Rapido LB&SCR Class E1 0-6-0T

[Killian keane]

Now here's a thought for all you Pannier fans, and in an attempt to regain Brighton supremacy in this thread (Mwahhahahaha!):

This is the first pannier to run on the GWR.

 

It is an LBSCR Craven design bought by one of the dock companies.

 

Discuss!

Meanwhile in Scotland

[Hippo]

The 'E1' is our project for 2020 so it will be a good while before we are in  position to take pre-orders. The '16XX' will be first, in 2019. (CJL)

Hopefully there may be the NCB one announced by then. 

(Fingers crossed).

 

Owen

[Compound2632]

THe DX goods is a much overlooked animal, though, and I'm not quite sure why ...... probably forgotten, just as mammoths seem to have been for a long time.

 

Fundamentally because even as SDX they didn't survive into the 1950s. For much the same reason, we're unlikely to see a RTR version of the Midland's standard 0-6-0 goods engine - getting on for nearly as numerous as the DX - except in the rebuilt form already done by Bachmann - the 3F.

 

But the E1 does appear to have been the second most numerous Brighton class, after the D1. As far as I can work out, at 125 engines, Stroudley's D1 was the most numerous class produced by any of the Southern constituents, beating by three Stirling's class O 0-6-0 for the South Eastern. Stirling wasn't such a tinkerer as some. Of the 400 or so engines for which he was responsible, 82% were of just three designs - 122 class O 0-6-0s, 118 class Q 0-4-4Ts, and 88 class F 4-4-0s.

 

EDIT corrected "numberous" to "numerous"!

Edited June 17, 2018 by Compound2632

[Nearholmer]

Stroudley’s D tanks are a slight conundrum to me, in that the record shows them to have been both highly successful, and to have had a propensity to derail. These derailments were always put down to track or driving, but the common factor does seem to have been the locos, which were probably track and speed sensitive. I’ve also read that they set the trend for 0-4-2T, and then 0-4-4T nationally, although I don’t know if that is correct. I think Craven actually designed the first 0-4-4T.

[Killian keane]

Stroudley’s D tanks are a slight conundrum to me, in that the record shows them to have been both highly successful, and to have had a propensity to derail. These derailments were always put down to track or driving, but the common factor does seem to have been the locos, which were probably track and speed sensitive. I’ve also read that they set the trend for 0-4-2T, and then 0-4-4T nationally, although I don’t know if that is correct. I think Craven actually designed the first 0-4-4T.

I seem to recall there was a concern that the Gladstones wouldn't ride very well either, which didn't turn out to be the case, so evidently it wasn't inherent to the front coupled type, as for the first 0-4-4t, the earliest I'm awate of is this SER loco by Cudworth, 1866

[Nick Holliday]

Stroudley’s D tanks are a slight conundrum to me, in that the record shows them to have been both highly successful, and to have had a propensity to derail. These derailments were always put down to track or driving, but the common factor does seem to have been the locos, which were probably track and speed sensitive. I’ve also read that they set the trend for 0-4-2T, and then 0-4-4T nationally, although I don’t know if that is correct. I think Craven actually designed the first 0-4-4T.

I've not heard of the D class having a particular propensity for derailing. As the largest class on the Bighton line they would naturally feature more than others in incidents, but Bradley/RCTS doesn't list any significant examples, and said "The short wheelbase and lengthy overhang made the class suspect at speed, but in practice there was little or no pitching because the leading coupled and small trailing wheels had plate springs and the driving pair a set of volute springs. When newly out of shops they ran equally well in either direction, but after some months wear of the rear journals gave rise to some wagging when working bunker first." Apart from a couple of major accidents, such as at Mayfield in 1897, which was attributed in part to rotten sleepers and poor ballasting, there are few other derailments logged.

It was the LSWR M7 that was taken off express duties after one left the road at speed at Tavistock in 1898, and the GWR 3251 class, that after a major accident at Doublebois in 1895 were all radically rebuilt from 0-4-4 tanks to 4-4-0 tender locos.

As for setting trends, there were plenty of earlier examples of the wheel arrangement, but many of the D class features were spread by Stroudley's assistant, Dugald Drummond, who, in his perambulations around various Scottish companies, laid the seed with a variety of tank locos, mainly 0-4-4, which had more than a passing likeness to the Brighton locos, with some features being perpetrated by his successors as CME on the North British and Caledonian lines.

[Jack P]

I know it's purely speculation at this point, but what do we think the price will be? Based on recent releases I'm thinking around £120 - thoughts?

[GreenGiraffe22]

I know it's purely speculation at this point, but what do we think the price will be? Based on recent releases I'm thinking around £120 - thoughts?

£120 seems about right with Ps at £99 and and Terriers at £110, ofcourse there will always be outrage on social media whatever price tag they stick on

[Compound2632]

Stroudley’s D tanks . I’ve also read that they set the trend for 0-4-2T, and then 0-4-4T nationally, although I don’t know if that is correct. I think Craven actually designed the first 0-4-4T.

 

If the Ds were trend-setters, then it was as four-coupled side-tank locomotives but I'm not sure the chronology stands up. Examples such as the Cudworth engines mentioned above or Matthew Kirtley's 690 and 780 classes for the Midland's London area services were back or well tanks. The first side-tank 0-4-4Ts were the thirty engines of S.W. Johnson's 134 class for the Great Eastern, built in 1872-3 - in fact just ahead of the first Ds. Johnson was building 0-4-4Ts for the Midland (and S&DJR) in quantity while the Ds were still being built. 

 

But it should be remembered that Johnson and Stroudley went well back - having shared responsibility for the NBR's locomotives in the early 1860s - so it's reasonable to suppose they may have discussed passenger tank engine design together. I wonder if the move from well to side tanks reflects growing confidence in the safety of a higher centre of gravity.

[dibber25]

I know it's purely speculation at this point, but what do we think the price will be? Based on recent releases I'm thinking around £120 - thoughts?

 

A pointless exercise. We don't yet know what the price will be. The 'E1' is a model for 2020, so at this stage, even the preliminary work hasn't started. (CJL)

[Compound2632]

A pointless exercise. 

 

That's what we're here for...

[Nearholmer]

To be clear, I’m not saying with certainty that the D tanks were trend-setters, more repeating what I’ve seen written, with a view to understanding whether or not it might be true.

 

As for derailments, it is worth trawling the accident archives, which contain a good number of less well-known ones involving D tanks.

 

A good friend, who is a professional rolling stock engineer, has explained the dynamics of an 0-4-2T in a flange-climb derailment to me, and, from what I recall, it is all rather ‘touch and go’, with a multiplicity of factors, any one of which going slightly ‘out of range’, can lead to trouble. It’s quite interesting that the wheel arrangement remained in use for a very long time, notably be the GWR, with widespread success, so those involved clearly knew what they were at.

[Oldddudders]

I know it's purely speculation at this point, but what do we think the price will be? Based on recent releases I'm thinking around £120 - thoughts?

By 2020 anything could have happened to the £, as Brexit may actually have fructified, and we have no idea what that will do to exchange rates, although they are unlikely to become more favourable to Sterling. I would think £120 hopelessly optimistic.

[Compound2632]

To be clear, I’m not saying with certainty that the D tanks were trend-setters, more repeating what I’ve seen written, with a view to understanding whether or not it might be true.

 

As for derailments, it is worth trawling the accident archives, which contain a good number of less well-known ones involving D tanks.

 

A good friend, who is a professional rolling stock engineer, has explained the dynamics of an 0-4-2T in a flange-climb derailment to me, and, from what I recall, it is all rather ‘touch and go’, with a multiplicity of factors, any one of which going slightly ‘out of range’, can lead to trouble. It’s quite interesting that the wheel arrangement remained in use for a very long time, notably be the GWR, with widespread success, so those involved clearly knew what they were at.

 

Is the situation any different for a larger-wheeled 0-4-2 tender locomotive travelling at higher speed? Or indeed, for a 0-6-0 tender locomotive with large-ish wheels, say around 5'3"? - both types being regarded as mixed traffic engines in the 19th century and so called upon to work at ordinary passenger train speeds. (Express passenger speeds in the case of the 6'6" Class B - but then Brighton express work wasn't very fast...)

 

The experience of running his Midland 6 and 1252 Class 0-4-4Ts on the S&DJR's poor permanent way in 1875/6 led Johnson to modify the design of the bogie on subsequent classes, both those built for the S&DJR and the Midland: increasing the wheelbase from 5'0" to 5'6" and altering the springing. Presumably a well-designed bogie gives a significant improvement in the ride of a four-coupled tank engine as it enters a curve compared to the inflexibility of a rigidly-mounted trailing axle, although the initial forces on the leading coupled wheels as they hit the curve can't be different - the rear bogie doesn't "know" what's going on up front.

 

Apologies, this is getting a long way away from Brighton six-coupled tank engines, though it's relevant to the thinking of their designer.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Compound2632

[Nearholmer]

The diameter of the leading wheel is of great importance, because it affects the angle of attack, and thereby the ratio of the downward forces and those that are attempting to cause upward climb.

 

The maths of all this wasn’t widely understood in the nineteenth century, but engineers almost certainly had a good ‘gut feel’ for it, and it was a very lively topic on the LBSCR, where there were periods of deep concern about the suitability of the Gladstones for high-speed work.

 

Some of the many factors revolve around how tightly-coupled the loco is to the train, because very tight coupling obviates tail-wagging, which can lead to excessive forces at the flanges of the front wheels ...... this was understood from c1850s, when it was worked out that the tender, if tightly coupled, latterly stabilised the loco. The same affect goes with the bogie of an 0-4-4T when it is trailing; as you say, it can’t ‘see’ what is coming, but it hugely assists in avoiding tail-wag.

 

Going down grade, with steam shut-off, into a curve, with the loco being pushed by a not very tightly coupled coach behind, can be the worst combination for an 0-4-2T ..... it only needs a slight misalignment of the Railway a a joint, or a slight ‘threepenny bit’, or slightly ill-set can’t, to cause real trouble that a loco with bogie leading would ride through.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Nearholmer]

Another point to bear in mind is that flange-climb can occur on the second driven axle, rather than the first, if a four-coupled loco ‘crabs’ due to tail-wagging.

 

And, the setting-up of the springing so as to give the correct weight distribution, can be a critical factor too.

[Forester]

It's hazy memory time:

 

I saw a lot of E1Rs in the late 50s - all in BR lined black.

Didn't see many E1s, as most had gone by then , but all the ones I saw were in plain black - which I associate with the class.

 

MR406 32151 is in BR lined black with no emblem.

 

I assume MR have photos of it. Did other E1s receive lined black?

 

(Asking for a bank manager)...

[chris45lsw]

It's hazy memory time:

 

I saw a lot of E1Rs in the late 50s - all in BR lined black.

Didn't see many E1s, as most had gone by then , but all the ones I saw were in plain black - which I associate with the class.

 

MR406 32151 is in BR lined black with no emblem.

 

I assume MR have photos of it. Did other E1s receive lined black?

 

(Asking for a bank manager)...

32151 gained its BR number and was painted lined black (presumably in error) at Eastleigh in Jan 1949 with blank side tanks.  It lost the lining in April 1953 when it had heavy repairs.  There's a photo in Locos of the LB&SCR Part 2 / RCTS, fig 26.  It was the only one so treated.

 

Chris KT

[Forester]

32151 gained its BR number and was painted lined black (presumably in error) at Eastleigh in Jan 1949 with blank side tanks.  It lost the lining in April 1953 when it had heavy repairs.  There's a photo in Locos of the LB&SCR Part 2 / RCTS, fig 26.  It was the only one so treated.

 

Chris KT

 

Thanks Chris.

 

Lining greatly improved the appearance of these tanks.

 

Hazy memory all polished up for another few days.

[Les1952]

The E1 at Cambois colliery would be a nice area-mate for the NCB USA tanks and DJM's Dackworth Austerity  (or even Hornby's no.49).

 

They could all have met up at Seaton Deleval workshops (though almost certainly didn't...)

 

Les

[Dave Searle]

This is a link to the E1 page on Dave Searle's LB&SCR website. You could tick them off there if you wanted?

http://www.lbscr.org/locos/E1.html

Cheers

Ian

 

Hi Ian,

 

I've updated the web-site and this has now moved: http://www.lbscr.org/Rolling-Stock/Locomotives/Stroudley/E1.xhtml

 

There are now photos of most locos as well.

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

[bike2steam]

Mmm, a nice little model of Rawnsley NCB engine shed, with an E1, albeit in CRC 'branding', alongside a exL&Y 2-4-2T (50705) - just the area I'm modelling at the moment.

Edited June 26, 2018 by bike2steam

[darren01]

Nice, one on my list.

Edited June 26, 2018 by darren01

[Compound2632]

Nice, one on my list.

 

I think you were confusing this with the Furness Railway's Sharp, Stewart 2-4-0s, or possibly H.A. Ivatt's 2-4-0s for the Great Northern. Both crying out to be done!

 

Edit: forgot Maunsell's rebuild of Wainwright's belpaire 4-4-0s.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Compound2632

[bike2steam]

Or even a GER T26 ??

Edited June 26, 2018 by bike2steam