Centenary of the Grouping

[Compound2632]

On 01/01/2023 at 09:20, Colin_McLeod said:

Happy 100th to LMS,  LNER,  GWR and SR.

 

Happy 75th to BR.

 

Which does go to emphasise what a brief period in the two centuries of British railways those 25 years of grouping were - a period blighted by the after-effects of the Great War, the Great Depression, and the Second World War. 

[t-b-g]

4 hours ago, Darryl Tooley said:

He was.

 

What is less certain is why.

 

The late Dr Hughes plausibly suggests, in 'The Gresley Influence' (Ian Allan, 1983), that it was with the intention of gently pointing him in the direction of recommending a younger man.  If this were done judiciously, Robinson might leave the room thinking it was his idea all along; there is no need to impute his later recollection to senility.

 

From C J Allen’s account of the formation of the LNER in 'The London & North Eastern Railway' (Ian Allan, 1966) it is clear that each of the constituent companies was concerned to get as many of its own men in the top jobs as possible, which resulted in a good deal of jockeying for position, horse trading, and general politicking.  Seen in this light, there are good reasons for getting Robinson’s seal of approval on Gresley’s appointment.

 

As you say, however, we will probably never know.

 

D

 

I feel that is a far more likely explanation.

 

There are ways and means of talking to somebody that would suggest that they had been offered the job (but gently steering them away from accepting it by saying that it might be a lot for them to take on when they were already winding down to retirement) and to make them feel that they have played a part in choosing the new man.

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

For a moment there I thought you were talking about King Charles III

LOL 😁

[adb968008]

On 01/01/2023 at 17:37, phil_sutters said:

In what way would you want or expect the model manufacturers to mark the centenary? A range of the first locos built by the 'new' companies? Existing models in their early groupings liveries? (I have a feeling that we have had these questions raised before.) Perhaps some of the hybrid liveries, with new company names and numbers on the pre-grouping liveries?

It would be nice to have a whole range of pre 1923 types to offer!

 

i can but dream

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

It would be nice to have a whole range of pre 1923 types to offer! ...

Those would have been last years models ...... you'll have to wait another 24 years and suggest that again ! 🙄

[gr.king]

As this is the grouping centenary year, it would be nice to have an exhibition (or several) specifically (and only?) catering for Big Four era modelling, with an even balance of representation of the four groups (plus the joint lines and minor concerns that remained independent). It almost certainly won't happen of course, probably too late to organise properly and not to the taste of the many who like to simply tip clone RTR models out of red or blue boxes onto Peco girder-way to portray the fifties and later. If it did happen of course, it might actually be of interest to the small specialist suppliers for model builders, traders who are increasingly reluctant to attend shows, since modellers of the earlier eras do perhaps have to build rather more for themselves.

[t-b-g]

25 minutes ago, gr.king said:

As this is the grouping centenary year, it would be nice to have an exhibition (or several) specifically (and only?) catering for Big Four era modelling, with an even balance of representation of the four groups (plus the joint lines and minor concerns that remained independent). It almost certainly won't happen of course, probably too late to organise properly and not to the taste of the many who like to simply tip clone RTR models out of red or blue boxes onto Peco girder-way to portray the fifties and later. If it did happen of course, it might actually be of interest to the small specialist suppliers for model builders, traders who are increasingly reluctant to attend shows, since modellers of the earlier eras do perhaps have to build rather more for themselves.

 

It would be a good opportunity for somebody to do something but unless plans are already being made it is probably a bit too late now.

 

The immediate post grouping period is a fascinating one with the exchange of locos and other stock around systems, running in places they never did before, like the B3s hauling the Pullman trains out of Kings Cross. Plus it was the last few years before the vast majority of locos on the LMS and the LNER went from red and green to black and even those that were black were usually lined out. Many carriages were still in fairly elaborate lined out liveries too. Apple Green and teak always wins over "cowpat" green and dull maroon for me. 

 

As you rightly say, the 1950s BR scene is no so over run with decent quality RTR that there is little point in building much nowadays but if you go back 80 or a 100 years, or even a bit further in my case, you can model all sorts of things that allow your work to stand out in the crowd and not be like what everybody else is doing.

 

I would certainly want to go to a show that was as you have suggested.

[Compound2632]

Just now, t-b-g said:

It would be a good opportunity for somebody to do something but unless plans are already being made it is probably a bit too late now.

 

Indeed. Feelers were put out to see if the NRM had any plans but it appeared they intended to focus on the centenary of one particular locomotive in their collection.

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Indeed. Feelers were put out to see if the NRM had any plans but it appeared they intended to focus on the centenary of one particular locomotive in their collection.

 

Which was, of course, the first loco put into traffic by the LNER. So the two centenaries are linked.

 

To my way of thinking, the grouping was a far more significant event than any one individual loco but to be fair to the NRM, they will probably generate more public interest their way around.

[Compound2632]

12 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

Which was, of course, the first loco put into traffic by the LNER. 

 

I find the date of 24 Feb 1923 quoted - presumably date to traffic? But I find it surprising if no other new locomotive was put into traffic in the first eight weeks of 1923 - surely there must have been some loco order delivery of which spanned the grouping?

Edited January 4, 2023 by Compound2632

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I find the date of 24 Feb 1923 quoted - presumably date to traffic? But I find it surprising if no other new locomotive was put into traffic in the first eight weeks of 1923 - surely there must have been some loco order delivery of which spanned the grouping?

 

I read it in a book once. So it must be true!

[Darryl Tooley]

32 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But I find it surprising if no other new locomotive was put into traffic in the first eight weeks of 1923

There were other locomotives put into traffic during this time, which is why Flying Scotsman is generally described as the first express engine to be built by the LNER. 

 

D

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, gr.king said:

... with an even balance of representation of the four groups ...

Trouble is, we'd spend all year arguing about what exactly an 'even balance' was ....... as a SOUTHERN fan, I'd be happy to take a quarter for 'my' railway but others might prefer a greater floor area for the larger companies ........ for some reason !

[Compound2632]

26 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Trouble is, we'd spend all year arguing about what exactly an 'even balance' was .

 

About 5:4:2:1!

 

See: https://www.railwaywondersoftheworld.com/railway_grouping.html.

Edited January 4, 2023 by Compound2632

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Darryl Tooley said:

There were other locomotives put into traffic during this time, which is why Flying Scotsman is generally described as the first express engine to be built by the LNER. 

 

D

All depends exactly how you define and qualify  'first'.    For example Raven pacific 2401, undeniably an 'express engine' by design if not necessarily by performance, entered traffic in January 1923 although it had officially been 'delivered' the previous month.   No new built GCR express designs entered LNER service between those that entered traffic in 1922 and the final batch delivered from August 1923.

 

If however you count the first express engine to appear wearing (a version of) LNER livery then presumably 1472 (its GNR number which it carried when new) fits the bill but it appears from the sources I have looked at that it wasn't named 'Flying Scotsman' until 1924.  So if that information regarding the naming is correct 'Flying Scotsman' was not the first express engine to be completed under the auspices of the LNER but GNR A1 pacific No.1472 was.  

 

Incidentally according to the BR Database 1472 entered traffic in February 1923, i.e. the month following that which another source  gives for NER 2401 entering traffic.  But as noted above 2401 had been completed in December 1922.

Edited January 4, 2023 by The Stationmaster

[Compound2632]

26 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

All depends exactly how you define and qualify  'first'.  

 

So what was the first locomotive ordered by the LNER, i.e. ordered after 1 Jan 1923, to enter service?

[gr.king]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

Trouble is, we'd spend all year arguing about what exactly an 'even balance' was ....... as a SOUTHERN fan, I'd be happy to take a quarter for 'my' railway but others might prefer a greater floor area for the larger companies ........ for some reason !

EQUAL representation as nearly as possible for the four groups is what I had in mind. I see no fair justification for anything else.

[Compound2632]

51 minutes ago, gr.king said:

EQUAL representation as nearly as possible for the four groups is what I had in mind. I see no fair justification for anything else.

 

But that leads to over-representation of the smaller groups. 

[Wickham Green too]

Well that's two hours arguing disagreeing so far - only 8668 hours to the end of the year ...............

[gr.king]

13 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

But that leads to over-representation of the smaller groups. 

No it doesn't - the whole idea being to celebrate the existence of each of the four main groups equally, not to run a show with a bias towards the LMS (no matter how much you might prefer red engines) and not to overlook the entities that did not become a part of any one of the groups. As a modellers' show, the relative sizes of the real groups are not in any case necessarily relevant. One could argue instead, unhelpfully, that the extent to which they have been modelled should be the deciding factor, but how would the extent to which each group has been modelled ever be accurately determined? How would models/layouts that never leave home, built by those who lead very private lives, be discovered / assessed / counted?

I certainly would not support or attend a show that was going to be dominated by LMS modelling because the LMS was the largest group, nor would I want to see a bias towards conical boilers on dark green engines that all look more or less the same, and I wouldn't want the very small concerns ignored - they add to variety, and very much add interest if they represent something rarely modelled.

If people want to argue about levels of representation relative to the real group sizes, that just adds to my belief that no suitable show is likely to take place.

 

[Compound2632]

Well argued. I would amend just one point

 

57 minutes ago, gr.king said:

(no matter how much you might prefer red black engines)

 

if you really want to play on my LMS bias!

 

I understand you have a preference for the LNER, in which case the applies.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Compound2632

[t-b-g]

I would like to think that mature, grown up modellers might be able to enjoy an exhibition that contains layouts and modellers that don't match their specific interests. If I only went to shows that catered for my fairly narrow and obscure tastes, I wouldn't go to any. The last time I saw a pre-grouping GCR layout at a show, it was me exhibiting it!

 

Representation and inclusivity are very much buzzwords of modern society.  If such a show were to include a couple more SR layouts than should really be there based on the size of the real railway company, it wouldn't bother me for a moment.

 

As long as there were a variety of different types of layouts and different scales/gauges and the quality of the modelling was good, that would do for me.

[rodent279]

On 04/01/2023 at 18:17, The Stationmaster said:

appears from the sources I have looked at that it wasn't named 'Flying Scotsman' until 1924.

So the NRM are a year early-FS's 2nd ton (see what I did there?😀) is not until next year!

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, rodent279 said:

So the NRM are a year early-FS's 2nd ton (see what I did there?😀) is not until next year!

 

It all depends! If you say that a loco exists from the day that its frames are assembled, then you could say that they are a year late, as that would have happened in late 1922.

[Wickham Green too]

But the NAME wasn't adopted for the train - and hence some locomotive or other - until 1924.