WD 2-8-0 on the Cornish Riveria in late 1947 - also, other unusual engines on emergency stand-ins?

[OnTheBranchline]

 

In Part 2 of Roger Venning's excellent "Taunton in the Forties" series in the GWR Magazine No 32 Autumn 1999, there is a paragraph about a King failing at Taunton in 'late' 1947 on the 10:30am Paddington to Penzance 'the down Cornish Riveria' and a WD Austerity being drafted and leaving platform 5 for Exeter. Roger speculated that the WD would only be for the run to Exeter and the timing from point to point was 37 minutes for the Riveria for the 30 miles which equates to roughly 60mph throughout.

 

In An Historical Survey of Great Western Engine Sheds 1947 by E. Lyons - there are two interesting tidbits:

1) Taunton's shed allocation for Dec 31, 1947 does list WD 77077 (95046) so I would think that this is the one that was used in the above? The allocation of larger engines at Taunton was:

4-6-0 - 4026, 4056, 4954, 5003, 5077, 5982, 5999

2-8-0 - 2814, 77077 (90546)

2-6-0 - 6305, 6317, 6323, 6328, 6343, 6372, 6377, 6394, 6398, 7304, 7314

 

2) The Exeter shed allocation on Dec 31, 1947 of larger engines was as follows (I only put larger engines because I assume something larger would have been chosen):

4-6-0 - 1020, 4054, 5012, 5059, 5098, 5902

2-8-0 - 2873, 3834, 4706

2-6-0 - 5321, 6301, 6397, 7316

 

Is there any more information on this emergency engine change and what happened after the run to Exeter from another source? It would be interesting to learn more. The crack engine crew on the Riveria probably couldn't believe what they were given at Taunton. Probably was a rough ride with the smaller wheels of a WD compared to a King.

 

You can all run out and buy a WD 2-8-0 to run on your GWR crack express now, it's prototypical.

 

Also I just wanted to open the floor to any other unusual engine diagram or stand-ins in your research? Not necessarily only GWR.

 

When I say unusual, I mean more of a ‘scraping the bottom of the barrel’.

Edited September 7, 2023 by OnTheBranchline

[Wickham Green too]

48 minutes ago, OnTheBranchline said:

... 1) Taunton's shed allocation for Dec 31, 1947 does list WD 77077 (95046) so I would think that this is the one that was used in the above? ...

Not necessarily - it could have been a visiting loco that was borrowed. Presumably 77077's allocation was justified and there was some regular traffic that should have taken it away from Taunton at times. 

[The Stationmaster]

Replacing a failed engine on a train depended then (as now in some respects) on using what was most readily available to get the train moving as soon as possible.  So any engine which had the power to shift teh train, even if not at the desired maximum speed would be used provided it was permitted rather than waiting for a more suitable engine to be prepared (assuming there was one available to prepare).

 

A chap  I knew years after the event  had been firing one day on the Up 'Bristolian' with a Driver who had a reputation for very hard running and flogging the Fireman to a state of ruin.  After their second failure of the trip - at Didcot - the only engine available was a 43XX so that was what they were given.  That in tirn had to come off at Reading where it was replaced by a 'Hall' which was the only 4-6-0 which was available.   the engine whi ch came off at didcot had been a 4-6-0 0f some sort which had been provided at Swindon - but it only lasted to Didvcot (probably I would imaginei because t wasn't fully prepared).

 

Back in 1973 I had a ride in South Wales - From Newport to Cardiff behind an EE Type 3 which was grabbed to replace a failed 1000 on a Paddngton - Swansea train.  And it happened to be driven by a man from my depot at that time and we didn't have any passenger train work at all but the original Driver didn't know EE Type 3s so that was that.  Talking to teh Driver later that day he said that he'd enjoyed himself havinga trip like that, made a niv ce change from freight work.

[LMS2968]

Some are born to greatness, others have it thrust upon them. 8266 complete with headboard wheels the Thames - Clyde Express into Trent following the failure of the diagrammed 5XP, 2 July 1955. Photo J Kent / Stanier 8F Locomotive Socy Archive.

 

This must have come as a surprise at Paddington when 8387 brought in the 7.10 Salop - Padd following the failure of the D1000 Western, 30 July 1963. Photo George Staddon / Neville Stead Colletion / 8F Socy Archive.

 

D1000 itself failed on the Padd - Wolverhampton and was assisted by 8179, as seen at Leamington. Date unknown, JRP Hunt / 8F Socy Archive.

 

Possibly the biggest disaster befell the Down Caledonian. The Class 40 failed at crewe and a Big Lizzie went on. This suffered injector troubles and was replaced at Carnforth - by an 8321 running tender first, which got the train to Carlisle. You can read all about it in the caption, but I don't think that's Bill Starvis.

[The Johnster]

Adrian Vaughan has a story concerning the demise of a Warship on the down Bristolian at Didcot in the early 60s, where the only loco available was the oldest tender loco on the WR, 2804, which was duly coupled on and set off to do the best it could.  There was an off-duty Bath Road fitter on the train with a bag of tools who volunteered his services and climbed aboard the Warship to do the best he could.  With the Warship's crew on 2804, and 2804's driver manning the Warship in case the fitter got it going, they were apparently observed at something in the high sixties mph going through Swindon, then the Warship came to life at the bottom of Dauntsey, and 'high speed' was the order of the rest of the day.  When they came to a stand at Temple Meads, they were met by fitters with oxy-cutting gear to remove 2804's expected siezed motion, but the loco, while warm, was able to make it's own way to St Philip's Marsh and, following inspection, worked a freight back to Didcot the same day. 

 

I'm not sure about this, but I tend to believe AV more than anything written by W A Tuplin.  It sounds a bit 'GW loco good, modern diesel bad' which is normal for AV, and he mentions that he'd have thought that WR management would have been proud of the fact that their oldest goods engine could do this, and says there were journos on the train, but that management put the mockers on anything that was off the 'white heat of modernisation' message.  This was apparently shortly after the LMR had been embarrassed by one of the daily liesheets carrying 'Red Duchess to the rescue', which involved a 40 failing on the up Royal Scot at Grayrigg and a Duchess on a parcels job bing coupled on the front, full load plus 140tons of dead 40, and time made up at Crewe.

[kevinlms]

There is always the 3F 0-6-0T 47496 entering Bath on the 'Pines Express', having assisted a West Country from Wellow.

An Ivo Peters photo from 1959, a copy of which appears in 'Fowler Locomotives'.

[rodent279]

Has a departmental loco ever assisted a passenger train? I'm thinking primarily of the class 23 5905, 24 97201, etc, but there were of course numerous departmental shunters such as class 08 97801 Pluto, and the WR PWM shunters.

[sandra]

There is a photo of a Stanier 8F at the buffer stops in Waterloo having brought in a local from Basingstoke.

[t-b-g]

I wish I could remember more details but I once met a chap who was building a model of a class J15 that he had been a driver on shunting and pilot duties on when a Britannia failed at Stratford on one of the named expresses.

 

He reckoned that he was probably the only the only driver who had taken a J15 into Liverpool Street with express headlamps and that particular train name headboard on. I think he said it was "The Continental" but that is the bit my memory is hazy on.

[LMS2968]

37 minutes ago, sandra said:

There is a photo of a Stanier 8F at the buffer stops in Waterloo having brought in a local from Basingstoke.

That was 8408 and it wasn't actually covering a failure. It had received an overhaul at Eastleigh (several 8Fs did) and was then used around the system for a bit. Still a bit of an oddity.

[Wickham Green too]

11 hours ago, The Johnster said:

... the only loco available was the oldest tender loco on the WR, 2804, ...

Well - how much of it was 'oldest' and how long since it had had a full overhaul ................ ?? 😮

[Darryl Tooley]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

He reckoned that he was probably the only the only driver who had taken a J15 into Liverpool Street with express headlamps and that particular train name headboard on. I think he said it was "The Continental" but that is the bit my memory is hazy on.

On 2nd September 1948 J15 No 65448, then acting as Chelmsford yard pilot, was substituted for a failed engine on the 'East Anglian', which it then worked to Liverpool Street, complete with headboard.

 

Source: RCTS 'Locomotives of the LNER' part 5 (and elsewhere - it's an oft-mentioned incident).

 

D 

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, Darryl Tooley said:

On 2nd September 1948 J15 No 65448, then acting as Chelmsford yard pilot, was substituted for a failed engine on the 'East Anglian', which it then worked to Liverpool Street, complete with headboard.

 

Source: RCTS 'Locomotives of the LNER' part 5 (and elsewhere - it's an oft-mentioned incident).

 

D 

 

I knew about that one but this chap said that the failed loco was a Britannia and that he was shunting at Stratford at the time, so I thought it may be another incident a few years later. 

[The Lurker]

I enjoyed the linked article about the exploits of a Terrier in the 19th century co-opted onto a special:

 

https://sremg.org.uk/RlyMag/MemRunBrightonTerrier.pdf

 

Instructions were given for it not to happen again!

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Adrian Vaughan has a story concerning the demise of a Warship on the down Bristolian at Didcot in the early 60s, where the only loco available was the oldest tender loco on the WR, 2804, which was duly coupled on and set off to do the best it could.  There was an off-duty Bath Road fitter on the train with a bag of tools who volunteered his services and climbed aboard the Warship to do the best he could.  With the Warship's crew on 2804, and 2804's driver manning the Warship in case the fitter got it going, they were apparently observed at something in the high sixties mph going through Swindon, then the Warship came to life at the bottom of Dauntsey, and 'high speed' was the order of the rest of the day.  When they came to a stand at Temple Meads, they were met by fitters with oxy-cutting gear to remove 2804's expected siezed motion, but the loco, while warm, was able to make it's own way to St Philip's Marsh and, following inspection, worked a freight back to Didcot the same day. 

 

I'm not sure about this, but I tend to believe AV more than anything written by W A Tuplin.  It sounds a bit 'GW loco good, modern diesel bad' which is normal for AV, and he mentions that he'd have thought that WR management would have been proud of the fact that their oldest goods engine could do this, and says there were journos on the train, but that management put the mockers on anything that was off the 'white heat of modernisation' message.  This was apparently shortly after the LMR had been embarrassed by one of the daily liesheets carrying 'Red Duchess to the rescue', which involved a 40 failing on the up Royal Scot at Grayrigg and a Duchess on a parcels job bing coupled on the front, full load plus 140tons of dead 40, and time made up at Crewe.

Having known AV very well I tend to take tales of his like that with a very considerable amount of salt as. a pinch of the stuff was a long way from sufficient.  He was well known for exaggeration and also for moving tales to locations where they didn't happen - such as one concerning a junction which appeared in a Wilshire newspaper at one time and mystified several who knew the location far better than he did.   One amusing incident was that in something which appeared in an SRS journal he explained that it was impossible to accept a train for a particular route at a certain junction without breaking the Signalling Regulations.  This resulted in a response from the late John Morris (who was well known for his encyclopaedic knowledge of Western signalling) who soberly pointed out that what AV was claiming needed a breach of the Regulations was in fact quite permissible  at that junction (which it indeed was).  If he had been breaking the Regulations it would have very easily have been picked up during Train Register Book checking and he would have been in serious trouble as a result.

 

Adrian is a brilliant raconteur and his books make fascinating, and at times very amusing, reading but he was always one to fall for tall stories and take them as fact.

[Ian Hargrave]

The subject of failed D1000 has been aired a couple of times. It was not uncommon. I travelled on the 5:00pm from Snow Hill to Paddington in January 1964.At this time,the MR…as it then became…..decided to replace the workings of the WR  hydraulic fleet with new Brush type 4. . We set off at a cracking pace with one on the front but near Princes Risborough came to a halt .There we stayed and were told by the ticket collector ( remember them ?) that we were held due to the 4:00 pm off Snow Hill suffering a failure. When we reached Paddington some 40 minutes late,the miscreant D 10XX could be viewed on an adjoining platform ,coupled inside a Mod.Hall.still at the head of its train 

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by Ian Hargrave
Adding text

[The Stationmaster]

6 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

The subject of failed D1000 has been aired a couple of times. It was not uncommon. I travelled on the 5:00pm from Snow Hill to Paddington in January 1964.At this time,the MR…as it then became…..decided to replace the workings of the WR  hydraulic fleet with new Brush type 4. . We set off at a cracking pace with one on the front but near Princes Risborough came to a halt .There we stayed and were told by the ticket collector ( remember them ?) that we were held due to the 4:00 pm off Snow Hill suffering a failure. When we reached Paddington some 40 minutes late,the miscreant could be viewed on an adjoining platform ,coupled inside a Mod.Hall.still at the head of its train 

 

You were lucky to make it behind a Brush Type 4  in some respects.  In their early days on the Paddington - Brimingham route  they quickly showed some very bad traits.  The worst was the habit of the automatic slack adjusters on the brake rigging to 'adjust' slack that wasn't there.   At best it simply rubbed the brake blocks down very quickly but it also led to brake block fires, scaled tyres and, in the very worst cases, to shifted tyres

[Ian Hargrave]

3 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

You were lucky to make it behind a Brush Type 4  in some respects.  In their early days on the Paddington - Brimingham route  they quickly showed some very bad traits.  The worst was the habit of the automatic slack adjusters on the brake rigging to 'adjust' slack that wasn't there.   At best it simply rubbed the brake blocks down very quickly but it also led to brake block fires, scaled tyres and, in the very worst cases, to shifted tyres

But  the MR appeared to have been insistent . However that was a Friday evening .Postscript Sunday evening return.Neither Western nor Brush available. Replacement: Castle. You couldn’t make it up.

[OnTheBranchline]

On 13/08/2023 at 08:32, Wickham Green too said:

Not necessarily - it could have been a visiting loco that was borrowed. Presumably 77077's allocation was justified and there was some regular traffic that should have taken it away from Taunton at times. 

The picture in the article doesn’t really give any indication but I can look again.

Edited August 14, 2023 by OnTheBranchline

[LMS2968]

36 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

You were lucky to make it behind a Brush Type 4  in some respects.  In their early days on the Paddington - Brimingham route  they quickly showed some very bad traits.  The worst was the habit of the automatic slack adjusters on the brake rigging to 'adjust' slack that wasn't there.   At best it simply rubbed the brake blocks down very quickly but it also led to brake block fires, scaled tyres and, in the very worst cases, to shifted tyres

A friend of mine was a driver from Warrington Arpley and one did it to him on a bitterly cold, frosty night. He was stopped at a signal and looked out sideways to see a red glow emanating from under the 47; it was the remains of the block and some of the rigging that was glowing. Having considered just carrying on, he asked the bobby to be to be put inside and a fitter called out. As the morning light arrived he noticed the landscape was all white, except for a ten foot semi-circle around this brake block.

 

The fitter eventually arrived and changed the necessary parts, but then announced that the engine was a failure since the tyre was loose on the wheel. Since the train was loaded petrol tankers, my mate was rather glad he stopped!

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

But  the MR appeared to have been insistent . However that was a Friday evening .Postscript Sunday evening return.Neither Western nor Brush available. Replacement: Castle. You couldn’t make it up.

I think the Brush Type 4s used on that route were all WR allocated.  I expect the idea was to cut back the area of operation of the 1000s as little had been done in the WR's Birmingham area to develop support facilities for mainline diesels and I think the 1000s were still very much on long cyclic diagrams at that time.

[The Johnster]

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

 He was well known for exaggeration

 

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

always one to fall for tall stories and take them as fact.

 

Hmm.  This chimes with my sense of him; like you, I find him a pleasant read, but a bit 'gushy' and overenthusiastic, bit similar to Sam...  Exaggeration, enthusiasm, and a degree of gullibility rather than mendacity, and I, too, was a bit puzzled by his infamous 'Wiltshire incident', which didn't chime with my understanding of the railway geography of the area.  But I'd take his word, somewhat salted, over Tuplin's anyday!

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by The Johnster

[OnTheBranchline]

54 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

 

 

Hmm.  This chimes with my sense of him; like you, I find him a pleasant read, but a bit 'gushy' and overenthusiastic, bit similar to Sam...  Exaggeration, enthusiasm, and a degree of gullibility rather than mendacity, and I, too, was a bit puzzled by his infamous 'Wiltshire incident', which didn't chime with my understanding of the railway geography of the area.  But I'd take his word, somewhat salted, over Tuplin's anyday!

 

Sorry - for us laymen or not born during that time, what was the Wiltshire incident? 

[johnofwessex]

Schools on the ACE anhyone?

 

https://sremg.org.uk/misc/ace.shtml

[62613]

9 hours ago, Darryl Tooley said:

On 2nd September 1948 J15 No 65448, then acting as Chelmsford yard pilot, was substituted for a failed engine on the 'East Anglian', which it then worked to Liverpool Street, complete with headboard.

 

Source: RCTS 'Locomotives of the LNER' part 5 (and elsewhere - it's an oft-mentioned incident).

 

D 

I've seen a photo of that train at Colchester in one of the East Anglian Steam books. Can't remember which one!