Jump to content
 
  • entries
    63
  • comments
    344
  • views
    11,115

Book Format for Locomotive Development


JimC

1,037 views

I'm mulling over something different in the way of formats. Traditionally locomotive books have been written class by class, which in many ways is the most logical way to do it. But the trouble is that its difficult to get a sense of how design developed. Say for instance, you're looking at GWR 0-6-0 freight engines. You list the 57 class and its history from a cabless domeless sandwich frame locomotive in 1855 with Gooch motion, then maybe the renewals around the mid 1870s which were almost new locomotives, domes boilers,  Stephenson link etc, and then typical 1890s boilers, even Belpaire fireboxes before being withdrawn mostly in the 1910s. Then you jump back to the 79s in 1857, and a similar story, and so it proceeds, jumping between eras and what by the end of their lives are very different locomotives. Which is fine, and its conventional because it works for most people, but it makes it very difficult to gain a picture of how the design school was progressing. A Dean Goods at the end of the class service life in the 40s and 50s was a very different beast to the first built Dean Goods in the early 1880s, and maybe it makes as much or even more sense to look at it alongside a 2251 as opposed to an Armstrong Goods?

So then I got to thinking, OK, lets look at it over a time line. The most extreme version would be to use a format of annals - literally year by year, So sort of 

"1903.
Of the 60 locomotives built this year, most were transitional Dean/Churchward types with Churchward boilers. There were 10 Aberdares with Std 4 tapered boilers without top feed and slide valves. 27 Bulldogs, which mostly had second hand parallel barrel Std 2 boilers, although the last ten had short cone taper boilered Std 2s. The reason for the second hand boilers was that the original plan was for a sort of super Bulldog with a Std 4 boiler, but in the event these were used to upgrade Aberdares instead. The ten new Cities, fitted with Std 4 boilers were also built this year as were a further 10 of the 36xx 2-4-2Ts. Most notable, however, was the start of the Churchward revolution. The 2nd and 3rd prototype Saints 98 and 171, the 28xx, No 97 and the large Prairie No 99 all appeared this year, the first with the Churchward front end with integrated cylinders/saddle. The DeGlehn  no 102 also made its first appearance this year. Arguably this was year the final form of the British steam locomotive appeared.
Then illustrations of a City and the Churchward prototypes perhaps."

An alternate approach would be to do periods of design, for instance Churchward/Dean Transition and Churchward Standards. That would separate the 36xx, Aberdare, Std boilers on 4-4-0s and the Std 2/4 boiler era from the true outside cylinder era, and in many ways would be a lot more readable, but on the other hand there would be big overlaps, with transition types like the Bird and Flower as late as 1908, but the outside cylinders starting in 1903. On the other hand it would be a lot more readable.

What do you think folks? Would you be more likely to purchase a book based on timelines? Rigidly as annals, or more flexible with eras?

 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 5

41 Comments


Recommended Comments



Having followed your posts, I'll be buying whatever you ship 😁. What would be fantastic would be a set of digital drawings that could be shipped or bought separately with them. The year by year idea definitely has its upside. I'm looking to scratch build a Class 655 and 2721 No 2705 & 2799 so this approach might help narrow down specifics that that batch had.

Link to comment

They're certainly a minefield, the pre group 0-6-0Ts. The challenge is not so much what they were like when built, as what they were like a few years down the lines after overhauls at different factories.
Making larger scale digital versions of the drawings available is a very interesting idea. I'll give some serious thought to that. Thankyou. Relationships/contracts with publishers may well not permit it though. 

Link to comment

I like the idea of year by year, or design periods, I think they would be easier to find the information for a particular loco for a particular year. Twould be easier than jumping from one book to another collating the required information. 

PS just bought a copy of the loco development book this summer, 👍👍.

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold

I can see it as a selling point for a gap in the market. I would also as an enthusiast be interested in such a cross-class, temporal approach.

 

That said, some thoughts:

 

I would personally prefer a narrative that describes overall changes without getting bogged down in too much esoteric technical detail. I think it would be important to maintain a sense of flow.

 

TBH, I think year by year might make for slightly dull reading after a while? Maybe  longer time spans instead, e.g. 5-10 years with a focus on selected key issues and developments in that period (e.g. your "eras"). Or has that already been done?

 

In extension of that, I wonder if it's all that interesting to go through detail of how many locos were built in a particular class each year? That would perhaps be better presented in a table format? 

 

Edited by Mikkel
  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Mikkel said:

In extension of that, I wonder if it's all that interesting to go through detail of how many locos were built in a particular class each year? That would perhaps be better presented in a table format? 

 

That's do-able, on a DIY basis, from John Daniel's spreadsheet:

http://www.gwr.org.uk/notes/Loco_lot_nos.xls

 

Also, BRDatabase is very useful for drilling down on a date basis.

 

Edited by Miss Prism
  • Like 1
Link to comment

I'm not so keen on the year-by-year analysis, because some years are chock-a-block full of revolution, and many other years are very quiet.

 

I think any choice of theme will inevitably be compromised because there's many ways of cutting the cake. The dominant theme of Nock's books for example is  'performance', which is fascinating in its own way, but as a result tends to concentrate on the larger express locos - the smaller lesser types are not considered to be particularly noteworthy.

 

The treatment slicing can also be non-era/non-class, e.g. 'brakes', 'boilers', 'superheating', 'maintenance'. For very nerdy niches, how about wheels and chimneys!

 

Modellers and prototype enthusiasts have different perspectives, and the 'era' slicing probably represents the best compromise and the most popular demand.

 

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold

Hi Jim,

 

I think that the reader might want to follow their own path through this huge matrix of information, to suit their particular interest, and so a format that is heavily cross-referenced might be a good way to go. For example, a section about a class (or a lot?) might then refer to other locos built the same year, at Swindon, at Wolverhampton, with the same boiler, same valve gear, etc. etc. all with page references so that the reader can flick to them. Maybe supplemented with some indexes arranged in different ways.

 

That might also be helpful in separating the interesting content from the drier relationship details?

 

Thought: The changes in development that you are tracking mainly occurred between Lots so I wonder if Classes are the right way to divide up the content? Perhaps Classes should be another cross-reference - although obviously a very important one.

 

(Thanks for the link to the errata - very useful.)

 

Phil

  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

That's do-able, on a DIY basis, from John Daniel's spreadsheet:

http://www.gwr.org.uk/notes/Loco_lot_nos.xls

I've been working with that, but didn't find it as useful as I hoped. It's not very sortable which doesn't help. Also I don't like that he lists locomotives by the last number they carried, not the build number. I've got a spreadsheet I've been working on for several days which will be the data source for this project, and although I started with the John Daniels sheet I also reckoned I needed to OCR the complete lot lists from RCTS part one, which I'm treating as the master reference. Then combine the two, and deal with all the issues like lots that need to be divided up for different years, design changes or whatever. I've also had to make reference to the individual RCTS volumes for further details. Its a considerable task and not very congenial!
The trouble is that making a database of GWR locomotives is decidedly awkward. Paper registers don't always transfer well to computers. There's no unique key, and not easy to construct one. A locomotive can have multiple numbers, classes, wheel arrangements etc etc, and a number multiple locomotives. It's all very messy! 
 

11 hours ago, Mikkel said:

TBH, I think year by year might make for slightly dull reading after a while? Maybe  longer time spans instead, e.g. 5-10 years with a focus on selected key issues and developments in that period

Yes, I have that concern as well. especially when its a few successive years of very similar types. 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Harlequin said:

I think that the reader might want to follow their own path through this huge matrix of information, to suit their particular interest, and so a format that is heavily cross-referenced might be a good way to go.

Yes indeedy. I don't think the tech is quite there yet - at least not without some more advanced programming than I really want to do or are capable of, but I can visualise an electronic book in which one has multiple indices, and can check the level of detail required and then have software create chapters that contain the required content in a readable form. Perhaps each paragraph, maybe even sentence would need its own meta data, and the software would assemble the text with the required meta data in the order defined by the chosen indices. Be an emperor sized job to label all the paragraphs with the correct meta data though. A book that could be different every time you read it!

Link to comment

I agree the John Daniel spreadsheet needs re-writing before it is user-friendly! (I don't like the entries under the diagrams column - very confusing.)  Also, although I haven't studied the matter, there do seem to be different locos carrying the same number. (Not a fault of that spreadsheet of course.)

 

Your last comment strongly hints at the march of AI. What I am increasingly struck by is how stupid Google is. Despite having the gwr.org page to pour over for the last 13 years, it's only recently it has been able to define 'pannier tank' (a passable but slightly amusing effort), and it thinks they only came into existence in 1929. Hmmm.

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

(I don't like the entries under the diagrams column - very confusing.) 

Yes, I haven't got to that one yet, but my impression is he's listing all the diagrams that a given class/sub class could have. For the 20thC classes it could be useful to list the diagram each lot was built against, but pretty much all of the most complex and difficult classes to get one's head around predate the diagram system.  It would be helpful to have the date each diagram was issues, but by and large I haven't traced that yet.

Link to comment

Though I do have a large and growing book collection I am probably not in the main target audience for this type of book as I don't normally like books that are overly technical. My interest is more to the operating side of the railway, how the requirements for more powerful or faster locomotives are balanced against other considerations such as cost or axle loading, and arguments with the civil engineer. Also information on where the classes were commonly found during their life, and sort of traffic they worked.

I prefer books that read well, perhaps because the author has included anecdotes relating to the subject, and then realise that I have also picked up some technical information along the way. Some cross-referencing is a good idea, and I always appreciate a chart or two,

 

cheers

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment

Gantt chart style presentation might work well.  Eg a set of blocks for the different batches of castles with thin lines back to precursor ‘activities’ where a new technique was introduced that led to the differences in the new batch.

 

suspect that the evolution of design with rebuilds and heavy overhauls complicates the picture though and not as simple as just new locomotive builds.

  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Clearwater said:

suspect that the evolution of design with rebuilds and heavy overhauls complicates the picture though and not as simple as just new locomotive builds.

I think you're absolutely right. I had better think more about how  to approach this with a different format. I suspect, for example that at any given period, especially end of 19thC, new boilers on different types coming out of the shops would be similar, and it would be good if one could show developments appearing across the fleet new and nominally old locomotives together. I'm thinking that my lots spreadsheet which I'm using to pick out time lines needs to include significant rebuilds etc. 

If I can tie down dates for locomotive diagrams in the 20thC better than I have so far that might help for that era. I've done a bit of that by interpolating the dates of diagrams for new classes. 19thC will be quite a bit of work. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I like the idea of categorising by theme, but as this thread highlights we all have our own preference or interpretation as to how this could be achieved. Maybe that's why many authors settle on class or a specific designer?  

 

For what it's worth, I think categorising by purpose may be the most practical. I.E. Evolution of the express engine, shunter, etc. This would allow you to include modern traction too if you wanted. There would also be scope for a book on experimental designs.

 

Good luck with your research and writing.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

A glance at the contents pages of Ahrons 'The British Steam Railway Locomotive 1825-1925' might give some food for thought. 

 

He mixes several different methods of classification - starting by time periods, within which he traces various lines of development.  He punctuates this progression by occasional chapters on 'performance', which includes the effects of various technical developments.  There are also some chapters on very specific types of locomotive.  In the GWR context, the special needs of the Welsh valleys comes to mind.

 

Mike

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

Yes, its an interesting format, and works pretty well. Of course he's got a much wider variety to contend with. I haven't found it that easy a format to dip into in search of specifics, but it's a good book to read seriously. Which makes me think, is there a difference between a non-fiction book and a reference book? 

---------------

On a different topic I'm wondering about absorbed types in the context of a chronological format. Going back to say 1870 or before the vast majority of the narrow gauge locomotive stock was this essentially random collection from here, there and everywhere which the Armstrongs had to try and conjure a working fleet out of. I think its very easy to give inadequate emphasis to the absorbed types, but at the same time are people interested?

This is a section I've drafted for the Shrewsbury and Birmingham's absorbed stock. What seems to be practical is a listing of the fleet and then detail, including a sketch if possible, of more significant types.
 

Shrewsbury and Birmingham – 1854

The Shrewsbury and Birmingham, which first ran trains in 1849, had 22 locomotives at the time of the merger, also in 1854. They worked closely with the Shrewsbury and Chester and the Birkenhead Railway, and at times locomotives were loaned or transferred between them. The fleet consisted of:-

One 2-2-2 from Bury, Curtis & Kennedy.

One 2-2-2 from E.B. Wilson & Co

One 2-2-2 from W. Fairbairn & Son

Six 0-4-2s and four 0-6-0s from R.B.Longridge & Co.

Four 0-6-0s, three 0-4-2s and a 2-2-2 from Robert Stephenson's.

One 0-4-0T from Sharp, Stewart and Co.

They had a similar history to the S&C fleet and most were withdrawn at similar ages.

 

Nos. 25 & 46-49 (0-6-0)

Builders Longridge

Line Shrewsbury & Birmingham

Driving Wheel Size 4ft 9in

Dates Built 1849-52

Cylinder Dimensions 15in x 24in

Number Built 5

Boiler Class Long boiler type

Dates Withdrawn 1868-1889

060-25.JPG.6091f5ef206a87b1f926a083fb778875.JPG

Figure 2 No 46 after 1854.

 

I haven't seen any evidence that the GWR referred to these as a class, but it's convenient to do so here. No 25 came to the GWR via the Shrewsbury & Chester and was numbered out of sequence with the rest. One was rebuilt as a saddle tank during its life, and the others were withdrawn in the 1860s and 1870s without major reconstruction.

 

No. 28, Nos. 50-53 (0-6-0) class

Builders Stephenson’s

Driving Wheel Size 4ft 9in

Dates Built 1849-51

Cylinder Dimensions 15in x 24in

Number Built 5

Boiler Class Long boiler type

Dates Withdrawn 1869-1877

060-50.JPG.9c86686e4b1f024bc4a5cfc12f7013f6.JPG

Again all five were built for the S&B, but one came to the GWR via the Shrewsbury & Chester and was numbered out of sequence. Unlike the Longridge 0-6-0s they had an ordinary raised firebox casing. A plan to convert them to saddle tanks never bore fruition, and they were withdrawn around the 1870s.


Now the thing is, if I put in a section for each absorbed line with at least a basic summary of the stock, its going to be huge chunks of a volume. Rightly so in the context of what the fleet looked like, but very unwieldy, and it pretty much doubles the size and cost of a volume. Russell, for example, has two books on GWR and one of absorbed, but he almost completely ignores the 19th C absorbed stock which would easily be another book's worth. If I'm seeking simply to trace the thread of GWR locomotive design then, apart from major rebuilds renewals into essentially GWR types, few of them are relevant, and you'd most certainly get a slimmer and easier to read volume out of it. One could do a separate study of the absorbed/amalgamated stock for instance, but would it sell? I have my doubts.

What does the panel think, include the absorbed stock, or make it purely GWR build and concentrate on the design story?

I'm conscious that we tend to have this picture of the GWR as a homogenous fleet of stylistically similar locomotives, with just a few Dean Goods and maybe Bull/Duke/Dogs to add some variety. Well, it was probably like that between London and say Newton Abbot, but go to Wales or Chester and it was an entirely different story. 

 

Edited by JimC
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment

192-newport-1930-small.jpg.38114ed67f634f4d88e13e1fa7971740.jpg

 

192 at Newport, 1930. The smokebox and boiler originate at Swindon, but the remainder is substantially Andrew Barclay. The injector looks a bit Swindon. It was ex-31 of the Alexandra (Newport and South Wales) Docks and Railway, and lasted until 1946, so must have been regarded as worth keeping.

 

Link to comment

It was some time before I discovered Part 3 of the RCTS survey of GWR engines. Incidentally, it's great to see that these Parts are now available on-line.  

 

It's a large Part but, while there are some fascinating 'odd-ball' engines, I'm not sure it contributes much to the line of GWR loco development.  The most significant part of the history is probably what experiences Joseph Armstrong brought with him to Wolverhampton from the Shrewsbury and Chester works at Saltney.  Apart from that, I think the rest could be omitted as peripheral.  

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment

As a (semi) aside, a quick count up suggests that by 1863 Joseph Armstrong was responsible for the maintenance of some 200 Locomotives of around 50 designs and ten different wheel arrangements from at least 16 builders. John Gibson in his volume "Great Western Locomotive design – A Critical Appreciation", comments that there isn't much to say about Armstrong's designs because they were very sound and orthodox.  Looking at those numbers it's evident that Armstrong must have been in an extremely good position to judge what best practice was and what features should be adopted. Looking at his record it would seem he took good advantage of that knowledge.

Link to comment

OK still unhappy with my drafts. A straight time based approach, with just a listing of classes built each year and sketches to show what new developments looked like seems to work provided I have no more than a sentence or so about the new class but nothing about its history. As soon as you go into subsequent development of the class everything starts jumping around in time and its easy to lose the thread and the logical sequence goes out of the window.  


One option, which is on the lines of what @Harlequin was talking about, would be to use extensive cross referencing and have one part of the volume a sequential history, and the other half class histories for reference. It would extensively duplicate the existing book though, and be a very large volume. 

Another that occurs to me is to say dammit, the other book will do as a class reference, and leave out all locomotive details at all, just have "this was built" and a sketch. Some rebuilds would also be included, especially in the 1870-1900 era when all sorts of boiler types were seen. That ought to make a reasonably small and cheap volume. The original book is maybe a bit thinner on the very early stuff than I could now do, but there's little help for that.

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment

So here's the Gooch era. Do you think you'd regard this as excessively skimpy on detail? Or does it work OK?

Swindon Locomotives up to 1864 (Gooch)

1854-1859

Only 24 standard gauge locomotives were built at Swindon over this period, mostly 0-6-0 Goods. There was no standard gauge route to Swindon so they had to be transhipped north on broad gauge wagons. A further 17 were built for the GWR by Beyer, Peacock, mostly to Gooch designs. Some 54 Broad gauge locomotives were also completed.

Nearly all Gooch designs featured sandwich frames. These were constructed of two relatively thin metal sheets each side of a wood core – normally oak or ash – all riveted together. They normally have a slotted appearance with large cut outs in less stressed areas.

Gooch era boilers were normally domeless with a raised firebox and featured a simple safety valve cover. As was typical for the era these locomotives had minimal protection for the crew. As one would expect the designs were similar to but generally smaller than the broad gauge types.

1855/6.

57 (0-6-0) class 1855

The twelve locomotives of the 57 class were constructed at Swindon in 1855 and 1856. They had outside sandwich frames and partial inside frames. Driving wheels were 5'0 diameter, and cylinders 15½in x 22in.

060-57-early.JPG.d462dde419e5fb2a6f6e5727304445c3.JPG

 

69 (2-2-2) class 1855

The 69 class 2-2-2s were also delivered in 1855/6, but although to a Gooch design they were constructed by Beyer, Peacock. They had 6'6" driving wheels and 15½in x 22in cylinders.

222-69-early.JPG.74ee263b6741a911c3f5605c00021468.JPG

1857/9

77 (0-6-0) class 1857

Two 0-6-0s were ordered from Beyer, Peacock, which were essentially Gooch boilers on a Beyer designed chassis. They had 5' driving wheels like the 57s, but 16*24 cylinders.

79 (0-6-0) class 1857

The first three of the 79 class were built at Swindon. They were similar to the 57 class, but had smaller (4ft6) driving wheels and larger (16inx25in) cylinders. 24 were built, the last in 1862.

Two basic 0-4-2 saddle tanks, 91 & 92, were purchased from Beyer, Peacock. A similar loco, 342, was built by Beyer, Peacock in 1856, and bought by the GWR in 1864.

 

1860

Nos. 93 & 94 (0-6-0T)

The first of well over a thousand GWR built 0-6-0T appeared in 1860. They were quite small engines with 4ft 2in (or possibly 4ft) wheels. They were fairly typical Gooch designs with domeless boilers, raised fireboxes and Gooch valve gear. They had inside frames, small side tanks and a well tank under the bunker.

1861

167 (0-6-0) class 1861

Four 0-6-0s were bought from Beyers which had been originally ordered for the Shrewsbury & Hereford. They were similar to the 77s.

1862/3

149 or England (2-4-0) class 1862

Built by George England and Co in 1862, to a Gooch design, this was an express passenger locomotive, unusual at a time when most passenger work was done by singles. They had 6ft 6in driving wheels and 16in x 24in cylinders.

They were numbered 149-156. They had slotted outside sandwich frames with the footplate rising in curves to clear the coupling rods, and open splashers with the spokes visible behind the springs. The boiler was domeless with a slightly raised round top firebox, and was substantially similar, if not identical to, that on the 157 class 2-2-2s. The general appearance was similar to the Gooch 69 class singles.

131 (0-6-0) class 1862

These were an updated version of the 57 class, with 5'0 wheels, 16in x 24in cylinders and fitted with Stephenson link motion. Two batches were built in 1862, 131-136 at Swindon, while 137-148 were built for the GWR by Slaughter, Gruning & Co. The rest, 310-319, were built at Swindon in 1864/5.

157 (2-2-2) class 1862

These were built by Sharp Stewarts in 1862 to Gooch specifications and had sandwich frames. They were not unlike the 69 class, but with larger 7ft 0in driving wheels and 16in x24in cylinders.

222-157-1862.JPG.0a0bc73f07259a67bd760124abb79fcf.JPG

1864

320 (2-4-0T) class

Swindon built two outside cylinder 2-4-0 Well tanks in 1864, 320 & 321. A Gooch design, they were the first standard gauge locomotives to be fitted with condensing gear on any British line. They had steeply inclined outside cylinders, located above the footplate and were very similar to the broad gauge ‘Metropolitan’ class. Driving wheels were 5ft 6in and cylinders 15in x 24in.

240-320.JPG.cc45df0edf871e1aeabf711ebae6d0c7.JPG

322 or Beyer (0-6-0) class 1864

The "Beyer" Class hardly warrants inclusion here since they were entirely of Beyer design. They were another class of 5ft 0in driving wheel 0-6-0s, with 17in x 24in cylinders.

They had plate (not sandwich) double frames with the running plate rising over each wheel to clear the cranks. There were two orders, the second being delivered in 1866 after Armstrong had taken over as Locomotive Superintendent.

060-322-beyer.JPG.db9b9f6b88c66b71333542489de7360b.JPG

 

Edited by JimC
Link to comment

So how would you find that? Is the absence of locomotive history OK (bearing in mind I intend to pick up rebuilds when the clock gets to them) or would you find yourself saying, yeah, yeah, but what happened to them?

Link to comment

As a modeller, I like to have a few key dimensions - especially wheelbase and, hopefully, visible boiler length and diameter.  The last can be problematic as it rises the question of cladding thickness, so actual diameter is probably the best thing to quote and then leave it up to a modeller's judgement. 

 

On the whole, I think that, in a survey of this type, the initial build is the most important thing.  Trying to track every detail of re-building has to be done on an individual engine basis, as boilers etc. got swapped around all over the place!  (e.g. 'Sir Daniel' No. 386 carried a boiler which had previously been on No. 166 (157class))

 

I suggest you pull out the general features of each 'Designer's period' in an introduction before starting on the individual classes.

 

It'll get more difficult when you get to the Armstrongs and the division between Swindon and Wolverhampton styles!

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...