Incompetent CMEs

[bbishop]

Compound, I was not implying that St Rollox had anything to do with 123, other than a William Weir (sic) was chief draughtsman.

 

On the subject of Urie, there was also a William Montgomerie Urie at St Rollox from 1889 as a draughtsman then chief draughtsman under M'Intosh.  Might our sources be confusing RW and WM?

 

I'm now researching LSWR draughtsmen!   Bill

[The Stationmaster]

On 13/06/2020 at 17:53, Andy Kirkham said:

Fowler did occur to me but I hesitated to name him because I don't really know enough about him. I know he would never have claimed to be a locomotive designer, but perhaps his failure lay in in his inability to firmly manage the competing factions from Derby, Crewe and elsewhere.

No, his big failing was his inability to deal with James Anderson who thought he was still in some sort of Midland Railway golden age and that Derby always knew best when it came to such things as axlebox design.  Fowler was a highly respected engineer, although not necessarily when it came to the design of railway engines but in that area his pbig problem - which undermined his reoutation, was the foibles of various outdated impositions on design detail by Anderson.

[JimC]

26 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

No, his big failing was his inability to deal with James Anderson 

 

Fowler, knowing he was not a steam locomotive designer, deferred to Anderson, who had been.  Normally that wouldn't be a mistake.

[PenrithBeacon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Anderson_(mechanical_engineer)

 

The impression I'm getting here was that Anderson was very much an excellent Victorian/Edwardian engineer in an age when a change to the 20th Century was needed. Sometimes, and not that rarely, engineering is more than the sum of previous experience, and I suspect Anderson wasn't up to that. If you like, he lacked imagination, but that should have been clear before he was promoted. Which begs the unanswerable question, why was he promoted to being Chief Locomotive Draughtsman?

Edited June 17, 2020 by PenrithBeacon

[brack]

29 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Which begs the unanswerable question, why was he promoted to being Chief Locomotive Draughtsman?

Well he ran the place for 5 years whilst fowler was seconded during the war looking after munitions on aircraft construction and presumably his limitations weren't yet obvious prior to that.

Post grouping answering the question is easy: Because he was from Derby.

[LMS2968]

James Anderson had been chief draughtsman to Henry Fowler, who became the Midland Railway's CME in 1909 when Richard Deeley stormed out. He had been in the D.O. before this (1903) in the pre-superheater/short travel valve gear days. During WWI, Fowler was seconded to the Ministry and Anderson was acting CME, but by this time things had moved on. Anderson hadn't.

 

Midland practice, and inherited by the LMS, was to separate the CME and Operating departments, and Anderson became Chief Motive Power Superintendent, i.e. he was responsible for providing and maintaining engines on a day to day basis, but had no responsibility for designing, building or overhauling them, which was Fowler's job. He was a strong personality and took on many of what were the CME's jobs; Fowler was an acquiescent character and allowed this to happen. I suspect that this was one reason why he was made CME: the Midland board had had a renegade on its hands with Deeley and didn't want to go there again. But it became a major problem, particularly after the Grouping.

[jim.snowdon]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

But he was pretty clever when it came to wheels

Not to be confused with Maunsell, who presided over the design of some quite useful locomotives for the SECR and was one of the select group of CMEs appointed from another railway company (as against rising through the ranks in the same company.

 

Jim 

[Compound2632]

13 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

the select group of CMEs appointed from another railway company (as against rising through the ranks in the same company.

 

Very select:

Patrick Stirling GSWR -> GNR

James Stirling GSWR -> SER

William Stroudley HR -> LBSCR

Dugald Drummond NBR -> CR -> (Australia / Clyde Loco Co.) -> LSWR

Peter Drummond HR -> GSWR

Hugh Smellie M&CR -> GSWR -> CR

James Manson GNoSR -> GSWR

William Adams NLR -> GER -> LSWR

S.W. Johnson E&GR -> GER -> MR

T.W. Worsdell GER -> NER

Alexander McDonnell GS&WR -> NER

John Aspinall GS&WR -> L&YR

H.A. Ivatt GS&WR -> GNR

J.G. Robinson WL&WR -> GCR

That's only those moving from one locomotive superintendency to another, the list of those appointed from a subordinate position to a locomotive superintendency is just as long; I'll only mention

William Kirtley MR -> LCDR

Robert Billinton MR -> LBSCR

for starters.

Edited June 18, 2020 by Compound2632
Added H.A. Ivatt (thanks LMS2968) and put the Inchicore leavers in chronological order; corrected John Lambie to Hugh Smellie.

[LMS2968]

You can add H.A. Ivatt moving from the GS&WR.

[Tankerman]

On 13/06/2020 at 22:10, Zomboid said:

I was just taking a pot shot at Swindon, since they didn't design anything actually new there after about 1912.

 

Which was what made Churchward such a genius. If you get it exactly right and your successors appreciate that, then all they have to do is update the designs as better materials and/or working practices become available.

[sir douglas]

it was quite common for them to move around during their career

 

-Bulleid learnt under Gresley

-Daniel gooch under Robert Stephenson

-David Joy started under Matthew Murray at the Round Foundry and moved to EB Wilson after Matthew's death

[Compound2632]

34 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

You can add H.A. Ivatt moving from the GS&WR.

 

Ah - missed that one. For some reason I thought he'd not gone straight to Loco Superintendent on the GNR but I was wrong. His Wikipedia entry says his referees for the Doncaster job were S.W. Johnson, John Aspinall, Webb, and Dean. The middle two are obvious - Ivatt had been a Crewe Apprentice along with Aspinall, and succeeded him at Inchicore. But there's no obvious connection with Johnson or Dean, unless the Great Northern directors had chosen to ask round the leading loco superintendents of the day. 

 

The LNWR stands out as a line that made all its Loco Superintendent appointments from within - after all, Crewe was the premier training ground for locomotive engineers, producing nearly as many famous names as the County of Ayrshire. As well as Aspinall and Ivatt, there's the Worsdell brothers, Hoy, Hughes, and Gresley. 

[Wickham Green too]

54 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

You can add H.A. Ivatt moving from the GS&WR.

Maunsell ( with a 'u' ) came from Inchicore too, of course. ( And Bulleid went in the opposite direction.)

[jim.snowdon]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Very select:

Patrick Stirling GSWR -> GNR

James Stirling GSWR -> SER

William Stroudley HR -> LBSCR

Dugald Drummond NBR -> CR -> (Australia / Clyde Loco Co.) -> LSWR

Peter Drummond HR -> GSWR

John Lambie GSWR -> CR

James Manson GNoSR -> GSWR

William Adams NLR -> GER -> LSWR

S.W. Johnson E&GR -> GER -> MR

T.W. Worsdell GER -> NER

Alexander McDonnell GS&WR -> NER

John Aspinall GS&WR -> L&YR

H.A. Ivatt GS&WR -> GNR

J.G. Robinson WL&WR -> GCR

That's only those moving from one locomotive superintendency to another, the list of those appointed from a subordinate position to a locomotive superintendency is just as long; I'll only mention

William Kirtley MR -> LCDR

Robert Billinton MR -> LBSCR

for starters.

Gosh. I guess I'd better blush now.

Jim 

[melmoth]

26 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 His Wikipedia entry says his referees for the Doncaster job were S.W. Johnson, John Aspinall, Webb, and Dean. The middle two are obvious - Ivatt had been a Crewe Apprentice along with Aspinall, and succeeded him at Inchicore. But there's no obvious connection with Johnson or Dean, unless the Great Northern directors had chosen to ask round the leading loco superintendents of the day. 

 

All, except Webb, were active members of the Association of Railway Locomotive Engineers, if I remember correctly. There is photo in H.A.V. Bulleid's book on Aspinall of about 15 CME/Superintendent types on an Association day out somewhere in the Lake District in the 1890s. Ivatt, Aspinall and Dean all present and correct.

Edited June 17, 2020 by melmoth
more info added

[LMS2968]

2 minutes ago, melmoth said:

 

All, except Webb, were active members of the Association of Railway Locomotive Engineers, if I remember correctly.

True. He was quite happy to use ideas from (some) other people, but was very opposed to sharing his ideas with them!

[melmoth]

Just now, LMS2968 said:

True. He was quite happy to use ideas from (some) other people, but was very opposed to sharing his ideas with them!

 

See also C.B. Collett

[The Johnster]

5 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

 

The impression I'm getting here was that Anderson was very much an excellent Victorian/Edwardian engineer in an age when a change to the 20th Century was needed. Sometimes, and not that rarely, engineering is more than the sum of previous experience, and I suspect Anderson wasn't up to that.

He wasn’t the only one.  The 20th century brought increased traffic, heavier bogie stock with lavatories and catering, and faster trains, both to satisfy passenger demand and increase the pathing capacity. Victorian CMEs sometimes struggled; Anderson certainly did, as did Drummond on the LSW.  You might argue that Dean would have been in similar trouble had his worsening condition made it necessary for Churchward to step in a few years before he would have otherwise had to.    

[Buhar]

On 14/06/2020 at 21:06, pH said:

 

 

Certainly from David L. Smith’s writings, the last two in that list of Locomotive Superintendents were not unqualified successes. Drummond’s early designs for the G&SWR were not welcomed (surprising in view of his previous work on the Highland) but his later designs were well regarded. Some of them were the last G&SWR engines in service, and had been used far beyond ex-G&SWR territory.

Whitelegg appears to have been an almost unmitigated disaster. The Baltics did well enough on ‘outer suburban’ services, but weren’t suited to much else. His rebuilds of earlier classes were not a success. In a sense, attempts at standardisation in G&SWR days was part of the problem. The locomotive fleet was in really bad shape after WW1, and needed rebuilding. Whitelegg wanted to create a small range of standard boilers to replace the ‘one offs’ in so many existing classes, and all his rebuilds used boilers from this new range. It was just unfortunate that the new boilers were not as good as the ones they replaced. That, plus other ‘improvements’, resulted in engines less useful than the originals.

 

After the Grouping, he became General Manager of Beyer Peacock, so he must have impressed some people.

Peter Drummond was a mixed bag, certainly not incompetent. but maybe a bit beholden to perpetuating family (Dugald) patents.  After a couple of disasters (eg the Pumpers) he did produce a few good engines in very difficult circumstances at Kilmarnock.  When Whitelegg took over the average age of a G&SWR boiler was nearly twenty years and Kilmarnock was too small and outdated to do anything much about repairs let alone new work.  The notion of re-boilering was actually sound and 75 boilers of three types were sourced from outside builders.  I don't think steam production was the issue, it appears more to be fiddling with valve settings and apertures and that was down to Whitelegg.  Many examples ran better after the wear of a few thousand miles had eased things in the steam-flow department.  He ruined the performance of nearly every engine he got his hands on and I'm told that David L. Smith remained contemptuous of the man even 50 years later.  

 

There were serious efforts to marry the Northern Division's chosen Caley boilers to G&SWR locos and, had that been possible, some might have lasted longer but it wasn't to be.  Whitelegg's cabs had a nice shape, though.

 

Alan

 

[bbishop]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Very select:

 

That's only those moving from one locomotive superintendency to another, the list of those appointed from a subordinate position to a locomotive superintendency is just as long; I'll only mention

William Kirtley MR -> LCDR

Robert Billinton MR -> LBSCR

for starters.

 

Didn't we trip over D E Marsh GNR -> LBSCR earlier in this thread?

 

Bill

[runs as required]

Quote

Churchward is well noted for having impromptu meetings in the draughtsman's offices, and very often at the draughtsman's chair.  Design issues were often resolved there & then, with the relevant staff involved.  There was no can-carrying going on, as the whole process was designed to obviate these instances.

On 16/06/2020 at 17:01, lanchester said:

In a different area, I believe RJ Mitchell used to do much the same thing at Supermarine. But at least if you do this in the drawing office there is a chance that changes are properly recorded. A quick redesign on the shop floor is not such a good idea.

On 16/06/2020 at 17:06, LMS2968 said:

George Hughes at Horwich too, and Nigel Gresley, when he had time, would happily seat himself at a drawing board.

 

I reckon this has all to do with whose chair has been taken over... 

I have posted before about my previous next door neighbour's mum in her nineties having  a fund of stories about being being (clearly a comely) tracer at Doncaster plant, through the war years, her boss being Bert Spencer, and they all enjoyed coming and sitting at her board and confabbing except that snooty Mr Thompson.

 

2

I have often wondered, amidst the universal condemnation of James Anderson by rail writers (usually not engineers or in railway management - such as Nock, CJ Allen, or Hamilton Ellis), whether there was anything to be argued in favour of Anderson eschewing big engines and preferring 'little and often' services throughout the system - very much the opposite of the heavy trains out of Euston - and maybe the basis of "clockface" modern  operation..

 

 

Edited June 17, 2020 by runs as required
clarifying English

[Andy Kirkham]

On 16/06/2020 at 17:01, lanchester said:

In a different area, I believe RJ Mitchell used to do much the same thing at Supermarine. But at least if you do this in the drawing office there is a chance that changes are properly recorded. A quick redesign on the shop floor is not such a good idea.

I wonder if he learned this during his spprenticeship at Kerr Stuart.

[pH]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

... 

John Lambie GSWR -> CR

...

Lambie was not CME  of the G&SWR. I think you mean Hugh Smellie? Plus, Smellie had been CME of the Maryport and Carlisle before moving to the same position with the G&SWR. Is that another category - ‘People who were CMEs of more than 2 different railways (other than by amalgamation)’?

[LMS2968]

7 hours ago, runs as required said:

I have often wondered, amidst the universal condemnation of James Anderson by rail writers (usually not engineers or in railway management - such as Nock, CJ Allen, or Hamilton Ellis), whether there was anything to be argued in favour of Anderson eschewing big engines and preferring 'little and often' services throughout the system - very much the opposite of the heavy trains out of Euston - and maybe the basis of "clockface" modern  operation..

That worked, with a couple of exceptions, on the Midland, but didn't translate too well elsewhere, especially on the WCML. A train is a train no matter if it has six coaches or sixteen, and occupies one block section at a time. There weren't enough block sections to accommodate the frequent short trains so they had to be concentrated into longer, less frequent ones.

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, pH said:

Lambie was not CME  of the G&SWR. I think you mean Hugh Smellie? Plus, Smellie had been CME of the Maryport and Carlisle before moving to the same position with the G&SWR. Is that another category - ‘People who were CMEs of more than 2 different railways (other than by amalgamation)’?

 

Thank you, yes I did. Shows I was writing that ;list from faulty memory! I have corrected this in my post.

 

Adams, Johnson, and D. Drummond are also in the 2+ category. Any others?

 

Harry Pollitt was Locomotive Superintendent of two without amalgamation or even moving out of his chair MSLR -> GCR !