GW Manors at Banbury

[Penrhos1920]

A couple of books mention that one of the first duties for the new Manor class was on the Port to Ports express between Banbury and Swansea. Locos being allocated to Banbury.

 

Which were the first GW Manors to be allocated to Banbury and what tenders did they have at that time?

 

Thanks

[timbowilts]

Accding to the JWP Rowledge book, GWR Locomotive Allocations, only 7810 & 7811 were allocated new to Banbury in December 1938. I have always understood the manors to have had Churchward 3500 gallon tenders?

 

Tim T

Modelling Cwm Cynon in EM

[melmoth]

In addition to the above, according to Peto's Register, 7800 was transferred to Banbury from Stafford Road in March 1938. All Manors initially ran with 3500 gallon tenders (Peto again).

[Penrhos1920]

Thanks, three locos would just cover the Port to Port. One loco on the south bound, a second on the north bound each day, six days a week. Shame that my Manor has a Collett 3000g tender.

[NCB]

Page 217 of Russell's GW locos vol 2 has the official pic of 7800 when first turned out. He also recounts the scene at Banbury, where he was based, when 7800 first took over the P2P. Both pic and drawing show a tender with the long coal rails. From my extremely shallow knowledge of GWR tenders, the shallowness I've only lately come to appreciate, I would guess it's a Collett 3500 gallon. Others would know better than I.

 

P.S. Is there a comprehensive description of GWR tenders and how they varied over the years anywhere?

[81C]

I would agree with 3500gal Collett with long fenders.

You might find more info' here .http://www.gwr.org.uk/

[Penrhos1920]

I would agree with 3500gal Collett with long fenders.

You might find more info' here .http://www.gwr.org.uk/

Thanks Southall, found the Beginners Guide to GWR Tenders here: http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-tenders.html. I think 7800 had a churchward 3500 tender as it doesn't have a vertical fender on the back.

[NCB]

Thanks Southall, found the Beginners Guide to GWR Tenders here: http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-tenders.html. I think 7800 had a churchward 3500 tender as it doesn't have a vertical fender on the back.

 

Very useful indeed. Thanks for that.

 

Nigel

[DCB]

Collett 3000 gallon tenders behind Manors is a preservation era situation. I understand several Collett underframes were used as ingot carrier chassis at a steelwork, Britton Ferry possibly,    Several of these survived and have been rebuilt as 3000 and 3500 gallon tenders. The Collett Tenders had flat bottom tanls whereas I understand the Churchward 3500 and the rare early Churchward 4000 gallon had well tanks down between the frames.  The Churchward The 3000 simply looks wrong behind a Manor as the sides are lower than the cab cut away.   The 3500 Collett was the early Hall tender, I think they went to the 4000 gallon after about 40 locos.

The GWR built Collett 4000 gallon tenders with many of the 2251 class for accountancy reasons. These tenders were never paired with 2251s as the GWR fitted these to Castles and Halls and cascaded the Churchward 3500 gallon tenders to smaller locos 4-4-0s etc until the older Dean tenders were released for the 2251s.  For a time Locos allocated to Oxford could not be fitted with 4000 gallon tenders as the coaler chutes were too low

GW locos seldom remained with their tenders for long, the locos had carefully planned overhauls every 80 000 miles or so maybe every 15 months and as the engine and tender were separated and overhauled separately, it was pretty much pot luck which tender the loco returned to service with.    I have never seen a photo of a Manor with a Collett 3500 tender in the pre preservation era, but I have seen an Intermediate 3500, the 3500 with high sides as per the Collett but no rear fender.

[Miss Prism]

12 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

The 3500 Collett was the early Hall tender, I think they went to the 4000 gallon after about 40 locos.

The tenders for the first Halls were Churchward 3500g, albeit some of them had Collett mods on their underframes. (The Collett 3500g was not introduced until 1930.) The last Hall to be accompanied, when initially outshopped, with a Churchward 3500g was I think 4943 or 4944. Thereafter it was Collett 3500g (rare, because there were so few of them) or Collett 4000g, and no doubt a few Halls reverted with Churchward 3500g units after works visits, at least until the Collett 4000g numbers were sufficient to satisfy all the classes competing for the new tender.

Agree about the Manor tenders - Churchward 3500g units were the norm (often with Collett frame mods of various styles), although a few (including 7807 and 7828) appeared in later BR days with the intermediate 3500g.

 

Edited February 2, 2019 by Miss Prism

[jjnewitt]

Just to add a little to the Manor and 3500 intermediate tender discussion, when the combination did occur they almost always were paired with Churchward type. Other locos, in addition to Compton and Odney mentioned above, that got them were Barcote and Ilford. Compton's pairing was interesting as the intermediate tender was one of those converted from older units rather than built under lot A.112. The only Manor that I know of that was paired with a Collett 3500 gallon intermediate tender in BR days was Fringford. She ran with this for a couple of years.

The prize for the oddest Manor/tender pairing must surely go to Cookham who in 1965 aquired a 4000 gallon tender.

Justin

[Miss Prism]

On 02/02/2019 at 08:53, jjnewitt said:

The only Manor that I know of that was paired with a Collett 3500 gallon intermediate tender in BR days was Fringford. She ran with this for a couple of years.

 

I call that simply a Collett 3500g, Justin. Why do you qualify it with 'intermediate'?

Thanks for info on Barcote and Iford. As for Cookham with a 4000g - urrrgghhhh!!! (Although I suppose it was touring around a bit in 1965.)

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Miss Prism

[jjnewitt]

Yes fair enough Collett 3500 gallon will suffice for them.

Justin

[russell price]

weren't the 1938 ones all built with the tenders from the 4300 moguls they replaced and used wheels and motion from too. Hence Churchward tenders are correct.

[Miss Prism]

5 hours ago, russell price said:

weren't the 1938 ones all built with the tenders from the 4300 moguls they replaced

 

The Manors got their initial 3500g Churchward units from the tender pool. These units may or may not have been the ones used with the withdrawn Moguls.

 

[timbowilts]

For anyone interested in Manor class locos the book below is essential reading IMHO. It includes a couple of photos of the Port-to-port train as well

Tim T

[The Fatadder]

Are there many photos from the post war pre nationalisation period?

 

in particular 7804

[Miss Prism]

Can't help with post-war pre-nationalisation, but here is 7804 at Newton, its right-hand cylinder front having had an argument with something. Seems to be plain black with red-background plates livery, which would time it as 1952-54. Still with original fat chimney, so is pre blastpipe mods.
 

[bécasse]

2 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Can't help with post-war pre-nationalisation, but here is 7804 at Newton, its right-hand cylinder front having had an argument with something. Seems to be plain black with red-background plates livery, which would time it as 1952-54. Still with original fat chimney, so is pre blastpipe mods.
 

What seems quite remarkable is just how clean the two other locomotives in the shot are. Could this have been during the Coronation period (early June 1953) with those two locos "dolled up" ready to work Coronation Day specials to London?

[NCB]

9 hours ago, bécasse said:

What seems quite remarkable is just how clean the two other locomotives in the shot are. Could this have been during the Coronation period (early June 1953) with those two locos "dolled up" ready to work Coronation Day specials to London?

 

Clean locomotives weren't uncommon in those days. Heavily worked sheds or heavily used services were apt to let the cosmetic aspects go, but at least on the Western quite a lot of engines were turned out in clean condition. I was at school in Stroud from 1957 to 1962, alongside the Swindon - Gloucester main line, and most engines up to 1960 were in decent condition. This was only partly due to the line being used for running-in turns from Swindon. The dirtiest loco around was the Collett 0-4-2 on the Stroud Valley railmotor service, invariably coated in grim. The change in the early 60s was dramatic.

 

Nigel

[Marshall5]

Certain sheds particularly Aberystwyth on the Cambrian section had a reputation for keeping their locos well turned out right up to the LMR takeover in 1963/4.  The photo below shows a reasonably clean green 75xxx piloting a very smart Manor (complete with polished brass) out of Shrewsbury on the down CCE in June 1962.

Ray.

 

[Western Star]

54 minutes ago, Marshall5 said:

The photo ... shows a reasonably clean green 75xxx piloting a very smart Manor

Are we sure?

 

Given that this is a service over ex-GWR lines might the working be arranged in GW tradition?  That is, the pilot engine being inside of the train engive.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Western Star said:

Are we sure?

 

Given that this is a service over ex-GWR lines might the working be arranged in GW tradition?  That is, the pilot engine being inside of the train engive.

I think I've been through this more than a few times on here although you might well have missed them (and I'd no doubt have a job finding the relevant posts as they were several years back).  The story (fable?) about the GWR always putting the train engine on the front is exactly that - a story, in fact probably more correctly a fable.  Who on earth started it off I haven't got a clue but it has crept into folklore with a vengeance.

 

The Instructions were based around a series of features such as size of the engine, size of the driving wheels, in some cases the specific class of engine being used to assist,  and also - in many locations, specific Instructions which modified the then current general Instruction to allow something completely opposite to it.  The detail also changed, sometimes subtly, over the years as did the places where something different from the norm was permitted and I've previously gone through all the changes from the mid 1930s up to 1960 (and which then applied to the end of WR steam).  And incidentally it wasn't much different if you go back to 1920 when teh relative position of the engines deoended entirely on their type (i.e. tank or tender engine), their wheel arrangement, and the gradients/level track over which assistance was being provided.

 

In this particular case in the Shrewsbury photo the assistant engine should normally be attached front if those two classes were involved and I doubt it is otherwise in that photo;  it is therefore the case that the 'Manor' was the train engine.  And having, many years ago, on the Up Cambrian Coast Express experienced our train being assisted up to Talerdigg with the 'Dukedog' assistant engine coupled front of the 'Manor' train engine I am reasonably sure the staff in that part of the world were wholly familiar with the relevant Instructions. 

[Western Star]

Thank you Mike, I am happy to accept your comments as such are grounded in experience whereas my comment is derived from ancient texts published for enthusiasts.

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, Western Star said:

Thank you Mike, I am happy to accept your comments as such are grounded in experience whereas my comment is derived from ancient texts published for enthusiasts.

It seems to have become something of an old wives' tale in a certain Railway Modelling magazine a good many years ago and may well have spread from there.  The odd thing about it is that even going back a century (from now) it wasn't right although there were certain circumstances when it was required , all very strange.