Hills of the North - The Last Great Project

[LNER4479]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

Hmm. 0245 AEDT Sunday? Have to give it a miss, sorry!

Watch it on catch up afterwards 

[Enterprisingwestern]

9 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Hmm. 0245 AEDT Sunday? Have to give it a miss, sorry!

 

Well, nobody forced you to go and live in upside down land did they, or are those sort of ships still sailing?!!

 

Mike.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

or are those sort of ships still sailing?

There's one way to find out!

[LNER4479]

11 hours ago, manna said:

G'Day Folks

 

Better let you know the Well wagon, is out of Gauge..........

 

manna

You're right. It's that stupid GWR handbrake lever, right at the end corner, fouls as you go round a tight corner ... 

[Chas Levin]

On 24/02/2021 at 14:50, LNER4479 said:

Hope you enjoyed those as much as I enjoyed taking them. It's good fun running trains; but must keep up progress with the actual build at the same time!

Wonderful series of photos - I bet I enjoyed viewing them easily as much as you enjoyed taking them .

[LNER4479]

A meeting of cousins ...

 

The Patriot sets out from Central with the Perth express

 

 

 

Meanwhile, away on Shap bank ...

 

The newly re-motored Royal Scot has charge of the Glasgow-Birmingham.

 

 

Which can only mean one thing ...

 

Stanier rebuilds meet!

 

A closer look at the bottom of the scenic section.

 

And rolling through Bog Junction.

 

Central's trainshed beckons.

 

First trip completed successfully.

 

A second Scot arrival in a short time.

 

Need some Jubilees on the layout for balance!

 

Don't forget - 3.45pm tomorrow to see the layout in action!

Edited March 12, 2021 by LNER4479

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Rebuilt Scots, rebuilt Patriots, Jubilees and Black Fives...

 

and some folk think Great Western engines all look the same!

 

[LNER4479]

They're completely different! Just depends how far away they are ...

[Gibbo675]

2 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

Rebuilt Scots, rebuilt Patriots, Jubilees and Black Fives...

 

and some folk think Great Western engines all look the same!

 

 

50 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

They're completely different! Just depends how far away they are ...

Hi Folks,

 

I was going to say that a black five is just a Hall with a different tender, a fancy cab and wobbly bits on the outside.

Don't tell Clive Mortimore I said that because he'll think that I owe 10p the swear box for THAT railway.

 

Gibbo.

[Denbridge]

8 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

 

Hi Folks,

 

I was going to say that a black five is just a Hall with a different tender, a fancy cab and wobbly bits on the outside.

Don't tell Clive Mortimore I said that because he'll think that I owe 10p the swear box for THAT railway.

 

Gibbo.

Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

And rolling through Bog Junction.

Interlocking deranged...

[LNER4479]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Interlocking deranged...

Not yet fitted would be a more accurate statement! All running via hand signals and clamped up points at the moment. 

[Clive Mortimore]

12 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

 

Hi Folks,

 

I was going to say that a black five is just a Hall with a different tender, a fancy cab and wobbly bits on the outside.

Don't tell Clive Mortimore I said that because he'll think that I owe 10p the swear box for THAT railway.

 

Gibbo.

No 20p as you tried to do it sneakily. 

 

14 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

Rebuilt Scots, rebuilt Patriots, Jubilees and Black Fives...

 

and some folk think Great Western engines all look the same!

 

Is it time for Doc to buy a new pair of glasses?

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

13 hours ago, Denbridge said:

Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon

 

Shhhh, don't mention the Great Western... I did, but I think I got away with it.

[LNER4479]

14 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

 

I was going to say that a black five is just a Hall with a different tender, a fancy cab and wobbly bits on the outside.

 

 

14 hours ago, Denbridge said:

Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon

Sorry - I can't let that rest! If you've goaded me into the following post, then so be it (a chance for gratuitous posting of a few more piccies!)

 

'Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon'

At best, I suspect out-of-context, reported speech. I've read two biographies of the great man and not aware of him directly saying anything like that.

 

Let's examine the evidence:

 

 (Andy York)

Undeniably, Stanier's version of the GWR 'Hall'. And why not? As Swindon Works Manager at the time, Stanier was heavily involved in the GW Hall build. The LMS version at least had the valve gear in a more sensible place for maintenance and the boilers required a certain amount of development to get them optimal. The LMS had nothing to compare with this prior to 1934; by 1951, a colossal 842 example of the type were in service. An absolute classic, in anyone's 'top 10' of all time great GB steam loco designs

 

 (Tony Wright)

The LMS version of Churchward GW 2-8-0. Again - why not? Again, the LMS had nothing like this (LNWR 0-8-0s perhaps but nowhere near as modern). The dependable 'heavy slogger' that was so badly needed (to eliminate expensive double-heading) and chosen as the early standard war loco (prior to the Austerities), 776 examples eventually in BR service.

 

And now the divergence starts!

 

 (Tony Wright)

The 3-cylinder 4-6-0 5XP (later 6P) 'Jubilees'. No GWR equivalent; the Jubilees were actually 'improved Patriots'. The GW low-superheat boiler formula proved particularly disastrous on this type and there were 17 different boiler configurations tried until the best superheat / surface heating area combo was arrived at after three years of exhaustive testing. During this time, Stanier's job was very 'much on the line' but Lord Stamp stuck by his man. Eventually the 'Jubs' became competent 2nd line express passenger locos, often called upon to handle train loads far in excess of their comfortable design brief.

 

2-6-4T. Again, no GW equivalent; again this was a development of an existing LMS type, the Fowler 2-6-4T, actually one of the better existing types Stanier inherited. Thereafter, a direct genealogy to the Fairburn and ultimately 80xxx type. Next to no GW influence there at all. The 3-cyl version of the Stanier 2-6-4T (for the LTSR services) was even LESS of a GW influence!

 

The rebuilt Royal Scots, Patriots (and two Jubilees, as shown here). Obvious, a re-working of existing LMS types, no GWR equivalent. By this stage, the boiler design was 100% LMS / Stanier, any previous GW inadequacies had long since been banished and the type 2A boiler fitted to these locos was an absolute world-beater, easily the best narrow firebox boiler of its size. It transformed all locos it was fitted to and allowed the Royal Scots in particular to share the burden of the heavy WCML post-war traffic with the pacifics. My goodness, the LMS had its money's worth out of those locos and preservation performance of No.46115 on the northern banks has simply reminded everyone what a stunning piece of kit a rebuilt 'Scot' really was.

 

And so to the pacifics! The Princess Royals are an interesting case in point. I couldn't put 'hand on heart' and claim no GW influence here. Stanier was under considerable pressure to produce a loco of this size / power upon his arrival so there is clearly Swindon-esque features. I would say that it owes little to the 'Great Bear' however. Much more a case of taking the 'King' front end (another GW loco type that Stanier was heavily involved with at Swindon - did you know that he accompanied No.6000 to the US in 1927?) and trying to blend that to a true wide-firebox boiler. Again, not wholly satisfactory, certainly as first applied, the low superheat again proving unsuitable to LMS conditions. Outside valve gear was fitted BUT the inside gear retained, a somewhat odd arrangement. But, again, with tinkering became a highly competent class, No.6201 being a record-holder in her own right.

 

 (Tony Wright)

And then - the magnum opus! I'm going to stick my neck out here and assert that there was virtually NOTHING left of any GWR influence by this stage. With one notable exception - the excellent front bogie (that almost certainly saved No.6220 from disaster at Crewe in June 1937). But that was French anyway!

No - by 1937, Stanier and his design team were fully homologated into the LMS way and such was the confidence that Stanier had in his team - and the brilliant Tom Coleman in particular - that much of the work on this type was done whilst the man himself was away in India (trying to stop their rather less-successful pacific locos throwing themselves off the track). I have this wicked image of Stanier returning home, clutching his ceremonial spear and shield ('hey, Robert - find somewhere to put these') and then have Coleman roll out the GA in front of him. There's a moment of quiet contemplation as Stanier takes in the sheer size, scale and brute majesty of the thing. 'Jeez, the guys have played a blinder here*', he thinks to himself.

(*less polite versions are available)

 

'Pure Swindon'? I don't think so!

 

(a few of the more minor types, such as the 2-6-0 and insipid 2-6-2T overlooked in this analysis)

 

Edited March 13, 2021 by LNER4479

[Denbridge]

1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

 

Sorry - I can't let that rest! If you've goaded me into the following post, then so be it (a chance for gratuitous posting of a few more piccies!)

 

'Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon'

At best, I suspect out-of-context, reported speech. I've read two biographies of the great man and not aware of him directly saying anything like that.

 

Let's examine the evidence:

 

 (Andy York)

Undeniably, Stanier's version of the GWR 'Hall'. And why not? As Swindon Works Manager at the time, Stanier was heavily involved in the GW Hall build. The LMS version at least had the valve gear in a more sensible place for maintenance and the boilers required a certain amount of development to get them optimal. The LMS had nothing to compare with this prior to 1934; by 1951, a colossal 842 example of the type were in service. An absolute classic, in anyone's 'top 10' of all time great GB steam loco designs

 

 (Tony Wright)

The LMS version of Churchward GW 2-8-0. Again - why not? Again, the LMS had nothing like this (LNWR 0-8-0s perhaps but nowhere near as modern). The dependable 'heavy slogger' that was so badly needed (to eliminate expensive double-heading) and chosen as the early standard war loco (prior to the Austerities), 776 examples eventually in BR service.

 

And now the divergence starts!

 

 (Tony Wright)

The 3-cylinder 4-6-0 5XP (later 6P) 'Jubilees'. No GWR equivalent; the Jubilees were actually 'improved Patriots'. The GW low-superheat boiler formula proved particularly disastrous on this type and there were 17 different boiler configurations tried until the best superheat / surface heating area combo was arrived at after three years of exhaustive testing. During this time, Stanier's job was very 'much on the line' but Lord Stamp stuck by his man. Eventually the 'Jubs' became competent 2nd line express passenger locos, often called upon to handle train loads far in excess of their comfortable design brief.

 

2-6-4T. Again, no GW equivalent; again this was a development of an existing LMS type, the Fowler 2-6-4T, actually one of the better existing types Stanier inherited. Thereafter, a direct genealogy to the Fairburn and ultimately 80xxx type. Next to no GW influence there at all. The 3-cyl version of the Stanier 2-6-4T (for the LTSR services) was even LESS of a GW influence!

 

The rebuilt Royal Scots, Patriots (and two Jubilees, as shown here). Obvious, a re-working of existing LMS types, no GWR equivalent. By this stage, the boiler design was 100% LMS / Stanier, any previous GW inadequacies had long since been banished and the type 2A boiler fitted to these locos was an absolute world-beater, easily the best narrow firebox boiler of its size. It transformed all locos it was fitted to and allowed the Royal Scots in particular to share the burden of the heavy WCML post-war traffic with the pacifics. My goodness, the LMS had its money's worth out of those locos and preservation performance of No.46115 on the northern banks has simply reminded everyone what a stunning piece of kit a rebuilt 'Scot' really was.

 

And so to the pacifics! The Princess Royals are an interesting case in point. I couldn't put 'hand on heart' and claim no GW influence here. Stanier was under considerable pressure to produce a loco of this size / power upon his arrival so there is clearly Swindon-esque features. I would say that it owes little to the 'Great Bear' however. Much more a case of taking the 'King' front end (another GW loco type that Stanier was heavily involved with at Swindon - did you know that he accompanied No.6000 to the US in 1927?) and trying to blend that to a true wide-firebox boiler. Again, not wholly satisfactory, certainly as first applied, the low superheat again proving unsuitable to LMS conditions. Outside valve gear was fitted BUT the inside gear retained, a somewhat odd arrangement. But, again, with tinkering became a highly competent class, No.6201 being a record-holder in her own right.

 

 (Tony Wright)

And then - the magnum opus! I'm going to stick my neck out here and assert that there was virtually NOTHING left of any GWR influence by this stage. With one notable exception - the excellent front bogie (that almost certainly saved No.6220 from disaster at Crewe in June 1937). But that was French anyway!

No - by 1937, Stanier and his design team were fully homologated into the LMS way and such was the confidence that Stanier had in his team - and the brilliant Tom Coleman in particular - that much of the work on this type was done whilst the man himself was away in India (trying to stop their rather less-successful pacific locos throwing themselves off the track). I have this wicked image of Stanier returning home, clutching his ceremonial spear and shield ('hey, Robert - find somewhere to put these') and then have Coleman roll out the GA in front of him. There's a moment of quiet contemplation as Stanier takes in the sheer size, scale and brute majesty of the thing. 'Jeez, the guys have played a blinder here*', he thinks to himself.

(*less polite versions are available)

 

'Pure Swindon'? I don't think so!

 

(a few of the more minor types, such as the 2-6-0 and insipid 2-6-2T overlooked in this analysis)

 

Stanier designs were Swindon where it mattered Boiler firebox relationships,  cylinder designs etc. It wasnt how an engine looks, it is what goes on inside. The design elements which made his locomotives so succesful were by his own admission directly copied from those laid down by G.J. Chuchward. It was interesting that where he deviated, with the 3 cylinder jubilees it took a long time to get them 'right'. This is by no means a criticism of Bill Stanier. The best designers follow the best ideas.

[Clive Mortimore]

2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

 

Sorry - I can't let that rest! If you've goaded me into the following post, then so be it (a chance for gratuitous posting of a few more piccies!)

 

'Stanier himself stated his designs were pure Swindon'

At best, I suspect out-of-context, reported speech. I've read two biographies of the great man and not aware of him directly saying anything like that.

 

Let's examine the evidence:

 

 (Andy York)

Undeniably, Stanier's version of the GWR 'Hall'. And why not? As Swindon Works Manager at the time, Stanier was heavily involved in the GW Hall build. The LMS version at least had the valve gear in a more sensible place for maintenance and the boilers required a certain amount of development to get them optimal. The LMS had nothing to compare with this prior to 1934; by 1951, a colossal 842 example of the type were in service. An absolute classic, in anyone's 'top 10' of all time great GB steam loco designs

 

 (Tony Wright)

The LMS version of Churchward GW 2-8-0. Again - why not? Again, the LMS had nothing like this (LNWR 0-8-0s perhaps but nowhere near as modern). The dependable 'heavy slogger' that was so badly needed (to eliminate expensive double-heading) and chosen as the early standard war loco (prior to the Austerities), 776 examples eventually in BR service.

 

And now the divergence starts!

 

 (Tony Wright)

The 3-cylinder 4-6-0 5XP (later 6P) 'Jubilees'. No GWR equivalent; the Jubilees were actually 'improved Patriots'. The GW low-superheat boiler formula proved particularly disastrous on this type and there were 17 different boiler configurations tried until the best superheat / surface heating area combo was arrived at after three years of exhaustive testing. During this time, Stanier's job was very 'much on the line' but Lord Stamp stuck by his man. Eventually the 'Jubs' became competent 2nd line express passenger locos, often called upon to handle train loads far in excess of their comfortable design brief.

 

2-6-4T. Again, no GW equivalent; again this was a development of an existing LMS type, the Fowler 2-6-4T, actually one of the better existing types Stanier inherited. Thereafter, a direct genealogy to the Fairburn and ultimately 80xxx type. Next to no GW influence there at all. The 3-cyl version of the Stanier 2-6-4T (for the LTSR services) was even LESS of a GW influence!

 

The rebuilt Royal Scots, Patriots (and two Jubilees, as shown here). Obvious, a re-working of existing LMS types, no GWR equivalent. By this stage, the boiler design was 100% LMS / Stanier, any previous GW inadequacies had long since been banished and the type 2A boiler fitted to these locos was an absolute world-beater, easily the best narrow firebox boiler of its size. It transformed all locos it was fitted to and allowed the Royal Scots in particular to share the burden of the heavy WCML post-war traffic with the pacifics. My goodness, the LMS had its money's worth out of those locos and preservation performance of No.46115 on the northern banks has simply reminded everyone what a stunning piece of kit a rebuilt 'Scot' really was.

 

And so to the pacifics! The Princess Royals are an interesting case in point. I couldn't put 'hand on heart' and claim no GW influence here. Stanier was under considerable pressure to produce a loco of this size / power upon his arrival so there is clearly Swindon-esque features. I would say that it owes little to the 'Great Bear' however. Much more a case of taking the 'King' front end (another GW loco type that Stanier was heavily involved with at Swindon - did you know that he accompanied No.6000 to the US in 1927?) and trying to blend that to a true wide-firebox boiler. Again, not wholly satisfactory, certainly as first applied, the low superheat again proving unsuitable to LMS conditions. Outside valve gear was fitted BUT the inside gear retained, a somewhat odd arrangement. But, again, with tinkering became a highly competent class, No.6201 being a record-holder in her own right.

 

 (Tony Wright)

And then - the magnum opus! I'm going to stick my neck out here and assert that there was virtually NOTHING left of any GWR influence by this stage. With one notable exception - the excellent front bogie (that almost certainly saved No.6220 from disaster at Crewe in June 1937). But that was French anyway!

No - by 1937, Stanier and his design team were fully homologated into the LMS way and such was the confidence that Stanier had in his team - and the brilliant Tom Coleman in particular - that much of the work on this type was done whilst the man himself was away in India (trying to stop their rather less-successful pacific locos throwing themselves off the track). I have this wicked image of Stanier returning home, clutching his ceremonial spear and shield ('hey, Robert - find somewhere to put these') and then have Coleman roll out the GA in front of him. There's a moment of quiet contemplation as Stanier takes in the sheer size, scale and brute majesty of the thing. 'Jeez, the guys have played a blinder here*', he thinks to himself.

(*less polite versions are available)

 

'Pure Swindon'? I don't think so!

 

(a few of the more minor types, such as the 2-6-0 and insipid 2-6-2T overlooked in this analysis)

 

Hi Graham

 

Don't forget the 139 examples of the class 3 passenger tank.

 

                                        

[LNER4479]

2 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

The best designers follow the best ideas.

Absolutely. But for them to be 'pure Swindon' rather implies that they weren't developed which was not the case. You take the best bits that work ... and discard the less good bits which aren't suitable. High superheat certainly wasn't something copied from the GWR!

 

Stanier clearly arrived at the LMS with 'all things Swindon' buzzing between his ears and his appointment was specifically targetted thus as the LMS looked enviously towards Swindon standardisation in the face of the disorganised chaos that was the LMS locomotive department of the time. My point - and happy to agree to disagree - was that, over the next five years he 'made it his own' and established the Stanier marque which, although had its origins in all things Swindon was distinctive enough not to be considered as 'pure Swindon'.

 

Put another way, the development work that Stanier and his team did took the Swindon / Churchward principles on to the next level and formed the basis of much of the BR standard fleet, with emphasis on servicing, maintainability etc in an increasingly difficult post-war world. You might argue that was heavily influenced by the 'Cox-Riddles-Bond' ex-LMS triumpherate; I would argue that was exactly what Stanier built - a highly effective design team that was the best around in 1948 and was therefore the natural choice.

 

[LNER4479]

13 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Graham

 

Don't forget the 139 examples of the class 3 passenger tank.

 

                                        

I didn't - I mentioned them at the end. Yes the one 'dud' but hardly critical to the story. Perhaps he was trying to replicate the GWR 2-6-2T?(!)

[Clive Mortimore]

2 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

I didn't - I mentioned them at the end. Yes the one 'dud' but hardly critical to the story. Perhaps he was trying to replicate the GWR 2-6-2T?(!)

That will learn me, read the whole post , not just look at the pretty pictures.

                                                                      

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Not enough credit given to Tom Coleman or Ron Jarvis, both of whom turned out superlative Pacifics that bear another man's name...

[LNER4479]

2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

No - by 1937, Stanier and his design team were fully homologated into the LMS way and such was the confidence that Stanier had in his team - and the brilliant Tom Coleman in particular - that much of the work on this type was done whilst the man himself was away in India (trying to stop their rather less-successful pacific locos throwing themselves off the track). I have this wicked image of Stanier returning home, clutching his ceremonial spear and shield ('hey, Robert - find somewhere to put these') and then have Coleman roll out the GA in front of him. There's a moment of quiet contemplation as Stanier takes in the sheer size, scale and brute majesty of the thing. 'Jeez, the guys have played a blinder here*', he thinks to himself.

(*less polite versions are available)

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

Not enough credit given to Tom Coleman or Ron Jarvis, both of whom turned out superlative Pacifics that bear another man's name...

Wot I said (see above). Someone else who doesn't read posts properly!

(apologies - re-reading, I can see that you weren't being directly critical of myself there)

 

Here's the thing. Coleman only rose to prominence because Stanier spotted his talent early on (The Horwich design office did much of the work on the 2-6-0 type) and then had the balls to promote him ahead of more senior men, thus circumventing the dreaded 'dead men's shoes' syndrome that had blighted the LMS previously (and which Stanier latterly suffered from himself to some extent at Swindon). It's very well explained in the Nock biography of Stanier.

 

Stanier's success wasn't all about him being a great engineer; he was also a great manager of men and could handle the politics that went with it - Nock describes well how Stanier treated the overlooked, more senior men with dignity and respect. I rather like that and it's what makes him a hero in my eyes.

 

The top man carries the can and the locos bear their name accordingly. But that's very much a two-edged sword.

 

What fun!

[LNER4479]

Anyhow ....

 

I hope you're all standing by. HotN about to go live on the Virtual show as a 'feed feature', whatever that means... Enjoy!

Edited March 13, 2021 by LNER4479

[LMS29]

Really enjoyed the video.  Gave a good feel on how the layout will operate and the work that needs doing.

 

Tom

[5BarVT]

Just enjoyed a very pleasant 26 mins watching HOTN.  I like your clock, a much posher face than mine.  Took me a couples of looks to confirm it was going the right way to match.

Paul.