got the order for the final 10 on 16 February 1875. According to James and Essery, the Derby Drawing Register lists some drawings for the class as tracings of Neilson and Vulcan drawings.

 

So, I think it looks as if the design work on the 1102 Class engines was done after Johnson's appointment, since the need for these engines was only identified to the Locomotive Committee a month before his first attendance. It seems to me unlikely that Kirtley, Jones, and Adams had a design for a 0-6-0T up their sleeves in anything but the broadest outline, or that they had already asked Neilson to prepare a design. That's my speculation. If anyone knows better, it'll be @Dave Hunt.

 

References:

 

F. James and R.J. Essery, The Midland Railway 'A' Class 0-6-0 Tank Engines, Midland Record No. 21 (Wild Swan Publications, ND) pp. 7-24.

D. Hunt, The Kirtley Era 2–4–0s, Part 3, Midland Record No. 34 (Wild Swan Publications, 2011) pp. 55-96.

S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 1 (Irwell Press, 2000), Vol. 2 (2007), and Vol. 3 (2002).

Edited October 15, 2019 by Compound2632
Corrected William Kirtley's relationship to Matthew

[Crimson Rambler]

In my opinion the 1102 class represents an example of Johnson building on Kirtley practice. I agree the detailed design work for these engines was carried out after SWJ's arrival mostly I suspect by Neilsons. Incidentally, while the 880 class was undoubtedly the precursor of the 1102s, I suggest much of the design for that class was done by Beyers. As well as being inside framed, because it used the more modern idea of shorter eccentric rods it had all of the motion arranged behind the motion plate although it used Beyer's usual swing links to support the valve spindles. SWJ used similar short eccentric rods on his 'pure' designs whereas MK had hitherto stayed with longer rods. Both 0-6-0T classes had their main frame plates spaced 4ft 2ins apart. This was the standard Kirtley dimension whereas SWJ normally used 4ft - 1.5ins. However this 'non-standard' frame spacing was retained for all the small 0-6-0Ts built subsequently - certainly as far as the Class N of the 1890s. I suspect it also applies to the Class Q but I will need to confirm this, whereas the later big 0-6-0Ts Classes S and U had their frames 4ft 1.5ins apart. 

Midland locomotive design is a intruiging subject even if at times it resembles a game of three-dimensionan chess!

 

Edward Snowball was a fascinating character and thought nothing it seems of altering railway companies designs if he thought it improved things! Thus he was responsible for introducing the elegant reverse curve between the spashers of Midland 2-4-0s and 4-4-0s. He also seemingly increased the frame depth of the Class D 0-4-4T - the Derby drawing had the top frame finish flush with the top of the platform whereas as built it was proud of it by and inch or so.

 

Crimson Rambler

 

 

[Northroader]

Your man also had a son, James Johnson, who worked for the GNoSR fro 1890. He produced some locos which carried on the 0-4-4T MR locos. - Class R, nine 84-92 built by Neilson 1893. (LNER G10 6884-6892)

 

Cylinders 17.5” x 26”

drivers 5’0” diam

bogies 3’0.5” diam.

w/b 7’6” 9’0” 5’6”

 

[Compound2632]

He did indeed. To add to the web of interconnectedness, James married Dugald Drummond's daughter Christine - Drummond and Johnson, along with Stroudley, having been together at Cowlairs before the Edinburgh & Glasgow was taken over by the North British. Their third child was named Dugald Samuel Waite Johnson. Did his perambulator have wingplates or not?

 

Apart from his brief stint on the Great North, following his training at Derby, little seems to be known of his career.

[Compound2632]

36 minutes ago, Crimson Rambler said:

Edward Snowball was a fascinating character and thought nothing it seems of altering railway companies designs if he thought it improved things! Thus he was responsible for introducing the elegant reverse curve between the spashers of Midland 2-4-0s and 4-4-0s.

 

 Well, that revelation shakes the accepted wisdom of the history of locomotive aesthetics to its core. I'd love to understand the evidence!

[Crimson Rambler]

To answer your question, the evidence concerning the introduction of the reverse curve connecting the splashers is as follows:-

I was told Neilson introduced it by Jack Braithewaite - the doyen of Midland locomotive aesthetics - I could claim his friendship along with that of David Tee who supported the theory. The curve first appeared on the batch of 6ft - 9ins 2-4-0s Nos 1502-1531 built by Neilsons. These engines were never given a class letter designation but were always referred to as 'Like O.232' i.e. they were similar to the corresponding Derby built engines. An early photo of No. 1527 in as-built condition appears in Summerson Vol 3 p10.

Conversely the corresponding Derby built engines were to two GA drawings 79-1194 for Nos 1400-1409 (O.232) while engines Nos 1472-91 (O.273) were to GA 80-1376. As-built photos of the first batch shew a flat section as do similar condition photos of O.273. I have never seen the GA for the Neilson batch - long ago I was told it didn't exist so cannot present absolute proof but GA 80-1376 shews the flat section.

If we accept the opinions of two of the most knowledgeable recent Midland locomotive enthusiasts that Neilsons did indeed introduce the reverse curve then it can explain the presence of a flat section on the next batch of Derby built passenger engines - 4-4-0s Nos 1562-71. According to Essery & Jenks (Vol 2 p86), the 1562s were the last Johnson passenger engines built with the flattened centre section. Possibly that piece of information either came from or was confirmed by David Tee.

Once Derby adopted the reverse curve it was then applied retrospectively to 'flat topped' engines as they went through the works. Most likely I believe when they were re-boilered (rebuilt in Midland parlance) which possibly explains why it took about 20 years for the last of the 'flatties' to disappear.

 

Incidentally James Johnson resigned from the GNoSR in Aug 1894 to join an engineering firm in the West of England - Scottish Locomotive History 1831-1923 - by Campbell Highet p149.

 

Crimson Rambler