Pre Grouping general discussion

[Regularity]

My SDX will probably end up looking more like this:

 

LNW-DX_2.jpg

Oh poop.

My back head is in need of rather more detail.

[Regularity]

I don't think I've seen a photo of the underside of a Webb tender before. Is the scoop meant to be that way round?

I think the scoop is the right way around. There looks to be some kind of shroud around it, presumably to deflect water that didn’t make it into the scoop back into the trough, rather than spraying it all around?

[Compound2632]

Heswall.jpg

 

GWR loco, LNWR carriages, northern passengers

 

Though I suspect the pink dress is the colorist's flight of fancy.

 

 

I think the scoop is the right way around. There looks to be some kind of shroud around it, presumably to deflect water that didn’t make it into the scoop back into the trough, rather than spraying it all around?

 

Now I see. There's no hint of any such thing in any of the tender drawings in Talbot's An Illustrated History of LNWR Engines or, on a cursory inspection, in side-on photos where one can see the scoop - so it would seem it's not a standard fitting - maybe some shedmaster's local innovation?

 

Is there any other evidence for this fitting?

Edited February 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[Regularity]

Just supposition/guesswork on my part.

[Penlan]

There's no hint of any such thing in any of the tender drawings in Talbot's An Illustrated History of LNWR Engines or, on a cursory inspection, in side-on photos where one can see the scoop - so it would seem it's not a standard fitting - maybe some shedmaster's local innovation?

Is there any other evidence for this fitting?

It was discussed in thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/122041-lnwr-1800-gall-tender-water-pickup-details/page-1&do=findComment&comment=2693165

The photo of the Preston accident shows the tin work was not an original fitment...

The photo in post #258 is in the LNWR Soc's book ' The Railway Photography of P.W.Pilcher', by David Patrick.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Penlan

[Compound2632]

Following on from the observation that nearly all RTR pre-grouping stock is post-1913, in an insomniac moment I’ve made a list of late Victorian and Edwardian locomotive classes for which a preserved example exists to tempt the RTR manufacturers. I have focused on the northern and Scottish lines, as I’m more confident I understand the rebuilding history for these classes – but I am sure I’ve made some errors and am happy to be corrected. I have excluded classes where the preserved example is in a post-Edwardian rebuilt condition and also unique locomotives such as Cornwall, Aerolite, and No. 123.

 

LNWR

 

Coal Tank 0-6-2T (1881, qty 300) - Bachmann

Renewed Precedent 2-4-0 (1887, qty 158)

 

NLR

 

Class 75 0-6-0T (1879, qty 30)

 

LYR

 

Class 25 0-6-0 (1876; qty 280 but see Class 23)

Class 5 2-4-2T (1889; qty 310) – Bachmann

Class 27 0-6-0 (1889; qty 484)

Class 23 0-6-0ST (1891; qty 230 rebuilt from Class 25)

Class 21 0-4-0ST (1886, qty 60) – Hornby

 

Midland

 

Class 156 2-4-0 (1890s in current condition*, qty 29)

Class 115 4-2-2 (1896*, qty 15)

*preserved with post-1907 Deeley smokebox/chimney

 

LT&SR

 

Class 79 4-4-2T (1909, qty 39)

 

GNR

 

A2 4-2-2 (1870, qty 53) – Rapido

C1 4-4-2 (1898, qty 22)

J13 0-6-0ST (1897, qty 85) – Hornby

(I am aware that these class designations are anachronistic for the Edwardian period)

 

GER

T26 2-4-0 (1891, qty 100)

S56 0-6-0T (1904, qty 20)

Y14 0-6-0 (1883, qty 289)

 

NER

 

1001 0-6-0 (1852, qty 192)

901 2-4-0 (1884 in preserved condition, qty 55)

1463 2-4-0 (1892 in preserved condition, qty 20)

C1 0-6-0 (1886, qty 201 including conversions from C)

H 0-4-0T (1888, qty 24)

M1 4-4-0 (1892, qty 20, or 52 if include Q & Q1)

 

Caledonian

Class 419 0-4-4T (1900, qty 92)

Class 828 0-6-0 (1899, 96)

 

Highland

 

Jones Goods 4-6-0 (1894, qty 15)

 

It’s interesting to note the dominance of the LYR in this list, both in terms of class types and absolute numbers of locomotives. A Class 25 would be just the thing to go with my kit-built LYR wagons!

[Hroth]

Heswall.jpg

 

GWR loco, LNWR carriages, northern passengers

Nice postcard.

 

The station is now a housing estate, cutting a chunk out of  the "Wirral Way". Walkers, etc, now have to detour through the streets to bypass the stupidity.

[Castlefinn]

I must say the DX looks in Great Western Green with proper plates,though its amazing how many people think its a Dean Goods.Andy.

[Regularity]

I must say the DX looks in Great Western Green with proper plates,though its amazing how many people think its a Dean Goods.Andy.

?

[Castlefinn]

The Great Western inherited 2 from the Manchester & Milford Railway,1338 lasted until 1915.Andy

[Regularity]

I wasn’t sure what you were referring to: your comment was somewhat apropos nothing without a quote.

 

But no. They didn’t have any DX goods on the M&M.

 

They were Webb 17” coal engines, not DX goods - smaller wheels, smaller splashers, closed splashers (unlike the DX which had an open-fronted crankpin splasher) and unlike the Cauliflower but like the DX goods, a straight footplate. Also, like only a small number of DX goods and unlike all Cauliflowers, they all had cast iron H-spoke wheel centres. I could maybe understand someone thinking a DX or especially a Webb rebuilt SDX looks a bit like a Dean 2301 goods engine in original round-topped firebox guise, but not a coal engine. They had proper plates on the LNWR.

 

In historical order:

DX goods.

Coal engine.

Special DX (rebuild).

Cauliflower.

[NCB]

There's plenty of South Wales 0-6-2s which made it into BR days, some partially rebuilt, some in more or less original condition. Very minor mods to the 56XX chassis (being based on Rhymney 0-6-2s) would cover a lot of them.  Some pre-grouping Rhymney stock would go down nicely.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Photo of 1338. The smokebox door is not LNWR and the lamp sockets have been replaced by lamp irons. Otherwise the loco looks very much in LNWR condition The tender is not LNWR but presumably GWR.

 

 

4mm model on 1338 built from LRM LNWR Coal Engine kit with GWR tender? (tender kit origin not known).

 

 

Edited to add additional comments re 1338.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Jol Wilkinson

[Regularity]

That smokebox door kind of suits it.

Always nice to be reminded that the GWR had at least two decent locos...

[Compound2632]

... and of course the DXs did start out in Ramsbottom's green livery. But doesn't Webb's LNWR livery look good on a Great Western engine?

[Regularity]

... and of course the DXs did start out in Ramsbottom's green livery.

 

But thankfully, they soon saw sense on the LNWR...

But doesn't Webb's LNWR livery look good on a Great Western engine?

What doesn’t it look good on?

[Compound2632]

What doesn’t it look good on?

 

It even looks good on this.

[Mrkirtley800]

OMG

Derek

[Northroader]

This is the best livery for those, however:

[Compound2632]

Oh dear.

[Mike 84C]

Interestingly the OO works round top firebox version of the GSR J15 got booked up very quickly. Maybe even sold out by now, It looks very similar to LNWR 0-6-0 tender engines and the model is selling into a much smaller market. So maybe there is the demand in the UK market for a Special goods/ Cauliflower/ Coal engine.

[Regularity]

GSR J15... ...looks very similar to LNWR 0-6-0 tender engines

Look at the background of who designed it, and you would be surprised if there wasn’t similarity between the two...

[Edwardian]

Does anyone happen to know the wheel diameter and wheelbase for the GSR J15?

 

I ask because, though this seems essentially to have been a Beyer Peacock design with a GSR, as McDonnell was responsible, rather unsurprisingly it looks strikingly similar to McDonnell's Class 59 for the NER.

 

Or J22, if you only speak LNER.

 

The curved running board is found on some of the class (the Darlington builds), and they had the sloping smoke box fronts until re-boilered by the Worsdells. 

 

Not that I can afford £230 for the OO Works model!

[Northroader]

The GS&WR “101” class, GSR/CIE “J15” had 5’1” drivers, on a wheelbase of 7’6” + 8’3”, although I’ve seen a wheelbase of 15’ 6” quoted as well, and the NER “59” class, LNER “J22, had 5’1” drivers, and a wheelbase of 7’9” + 8’3”. Being the NER, two had 5’7” drivers, and there was different boiler pitches and tenders.

[Compound2632]

The GS&WR “101” class, GSR/CIE “J15” had 5’1” drivers, on a wheelbase of 7’6” + 8’3”, although I’ve seen a wheelbase of 15’ 6” quoted as well, and the NER “59” class, LNER “J22, had 5’1” drivers, and a wheelbase of 7’9” + 8’3”. Being the NER, two had 5’7” drivers, and there was different boiler pitches and tenders.

 

Some creep in size over the 7'3" + 8'3" of Ramsbottom's DX from which McDonnell's engines were derived.