The Rocket, is it really?

[rockershovel]

I’d always understood that the development of a full frame was necessary to create sufficient structural strength to allow coupled driving wheels?

[LMS2968]

There were four- and six-coupled designs in use prior to Rocket. But as was proved once the L&MR began operations, the structural integrity of the locos was far from adequate for (comparatively) long, high speed runs.

[Compound2632]

I’d always understood that the development of a full frame was necessary to create sufficient structural strength to allow coupled driving wheels?

 

As in the drawing of Comet. But there was perhaps some trial and error here? After all, the early Wylam engines were coupled.

 

Re. the Rocket replica: the NMR one dates from 1979 but there must have been an earlier one, possibly built for the centenary of the Liverpool & Manchester; it's most often seen alongside Coronation in 1938 - as seen here at 4:27 - Lion in action later.

[brack]

Rocket replicas - I'd thought the NRM/science museum have 2. One partly sectioned from the 20s or 30s (probably built for the centenary as you say) and the working one built for rainhill 150 in 1979.

[LMS2968]

From the book I mentioned in Post 5:

 

Known Full size replicas by date, builder, customer, present location where known, fate where known

 

1881 Crewe Works for LNWR Scrapped 1975

1892 Crewe Works (wood) Columbia World's Exposition B&ORR Museum

1923 Buster Keaton/Joseph M Schenk Productions (Film - Our Hospitality)Smithsonian Institute

1929 Robert Stephenson & Co for Henry Ford Museum, Dearborn

1930 Derby Works LMS for Centenary Pageant

1930 Robert Stephenson & Co Museum of Peaceful Arts, privately owned

1931 Robert Stephenson & Co Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago

1931 Robert Stephenson & Co Science Museum London (sectioned)

1979 Locomotive Enterprises Science Museum (Rocket 150) NRM

Edited April 7, 2018 by LMS2968

[GeoffAlan]

Whatever percentage of original parts left on any steam locomotive that worked for its living, once it is put into a museum, that is the locomotive, as last used. Should the museums then try to retrofit the locos to as new condition? I for one think not.

 

I once tried to keep track of the boiler swaps on the A4 fleet. A difficult and essentially futile exercise. Mallard is Mallard no matter which boiler she has IMHO.

[Compound2632]

From the book I mentioned in Post 5:

 

Known Full size replicas by date, builder, customer, present location where known, fate where known

 

1881 Crewe Works for LNWR Scrapped 1975

1892 Crewe Works (wood) Columbia World's Exposition B&ORR Museum

1923 Buster Keaton/Joseph M Schenk Productions (Film - Our Hospitality)Smithsonian Institute

1929 Robert Stephenson & Co for Henry Ford Museum, Dearborn

1930 Derby Works LMS for Centenary Pageant

1930 Robert Stephenson & Co Museum of Peaceful Arts, privately owned

1931 Robert Stephenson & Co Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago

1931 Robert Stephenson & Co Science Museum London (sectioned)

1979 Locomotive Enterprises Science Museum (Rocket 150) NRM

 

The relatively recent demise (43 years ago!) of the 1881 Crewe Works replica seems rather shocking as it would have been an historic artefact in its own right.

 

Is the fate of the 1930 LMS replica known?

 

The Dearborn and Chicago replicas are on display, according to a quick web search, but I couldn't find the 1892 replica or the Museum of Peaceful Arts.

[LMS2968]

The books states that the 1930 Derby build was 'probably scrapped in the 1930s'.

 

1892 Replica: The book was published in 2000 so might be out of date. It states, 'Initiative of Co. J.G. Pangborn. Some parts transferred from 1881 replica'. That's as much as I know.

[Invicta]

Thanks for that - the engineer's 1884 query appears to be based upon someone putting the wrong name on a sketch then?

 

According to the caption, the drawing is a 'facsimile of a sketch made by Mr W. Stenson, March 12 1832'. If that's the Stenson I think it is, then it's William Stenson, the proprietor of Whitwick Colliery, who would have been pretty intimately acquainted with the early days of the L+S- it was Stenson and his business partners who first identified the need for, and proposed the construction of the line. The March date is interesting, as it's a good two months before the first engine 'Comet' is supposed to have been delivered- so exactly what was it a sketch of...?

 

Oh crumbs! What have I started?!

To clarify, it is not a question of whether the engine in the science museum is largely original but whether it is the actual Rocket, there is a dubious theory that there were TWO engines named Rocket built for the L&M by Stephensons, and that the engine at Rainhill was not the same Rocket that pulled the first directors train, the theory states that the Rocket in Kensington is not the machine that participated in the Rainhill trials, this theory has been discarded by most (myself included) I believe it to be purely a case of mistaken identity, a sketch was once done of Northumbrian and mislabelled as Rocket, another 'Rocket' was supposedly employed doing stationary work in a Manchester brickworks, this was likely a Rocket class engine (Phoenix, meteor, comet etc) but not the original, as for what that 0-4-0 is, nobody seems to know, my guess is it's a Stephenson engine built shortly after Invicta hired to the Leicester and Swannington Rly temporarily, it being called Rocket only by coincidence

 

The C.R. Clinker account of the history of the line, (linked by TheSignalEngineer earlier in the thread), although written in the 1950s, 120 years after the event, has the advantage of having been based on the original minutes of the L+S directors' meetings, and it gives a very precise outline of the line's early engines, right down to their works numbers and delivery dates:

 

Comet- Works no. 4, delivered 5th May 1832 (the line opened on the 17th July)

Phoenix- Works no. 6, delivered 28th Aug 1832

Samson- Works no. 34, delivered 1st Jan 1833

Goliath- Works no. 35, delivered 20th Mar 1833

Hercules- Works no. 36, delivered 17th Dec 1833.

 

The Engineer article talks about 'it had been publically announced that the line would be opened with three new engines, Samson, Phoenix and Goliath, but as bad luck would have it, the boat wit the Samson ran aground near Trent. Being thus short of an engine, the Rocket was taken off ballasting and required for the opening trains. All Leicester knew the Rocket was the ballast engine, so John Ellis and Robert Stephenson said 'Call her Comet', which was no sooner said than done'.

 

That's quite a difference from Clinker's account, researched from the company's records- he suggests that far from being intended for the opening, Phoenix, Samson and Goliath weren't even ordered until after a board meeting on 3rd August- a few weeks after the opening of the line. Incidentally, if these three were only ordered in August, then the delivery date for Phoenix at the end of the month, seems very quick compared to the other two- Looking at the works numbers, was she an engine that the Stephensons were able to supply from stock, rather than building to order?

 

There doesn't seem to be anything in Clinker's version of events (and by implication the company's own records) that suggests the engine on the opening day was anything other than 'Comet', or accounts for the presence of an additional engine hired from the Stephensons. 

Edited April 8, 2018 by Invicta

[Invicta]

The books states that the 1930 Derby build was 'probably scrapped in the 1930s'.

 

1892 Replica: The book was published in 2000 so might be out of date. It states, 'Initiative of Co. J.G. Pangborn. Some parts transferred from 1881 replica'. That's as much as I know.

 

Wasn't there a small collection of preserved Midland engines at Derby works which were scrapped on the orders of Stanier in the mid-30's to free up space in the works?. Could the 1930 replica have been cut up as part of the same exercise in tidying the works up?

[LMS2968]

The Engineer article talks about 'it had been publically announced that the line would be opened with three new engines, Samson, Phoenix and Goliath, but as bad luck would have it, the boat wit the Samson ran aground near Trent. Being thus short of an engine, the Rocket was taken off ballasting and required for the opening trains. All Leicester knew the Rocket was the ballast engine, so John Ellis and Robert Stephenson said 'Call her Comet', which was no sooner said than done'. 

There doesn't seem to be anything in Clinker's version of events (and by implication the company's own records) that suggests the engine on the opening day was anything other than 'Comet', or accounts for the presence of an additional engine hired from the Stephensons.

Ah, now then. The book states that 'By the end of 1832, the L&MR had sufficient motive power to meet its anticipated requirements, and it began to dispose of its older locomotives, which were obsolescent and expensive to run compered with the 'Planet' types. 'Comet' was sold to a contractor in December 1832, and, but for the refurbishment*, 'Rocket' might also have been sold at this time.'

*'Rocket' was involved in a collision on the Wigan Branch Railway on 6 November 1832 causing damage to the extent of £74.14.7, of which the courts decided that the WBR was liable to the extent of £50.

 

The source given are (L&MR) 'Sub-Committee minutes, pp21-1, entry for 19 December 1832 and pp224, entry for27 December 1832, regarding the sale of 'North Star' and 'Comet'.

 

Additional information: 'Comet's' purchaser was recorded as William McKenzie, 1832. Presumably, the sale might have been July, but the source does state '...end of 1832.' So are we looking at the same engine. But 'Rocket' returned to L&MR stand-by duties and works trains following its repair. It was not frequently used, and never on service trains. She was used on the l&MR for experimental work, including Lord Dundonald and his rotary engine in 1834-35. It is doubtful if it was used on the l&MR after the trials ended, before being sold in 1836 to the Earl of Carlisle for use on his Naworth Colliery. Before it left, the L&MR directors ordered that a good drawing be made of the locomotive, obviously in recognition of its historical importance, especially to the L&MR. There are two versions of this: the 'Crewe' Drawing (in the Science Museum) and the 'Stephenson' Drawing In the NRM), very similar but by different people. This recognition by the directors is virtually proof of 'Rocket's' authenticity.

 

Despite what was said in an earlier post, she would have made a good shunter. The Trials required a loco with good acceleration and easy reversal. She had no means of shortening the cut-off, not needed over the short Trials course, and reversal was by simply depressing a pedal on the footplate. Exactly these conditions would apply to a shunter, but the attributes would be far less useful on a long, fast run.

Edited April 8, 2018 by LMS2968

[pete_mcfarlane]

The relatively recent demise (43 years ago!) of the 1881 Crewe Works replica seems rather shocking as it would have been an historic artefact in its own right.

There's more information here: https://newbuildsteam.com/2016/11/12/museum-replicas/

 

Basically it was used as a basis for the 1979 working replica. 

[Corbs]

Any idea which replica appears in this old film?

https://youtu.be/ruOot6vUadE?t=5m56s

[Ravenser]

Any idea which replica appears in this old film?

https://youtu.be/ruOot6vUadE?t=5m56s

 

There are only two candidates - those built by Robert Stephenson & Co for Henry Ford in 1929 , and for Chicago in 1931. Only the first of those is definitely known to have been steamed

[Ravenser]

According to the caption, the drawing is a 'facsimile of a sketch made by Mr W. Stenson, March 12 1832'. If that's the Stenson I think it is, then it's William Stenson, the proprietor of Whitwick Colliery, who would have been pretty intimately acquainted with the early days of the L+S- it was Stenson and his business partners who first identified the need for, and proposed the construction of the line. The March date is interesting, as it's a good two months before the first engine 'Comet' is supposed to have been delivered- so exactly what was it a sketch of...?

 

 

The C.R. Clinker account of the history of the line, (linked by TheSignalEngineer earlier in the thread), although written in the 1950s, 120 years after the event, has the advantage of having been based on the original minutes of the L+S directors' meetings, and it gives a very precise outline of the line's early engines, right down to their works numbers and delivery dates:

 

Comet- Works no. 4, delivered 5th May 1832 (the line opened on the 17th July)

Phoenix- Works no. 6, delivered 28th Aug 1832

Samson- Works no. 34, delivered 1st Jan 1833

Goliath- Works no. 35, delivered 20th Mar 1833

Hercules- Works no. 36, delivered 17th Dec 1833.

 

The Engineer article talks about 'it had been publically announced that the line would be opened with three new engines, Samson, Phoenix and Goliath, but as bad luck would have it, the boat wit the Samson ran aground near Trent. Being thus short of an engine, the Rocket was taken off ballasting and required for the opening trains. All Leicester knew the Rocket was the ballast engine, so John Ellis and Robert Stephenson said 'Call her Comet', which was no sooner said than done'.

 

That's quite a difference from Clinker's account, researched from the company's records- he suggests that far from being intended for the opening, Phoenix, Samson and Goliath weren't even ordered until after a board meeting on 3rd August- a few weeks after the opening of the line. Incidentally, if these three were only ordered in August, then the delivery date for Phoenix at the end of the month, seems very quick compared to the other two- Looking at the works numbers, was she an engine that the Stephensons were able to supply from stock, rather than building to order?  [Emphasis added]

 

There doesn't seem to be anything in Clinker's version of events (and by implication the company's own records) that suggests the engine on the opening day was anything other than 'Comet', or accounts for the presence of an additional engine hired from the Stephensons. 

 

Phoenix is a suggestive name - a Phoenix is supposed to rise from its own ashes, and it was smaller than the other two locos ordered at the same time.. But Clinker's drawing - based on what source is not clear - clearly shows a Planet type 0-4-0, with inside cylinders. And it was sold to the London & Birmingham in 1835 - this leaves no route to the Brampton Railway. It cannot be the 1829 Rocket, or the loco in the 1884 drawing

 

The 1884 Engineer  drawing is a copy, not an original - the Rocket nameplates could have been added during copying, or indeed added to the original drawing at any time between 1832 and 1884

 

I see absolutely no reason to doubt the origin of the Rocket in the Science Museum.

 

And the key "witness" in the Engineer correspondence is questionable. He must have been almost 80 in order to have been on the Stockton & Darlington in 1825 , and he is in too many  key places in railway history, one after another, to inspire confidence in me. Also he is anonymous , and his name is concealed by the magazine - yet if he was around 80 years old why would he still need to conceal his name ?? He would hardly still be working

 

I can see how bits and pieces might have been woven together into an old man's tale, but the bits just won't fit with other contemporary sources. Maybe Phoenix was a secondhand reconditioned engine supplied in haste - but she cannot have been the 1829 Rocket. And if a second hand engine was supplied, the evidence suggests it wasn't Comet as he claims

[Steamport Southport]

Any idea which replica appears in this old film?

https://youtu.be/ruOot6vUadE?t=5m56s

 

The film it comes from is German, if it's the one I'm thinking of. I would suggest it is the LMS one.

 

The clue is in the British style caps the crew are wearing (or European). No evidence that it is actually in steam. Probably more likely a few damp rags and a hefty push from behind.

 

 

 

Jason

Edited April 10, 2018 by Steamport Southport