RMweb Gold LH&JC Posted July 22, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 22, 2011 No. 10 G. H. WOOD? Boiler donated from no. 13 KISSACK. Spot on, back to you EddieB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Sorry guys, I feel I'm hogging this thread. Hopefully a fairly easy question, the preamble should help to confirm the right answer. Son succeeded father, and father had previously spent time at Swindon. Son was responsible for some successful locomotive designs, but unfortunately one of his locomotives is generally reckoned to have had the shortest working life of any British main line steam locomotive. It was built, written off after an accident and scrapped, all within the same year (but I'm not giving the year). What was the running number of this locomotive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pH Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 A800? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 A800? "River Cray", the K class 2-6-4T that was involved in the Sevenoaks accident of 1927? I've had to do some hasty checking, but that loco was built at Brighton works and entered service in 1926. It was only lightly damaged in the accident and survived to be rebuilt as a tender loco in 1928. So it doesn't fit the bill, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 46202 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 OK Which surviving Manx Peacock has the dubious distinction of not working a single train following a heavy overhaul? As a matter of interest, when did this occur? I can't find any reference to it happening, certainly not in "nationalisation" history. Evidently it didn't happen when no. 10 received no. 13's boiler. JE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 46202 That would be two months after rebuilding, rather than when first built. Good try, but not right. Remember that the preamble about the father and son should help to confirm the right locomotive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold LH&JC Posted July 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 23, 2011 As a matter of interest, when did this occur? I can't find any reference to it happening, certainly not in "nationalisation" history. Evidently it didn't happen when no. 10 received no. 13's boiler. JE 15th November 1928. G H Wood was on test and the IMR's locomotive superintendent took her out for an unplanned test run to Port Soderick. Unfortunately a Thursdays only market train was coasting down to Douglas with Tynwald in charge. The collision buckled G H Wood's frames. Before G H Wood could run again, a forge had to be built to repair her frames, which were buckled again when she collided with Hutchinson in 1967. It's ironic that Tynwald only exists as a set of frames while G H Wood is still in front line service on the IMR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 15th November 1928. G H Wood was on test and the IMR's locomotive superintendent took her out for an unplanned test run to Port Soderick. Unfortunately a Thursdays only market train was coasting down to Douglas with Tynwald in charge. The collision buckled G H Wood's frames. Before G H Wood could run again, a forge had to be built to repair her frames, which were buckled again when she collided with Hutchinson in 1967. It's ironic that Tynwald only exists as a set of frames while G H Wood is still in front line service on the IMR! Fascinating, many thanks. JE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 23, 2011 Father and son are not too difficult (I think) but finding the loco most definitely is!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Father and son are not too difficult (I think) but finding the loco most definitely is!!!! Let me know what you're thinking here, Mike... There was me thinking this was so well known that that someone would be along with the right answer before I'd finished typing the question. All I can say is you should see the "stinker" I'm keeping for another occasion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Time to give a little more information, I think. In addition to the standard reference works on the company's locomotives, the locomotive in question was so identified in one of Philip Atkins' excellent survey articles in Backtrack. The year of its building and scrappage has been described as a "Halcyon year" in another of that same author's pieces in the same magazine. Had the locomotive survived, it's last number prior to nationalisation would have been the same as the number originally carried. The father of the son responsible for the design had an uncle who was Locomotive Superintendent at a third railway company (i.e. not the one for which this locomotive was built, nor the Great Western as identified by reference to Swindon in the original question). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pH Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 1506 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 24, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 24, 2011 1506 Which might now explain why I couldn't find anything under the name of the Loco Superintendent whose works I was searching through Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 1506 Quite correct. From the second batch ("A73") of Stephen Holden's Great Eastern Railway S69 class 4-6-0 (which became LNER B12). Delivered in early 1913, damaged beyond economic repair in an accident at Colchester, written off and scrapped within the same year. Had it survived it would have become LNER 8506, reverting to 1506 in the 1946 renumbering. Father James Holden spent some time at Swindon before becoming Locomotive Superintendent at Stratford. His uncle, Edward Tennant held a similar post on the North Eastern Railway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pH Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 OK - in which British railway facility would one have been able to find a unique species of daisy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 25, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 25, 2011 The island of Sodor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Wath? The Great Central Railway had four 0-8-4T locomotives built by Beyer Peacock in 1907, which became LNER class S1. Gresley added a booster to one of the locomotives and added two more new-builds to the same design (also fitted with boosters) in 1932. Collectively they were known as the "Wath Daisies". Not totally unique as the new locos replaced two of the originals transferred to March for the new hump yard at Whitemoor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pH Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Yes, Wath marshalling yard. Over to you again, Eddie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Here's a teaser then. Follow the logic in the preamble for a clue to the question. Swindon, as we all know, never allocated works numbers to the locomotives it built. It did however complete a locomotive in 1960 which was numbered 92220 by British Railways. What then is the significance of the locomotive built at Darlington with works number 2156 and the locomotive built by Yorkshire Engine Co. with works number 2584 (subcontracted by Hunslet Engine Co. which had allocated their works number 3739)? Both locomotives - and their significance - need to be identified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Well, I can identify the Yorkshire Engine Co one: it was BR No. 3409 (YE2584 of 1956), the last steam locomotive built at Meadowhall and the last BR locomotive to be built to a pre-nationalisation design (GWR 94xx class). Presumably the Darlington one was the last steam locomotive built there, to a pre-grouping design, class J72 no. 69028. Thus we have the last post-nationalisation locomotive, 92220, the last grouping design locomotive, 3409 and the last pre-grouping design locomotive, 69028. All were built by BR! I assume this wasn't your "stinker". JE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Well, I can identify the Yorkshire Engine Co one: it was BR No. 3409 (YE2584 of 1956), the last steam locomotive built at Meadowhall and the last BR locomotive to be built to a pre-nationalisation design (GWR 94xx class). Presumably the Darlington one was the last steam locomotive built there, to a pre-grouping design, class J72 no. 69028. Thus we have the last post-nationalisation locomotive, 92220, the last grouping design locomotive, 3409 and the last pre-grouping design locomotive, 69028. All were built by BR! I assume this wasn't your "stinker". JE Correct on all points, including that it wasn't my "stinker"! B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Right, the next one. This engineer was born in Great Britain and had connections to East and West India from his father. He himself saw many parts of the Mediterranean in his career, but also had North, South and Eastern employers. Who was he? JE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'm puzzling a little over what type of engineer you're after (ok, it isn't Farouk Engineer, for starters). When you say "employers" do you mean he worked as an employee for companies based in those parts, or he had a patent that was employed there? So far the best name I can come up with is ER Calthrop, which I'm pretty sure is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'm puzzling a little over what type of engineer you're after (ok, it isn't Farouk Engineer, for starters). When you say "employers" do you mean he worked as an employee for companies based in those parts, or he had a patent that was employed there? So far the best name I can come up with is ER Calthrop, which I'm pretty sure is wrong. He was a railway engineer, working for railway companies throughout his career after an apprenticeship with marine engineers and some early work on naval matters (his Mediterranean connection), and you are right, you are wrong! JE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now