Lms jinty push pull fitted

[johnny45#]

Newbie O gauge what kind of stock would a jinty fitted with push pull equipment pull 4 wheel 6 wheel or even bogie coaches ?

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

One location that had push-pull fitted Jinty was the Oxenhope branch (Keighley & Worth Valley).

 

The carriages in question were converted period 3 Stanier corridor coaches.

 

Various suitable Stanier coaches are available cheaply from Ian Kirk (see construction thread here on RMweb).

 

I don't believe that a Jinty would ever have been used with 4-wheel or 6-wheel coaches except for the services from Broad St to the Northern Heights, and those were not push-pull.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Joseph_Pestell
Add

[kevinlms]

19 minutes ago, johnny45# said:

Newbie O gauge what kind of stock would a jinty fitted with push pull equipment pull 4 wheel 6 wheel or even bogie coaches ?

 

It depends enormously on when & where, but on the LMS not likely to be 4 or 6 wheeled stock. Those sort of coaches were something to be found on Light Railways, or some workman specials on GWR mining areas.

 

The earliest Push-Pull services were replacements for steam rail motors, which almost invariably proved not to be up to the task. The PP fitted locos, often used the old coaches with a 2nd bogie to replace the former steam unit. The Midland, LNWR & L&YR certainly did, but more common were modified coaches of around the 50ft mark.

 

The locos were more likely to be of 0-4-4T or 0-6-2T, than a Jinty.

[johnny45#]

I have a Dapol jinty push pull fitted, should I just remove parts an plate over as I don't intend to buy another engine.

[Steamport Southport]

The LMS pull/push fitted Jinties were converted for use in South Wales. The alternatives at the time weren't powerful enough to cope with the gradients. I believe they were later replaced by GWR Prairie tanks. When they were transferred elsewhere, still with the P/P gear attached.

 

They would have worked other duties when not working passenger trains. Or non pull/push fitted passenger trains. 

 

I'll try and find a date they were converted as it was before BR days. Mid 1930s I think.

 

 

47477, 47478, 47479, 47480, 47481, 47655 and 47681 were fitted for push-pull train working on the Western Region. They were allocated to Upper Bank depot which was transferred from Midland Region to Western Region ownership in 1950. Some of these also spent time at Swansea Victoria and Swansea East Dock.

 

https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/3f-47260-47681-0-6-0t-lms-sdjr-fowler-jinty/

 

 

 

 

Jason

[johnofwessex]

I take it that they had GWR rather than LMS pattern push pull equipment fitted?

[Steamport Southport]

6 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

I take it that they had GWR rather than LMS pattern push pull equipment fitted?

 

Sorry. I think the quote is a bit confusing, I was mainly trying to quote the numbers.

 

Standard LMS pull/push equipment. They replaced earlier locomotives which were struggling to keep time. I think it was MR 1P 0-4-4Ts.

 

This is one of the LMS Jinties. Still with it's equipment in 1965 at Newton Heath.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gricerman/38188431382/

 

 

 

Just that when the Western Region took over Swansea in regional boundary changes they moved away and were replaced by GWR Prairies. BR modified some coaches to work with these. 

 

http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/data/Catalog/pdf/W80.pdf

 

 

The LMS called them Pull & Push and even had it written on the coaches. Some further details here.

 

https://glostransporthistory.visit-gloucestershire.co.uk/Push Pull YTT.html

 

 

Jason

[kevinlms]

10 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

I take it that they had GWR rather than LMS pattern push pull equipment fitted?

No, they were LMS services, not GWR ones.

[Il Grifone]

What is the difference? I am aware how the GWR did it*, but not lesser railways. One of the South Wales lines (TVR?) used a chain affair I understand, but beyond that I have never found any information (not that I have looked very hard).

 

* I have seen a libellous suggestion that it was not unknown for the apparatus not to be connected and communication was by means of the gong on the autocoach, leaving the fireman to do the work of actually driving the thing.

Edited October 3, 2020 by Il Grifone

[Steamport Southport]

5 hours ago, Il Grifone said:

What is the difference? I am aware how the GWR did it*, but not lesser railways. One of the South Wales lines (TVR?) used a chain affair I understand, but beyond that I have never found any information (not that I have looked very hard).

 

* I have seen a libellous suggestion that it was not unknown for the apparatus not to be connected and communication was by means of the gong on the autocoach, leaving the fireman to do the work of actually driving the thing.

 

The superior railways used air or vacuum systems. Which could be connected in a couple of minutes via a couple of pipes. 

 

The Green Wet & Rusty used some antiquated rod idea that took hours to couple up. 

 

All detailed in the links I posted above.

 

 

Jason

[Compound2632]

22 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

The superior railways used air or vacuum systems. Which could be connected in a couple of minutes via a couple of pipes. 

 

The Green Wet & Rusty used some antiquated rod idea that took hours to couple up. 

 

 

In brief, the equipment on the side of the smokebox is a valve through which the steam pipe from the dome to the cylinders was diverted. The valve was operated by a vertical rod connected to a piston in a vacuum cylinder at footplate level. The position of the piston was determined by the pressure in the vacuum cylinder. There was a vacuum pipe connected to a vacuum pipe on the driving carriage, which had a control valve. The driver thus had two vacuum systems to control, one for the smokebox regulator and the usual one for the brakes. When running in "push" mode, the driver relied on the fireman to open and close the main regulator. Motor fitted (to use the LMS term) carriages can be distinguished even from the non-driving end by the second vacuum hose as well as the "PULL & PUSH" plate. A couple of photos, dating from the Midland's introduction of this system in 1908:

 

 

NRM DY 2269, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.

 

 

NRM DY 2271, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.

 

The LMS inherited a fair amount of motor-fitted stock from the LNWR; I'm not entirely sure whether the LNWR system was identical to the Midland system but certainly in LMS days it used that system and quite a number of ex-LNWR tank engines were fitted with the vacuum-controlled smokebox regulator. Motor train operation was more widespread on ex-LNWR lines than ex-Midland lines, simply because the ex-LNWR system had more suitable branch lines. 

 

Edited October 3, 2020 by Compound2632

[DCB]

28 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

The superior railways used air or vacuum systems. Which could be connected in a couple of minutes via a couple of pipes. 

 

The Green Wet & Rusty used some antiquated rod idea that took hours to couple up. 

 

All detailed in the links I posted above.

 

Jason

That's one way of looking at it, but in reality the Gods Wonderful Railway used to recruit big strapping Country lads used to farm work and eating Pasties and drinking cider what could move a 140ft long bit of triple jointed steel bar attached to the regulator like it was nothing.

Now when the Loud'N Windy railway tried its blokes what grew up in smoke filled streets on a diet of dripping and chips and thin watery beer they couldn't manage so they had to introduce Vacuum operated Push Pull gear.  Old Frank Webb would have churned in his grave.   

Presumably the Jinties had screw reverse fitted as well?  Damn nuisance for shunting.  GW seemed to only fit screw reverse locos with auto gear at least in later years.

[DCB]

Was the LMS Auto gear smokebox regulator in addition to a dome mounted regulator or instead of?  

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, DavidCBroad said:

Was the LMS Auto gear smokebox regulator in addition to a dome mounted regulator or instead of?  

 

In addition. As I said, the fireman worked the ordinary regulator from the footplate - opening it when the train was ready to start, closing it on coming to a halt, while the driver worked the smokebox regulator and the brakes - actually starting and stopping the train - from the driving compartment of the coach. In "pull" mode, the smokebox regulator would be fully open and the locomotive driven normally from the footplate.

 

At least that's my understanding of how it worked. I assume the smokebox regulator was fail-safe - i.e. there had to be a vacuum created to keep it open.