Most Numerous Locomotive in UK?

[Evertrainz]

I was wondering what locomotives were built in the highest numbers in the UK?

 

For steam? Diesel?

 

The latter list holds the 08 and 47 but I'd be interested in hearing what the most numerous steam loco was, considering how many different classes there were...

 

With how shallow my knowledge on steam is I might say a Jinty? One of the Panniers I believe saw a large number built as well.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Evertrainz

[russ p]

Wasn't the black 5 the biggest class on BR with 842 but I seem to recall there was more 8Fs but not all were in this country

The 350hp shunter with 4'6" wheels with various engines some being 08-10 plus 13 were probably the largest single type to have worked in the UK

[TheSignalEngineer]

The GWR 57xx panniers in their various guises including the 8750 series and the Condensers reached 863 IIRC. 

666 8Fs entered BR service but including those on WD orders 852 were actually built.

 

For diesels the 47s consisted of 512 locos.

The various versions of the 350HP shunter, Classes 08, 09 and 10  which were outwardly similar eventually numbered 1193

[Clive Mortimore]

The GWR 57xx panniers in their various guises including the 8750 series and the Condensers reached 863 IIRC. 

666 8Fs entered BR service but including those on WD orders 852 were actually built.

 

For diesels the 47s consisted of 512 locos.

The various versions of the 350HP shunter, Classes 08, 09 and 10  which were outwardly similar eventually numbered 1193

Hi Charles

 

There were only ever a maximum 510 Brush 4s in service. The original "Thor" and one other had been withdrawn due to accident damage before all the class had been built. They were still the largest class of mainline diesels. 

[jim.snowdon]

Not forgetting the 935 2-8-0s to the Riddles design for the War Department.

 

Jim

[Evertrainz]

I do wonder why there were generally twice the amount of steam locos of a single class built compared to diesels. Perhaps diesels required less maintenance so higher availability? 

Edited July 24, 2017 by Evertrainz

[LMS2968]

The highest number of steam locos within a single class for use in Britain was the 943 Ramsbottom DX class 0-6-0s, built for the LNWR from September 1858 to October 1874. The last ten, rebuilt as Special DX, survived to 1922.

 

There are several reasons why there were fewer diesel than steam locos: a lack of servicing time needed between turns was certainly one, but also by the time of the diesels' introduction both traffic levels and route mileage had reduced. Had the diesels not arrived, there would still have been a reduction in the number of steam locos needed to carry out the remaining work.

[Zomboid]

A lot of steam engines were replaced with electric locos and units (DMUs, too).

 

What about non-BR? Some industrial types would have been pretty numerous.

[AberdeenBill]

Interesting stuff...   We should not regard it as a "contest", cultural, political or otherwise, but these UK numbers compare with 1340 for the SNCF 141R (2-8-2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCF_Class_141R built in just two years after WWII, 7000+ for the German 2-10-0 class 52 ( Kriegslok) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRB_Class_52 and 5200 for the Soviet 'L' class (also a 2-10-0) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_locomotive_class_L .   The earlier Russian 'E' family of 0-10-0s is said to number over 11,000, but apart from wheel arrangement, they are perhaps too heterogeneous to count as one class.

 

Bill

[TheSignalEngineer]

Hi Charles

 

There were only ever a maximum 510 Brush 4s in service. The original "Thor" and one other had been withdrawn due to accident damage before all the class had been built. They were still the largest class of mainline diesels. 

Agreed Clive

 

D1734 was written off after an accident at Coton Hill, Shrewsbury, in January 1965, barely 8 months old. D1671 was withdrawn from Canton early in 1966. The last delivery was about the beginning of 1968.

[russ p]

If the worldwide totals of 66s are counted they must be getting close to 47s

As stated about about steam loco our totals ate very small compared to USSR,China ,USA and even France and Germany

[chris p bacon]

I do wonder why there were generally twice the amount of steam locos of a single class built compared to diesels. Perhaps diesels required less maintenance so higher availability? 

 

In a nutshell, yes.

When the Deltic were introduced there were 22 of them and they replaced something like 55 Pacifics on the Ex GN main line.

[LMS2968]

In a nutshell, yes.

When the Deltic were introduced there were 22 of them and they replaced something like 55 Pacifics on the Ex GN main line.

That was the common claim of BR in one of its many attempts to justify the mass application of diesel traction. It forgot to mention that the 55 Pacifics did a lot of other work above what the 22 Deltics were doing.

[chris p bacon]

That was the common claim of BR in one of its many attempts to justify the mass application of diesel traction. It forgot to mention that the 55 Pacifics did a lot of other work above what the 22 Deltics were doing.

 

There is some truth in that, but it did take more steam loco's to perform the same duties as well as lighting up and cleaning out.

[Zomboid]

Just looking at Deltics probably doesn't give a big enough picture. Maybe the number of type 4 & 5s which were needed for the ER services as against class 6/7/8 steam locos would give a better picture.

 

Either way, the fact is that assuming comparable failure rate, you need fewer diesels to do a given amount of work than you do steam locos. And fewer still electrics.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...The earlier Russian 'E' family of 0-10-0s is said to number over 11,000, but apart from wheel arrangement, they are perhaps too heterogeneous to count as one class.

As stated about about steam locos our totals are very small compared to USSR, China , USA and even France and Germany

 Which brings in the question of what is counted as a 'class', with different definitions you get very different totals.

 

The 0-6-0 goods had been 'standardised' in general design in the UK by the 1870s, and whether designed and built in Glasgow or Eastleigh - or any of the numerous works inbetween - comparison of the leading dimensions and equipment fit will reveal more similarites than differences in the essential working parts and layout. In other countries all the 0-6-0's built on the Crewe/Ramsbottom wheelbase 7'3"+8'3" might well have been grouped as one class, likewise all the Derby wheelbase 8'+8'6", as another class: and those two between them would have accounted for the majority of the many thousands of 0-6-0 in UK service in late C19th.

[kevinlms]

 Which brings in the question of what is counted as a 'class', with different definitions you get very different totals.

 

The 0-6-0 goods had been 'standardised' in general design in the UK by the 1870s, and whether designed and built in Glasgow or Eastleigh - or any of the numerous works inbetween - comparison of the leading dimensions and equipment fit will reveal more similarites than differences in the essential working parts and layout. In other countries all the 0-6-0's built on the Crewe/Ramsbottom wheelbase 7'3"+8'3" might well have been grouped as one class, likewise all the Derby wheelbase 8'+8'6", as another class: and those two between them would have accounted for the majority of the many thousands of 0-6-0 in UK service in late C19th.

That is over simplifying a bit. Taking the Midland locomotives as an example, there is a vast difference between the capabilities of say a Kirtley 0-6-0 (of which 237 were built, but 28 had been withdrawn even before the 1907 renumbering) and the 4F (197 by the Midland [5 for S&DJR] & 575 by the LMS - totalling 772), which were much more powerful, but kept many features of the Kirtley versions, much to their detriment.

 

I think the intention of this thread, is to identify large fleets of almost identical locomotives - certainly ones where railway management could & did use them interchangeably.

[Reorte]

These days I suppose it's the 66, by quite some margin (and they must be fairly high up the list of all time) although IIRC the OP did say "built in the UK" which will disqualify them.

[pete_mcfarlane]

What about non-BR? Some industrial types would have been pretty numerous.

There were supposedly over 900 of the 20HP Simplex locos built for the Army during WW1. 

[The Johnster]

Hi Charles

 

There were only ever a maximum 510 Brush 4s in service. The original "Thor" and one other had been withdrawn due to accident damage before all the class had been built. They were still the largest class of mainline diesels. 

 

But the OP specified 'built'.  Splitting hairs, I know, and useful information, Clive.  I remember 'Thor's' accident very well.

[The Johnster]

I do wonder why there were generally twice the amount of steam locos of a single class built compared to diesels. Perhaps diesels required less maintenance so higher availability? 

 

Yes.  When the WR was replacing steam with diesels sheds allocated diesels were required to remove 3 roughly equivalent steam engines from service, as a diesel was supposed to do the work of 3 steam locos allowing for down time for fire dropping, smokebox cleaning, watering, coaling, relighting and preparation, then the 10 day boiler washout and tube cleaning which would have a loco out of service for 48 hours (20% of your roster not available).  This was a step too far and the timetable came close to collapse in 1962 as a result of a combination of unplanned reliability issues with the Warships, delays to deliveries of new diesel or overhauled steam locos from Swindon which was bay-blocked with dead Warships, and premature withdrawal of steam locos.  It was the death knell of the hydraulics, and future WR sourcing of new locos was mostly of easily available diesel-electric of class 37 and 47.  The collapse of Beyer Peacock who had another 100 Hymeks on order, low geared for South Wales valleys work, didn't help.  You need at least twice as many steam engines as diesels to run a given service, but he diesels cost 3 times as much.

[37114]

  I remember 'Thor's' accident very well.

D6983 destroyed in the same accident, meaning that there were only 309 EE type 3's in service for just over 1 month. 

[brack]

There were supposedly over 900 of the 20HP Simplex locos built for the Army during WW1. 

indeed, plus more built in peacetime - one list gives 1198 20HP locos built up to 1932 to the same design. Many of the later locos (not counted in that list) didn't differ that much in design, so depending on how you count them the true figure might be even higher. That must be the winner for the UK?

[The Johnster]

These days I suppose it's the 66, by quite some margin (and they must be fairly high up the list of all time) although IIRC the OP did say "built in the UK" which will disqualify them.

 

Same goes for the SNCF's 141Rs

 

Were any class of loco for overseas use built in greater numbers in the UK?   There were an awful lot of Beyer Peaccok 4-4-0s in the world at one time, and some of the NB classes might be up thee as well.

[EddieB]

Were any class of loco for overseas use built in greater numbers in the UK?   There were an awful lot of Beyer Peacock 4-4-0s in the world at one time, and some of the NB classes might be up thee as well.

IIRC nothing that matched the largest classes built for the domestic railways.  If you count those types built for overseas that also saw home service, then the 8F (852 examples), WD 2-8-0 (935) and Austerityb 0-6-0ST (485) were probably the largest.

 

Of those built purely for export, perhaps the 140C (270 built by NBL, NW and VF, including six lost at sea)  were the most numerous, with the largest from a single builder being 200 class 37 2-8-0s for Belgium, built by Armstrong Whitworth in 1922.

 

Beyond Europe, I don't have collated figures, so can only give a couple of examples.  One of the largest classes were the South African 15F 4-8-2s, 234 out of a total of 255 being in Britain.  Production of the Indian "Standard Goods" (SG/SG1) 0-6-0 was around 450 machines.

 

Although BP built many 4-4-0s, they were to different designs and, being passenger locomotives, were produced in inferior numbers to freight or mixed traffic machines.