Wright writes.....

[jrg1]

The rebuild frames and boiler were set up whilst 4470 was still in traffic-any A1 due for works could have been designated for the A1/1 rebuild.  using 4470 was a political decision-and a poor one.

[billbedford]

Gresley was a hard act to follow and whatever the new person had done would be seen to be wrong by some folk. 

 

Really? He certainly wasn't one of those engineers that 'could make things for a pound that others made for a fiver'.

[billbedford]

The rebuild frames and boiler were set up whilst 4470 was still in traffic-any A1 due for works could have been designated for the A1/1 rebuild.  using 4470 was a political decision-and a poor one.

 

The new sets of frames and boilers were set up, while the loco was still in traffic, for every A1/A3 that went into the shops for a heavy repair.

Edited December 9, 2015 by billbedford

[gwrrob]

Simon has left us. However on the previous incarnation of MREmag he took part in a prolonged exchange of views re Thompson's designs and conversions. Simon's contributions were enlightening. Unfortunately due to the change in ownership, the MREmag archive  appears not to be accessible.

 

He's on today's page eating humble pie apparently.

[Focalplane]

It is very difficult, 58 years on in life, to try to put oneself back in time as a 12 year old, but this topic provides quite a good framework for doing so.  I am quite sure I did not know the names of any CMEs when I was 12 years old.  I was fascinated by steam locomotives and, of all the many designs, some fascinated me more than others, and not for any reasons related to the CME and design team who "built" them.  It is interesting though, that the locomotives that were top of my list back then have remained high on the same, though expanded, list today.

 

As I may have mentioned before, I was fortunate to get permits for groups to visit Crewe, Doncaster and Derby Works, all within a week, when a friend and I cycled across country.  This was a formative experience (we had effectively run away from home, no-one knew where we were).  At the time I didn't talk to many railwaymen, probably because they were chasing me and I was running away.  So my company was mostly other 12 year old trainspotters.  Our skills were always put to the test when a distant express came down the line at Tamworth.  The competition was who could first correctly identify the locomotive.  So steam pipes, smoke deflectors and so on became the key to our pastime.  We did know something about valve gears, cylinders and so on, but this was usually restricted to what Ian Allan listed in the Combined Volume.  Tractive Effort was an all important measure, or so we thought at the time.

 

So, when a few years later I built my first white metal kit, I did not have any idea of what was correct and what was not.  I followed the instructions and that was that.  By then I had no one in my family who had any interest in trains - my stepfather was an avid supporter of Dr. Beeching - so my pastime certainly suffered from a lack of guidance.

 

Which is why I now lap up information and tend to ask questions that some of you will say "oh, we've been through that one before, do we have to again?"  Funny though, that having said that the discussion is usually repeated (and all for my benefit?)

[Headstock]

The last of my trilogy of Crownline LNER pacifics and the one that entailed the most extensive modifications to the original kit.  Quite a journey but I learned a lot in the process.  The valve gear is fully working

but I did have a little help in it's final form, so 60863 still counts as my first working valve gear that was all my own work. The cab side sheets where sliced in two and extended to improve the look of the original

etches, the smoke box was extended and springs added to the frames as well as many other tweaks, fiddles and lunatic ajustments.  Why didn't I go with the superior DJH kit ? well it's that journey thing again

isn't it.

[Pebbles]

There is only one problem - Thompson was too close in age to Gresley. In history this has happened to many able people it's just fate. I believe that Thompson did act in a vindictive manner when he became CME but remember he was responsible for the B12, D16 and B16 rebuilds. As to the question of the B1 when did any CME design an engine they set the agenda and the design staff did the rest. Whilst Thompson had a thing about equal length con rods that appeared on the A2/1, A2/2 and the A2/3  this didn't extend to the A1/1 where he compromised.

[coachmann]

The railways were worked to death during the war and afterwards and had things been different, Gresley would have had to answer for the designs he signed off once extreme conditions and lack of maintenance manifested itself. As it was, Thompson found himself in office at the worst time imaginable.

Edited December 9, 2015 by coachmann

[Rail-Online]

. In any ways the most remarkable sight was in 1955 when a three car GWR railcar set travelled with a group of Nat West Bank railway enthusiasts from Paddington to Derby...you've guessed it through Water Orton.

And indeed here it is:

 

http://www.zenfolio.com/railonline/e/p190563228

 

(photos 5 and 6)

 

Not featured on Six Bells, does anyone know the date ans identity of theDMU?

 

Tony

Edited December 9, 2015 by Rail-Online

[gr.king]

Really? He certainly wasn't one of those engineers that 'could make things for a pound that others made for a fiver'.

 

Maybe in some situations it is best not pare building costs down to a pound if it costs a fiver to make a good one?

[gr.king]

 Thompson found himself in office at the worst time imaginable.

 

Difficult to disagree with that. If he had ambition he must have been extremely frustrated to find that "opportunity" such as it was came only quite late in his career and really presented extremely little freedom to act as he might have wished. Compared to the access to money and materials that he might have enjoyed on the wealthy North Eastern, had it survived and had he risen to the top, the CME job on the cash-strapped LNER in the depths of a war that was going very badly at the time must have seemed like a nightmare come true.

Edited December 9, 2015 by gr.king

[Headstock]

With any of these discussions  you realy have to go back to the original data otherwise you are just repeating the same old mantra.  A good case in point is William browns excellent book on the Hush Hush, he did extensive research on this

locomotive from  original documenation that he discovered in the NRM.  As a result the true story of this locomotive came to light for the first time, dismissing the myths about this engine, often heard and repeated even in such esteemed

publicasions as the RCTS green books. 

 

Some years ago I conducted my own research looking for the other LMS streamliner that survived into BR days.(the books will tell you there was only one)  As a result I pulled the record cards out of the archives of all the Princess and Princess

Coronation class pacifics.  I found my streamliner but as a side note another picture started to emerge, of just how much time these locomotives spent in works and how costly they where to maintain. The Princess in paticular were very expensive

locomotives and spent long periods out of service. A clear picture emerged from their own documentation of loco costings. I was not suprised that it came as a shock to the LM men, that the LNERs locomotives and pacifics in paticular cost less to build, operate and mantain then the LM equivalents. The phrase 'hoist by your own petard' springs to mind.  The LNER locomotives where not expensive when compared to their rivals.

 

note when the LM guys took over BR they introduced Loco costings to other regions, the cynics believed that this was a way of proving the superiority of the LM product over the other railways. It backfired somwhat when dealing with LNER, who were

well practiced in spending as little as possible of the money they didn't have.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Headstock

[Headstock]

Stannier himself went on record to say that the LM had not enough pacifics, If anything looking at the diagrams and milage records the big engines were rather underutilized (  I supose the accountants would see that as a cost penalty) with the brunt of the traffic falling onto the Royal scots and other 4-6-0 types. I don't pretend to be an expert but I couldnt find any workings as arduous as some of those worked by the A1s, in terms of round trips in a day but of course the ER had more big engines to play with.  The A1s did work the west cost mainline out of Polmadie, usualy on the Birmingham Glasgow and the return West coast postal.  The drivers, naturaly prefered their Duchess locomotives but did concede that the A1s were perfectly capable machines and amazingly light on water and coal compare to thei usual engines. At the end of the day it's all accountant speak, they are the ones who got the shock, it had little to do with working the trains on the ground.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Headstock

[46256]

With any of these discussions  you realy have to go back to the original data otherwise you are just repeating the same old mantra.  A good case in point is William browns excellent book on the Hush Hush, he did extensive research on this

locomotive from  original documenation that he discovered in the NRM.  As a result the true story of this locomotive came to light for the first time, dismissing the myths about this engine, often heard and repeated even in such esteemed

publicasions as the RCTS green books. 

 

Some years ago I conducted my own research looking for the other LMS streamliner that survived into BR days.(the books will tell you there was only one)  As a result I pulled the record cards out of the archives of all the Princess and Princess

Coronation class pacifics.  I found my streamliner but as a side note another picture started to emerge, of just how much time these locomotives spent in works and how costly they where to maintain. The Princess in paticular were very expensive

locomotives and spent long periods out of service. A clear picture emerged from their own documentation of loco costings. I was not suprised that it came as a shock to the LM men, that the LNERs locomotives and pacifics in paticular cost less to build, operate and

mantain then there LM equivalents. The phrase 'hoist by your own petard' springs to mind.  The LNER locomotives where not expensive when compared to their rivals.

sir really enjoying this up until this post.....I am now going for a lie down with my book of the princess pacifics to get over the shock.....a glass or two of red may need to be consumed later as well...

[Headstock]

Only shocking if your an accountant, but enjoy the book and the wine.  I shall get my book of the A1S A2S and all the rest and have a lemsip

Edited December 9, 2015 by Headstock

[Class O]

I have been told by several men that were there that a S160 was studied in detail before the B1 design was finalised, particularly the cylinders and porting arrangements......

[Focalplane]

Stanier himself went on record to say that the LM had not enough pacifics, If anything looking at the diagrams and milage records the big engines were rather underutilized (  I supose the accountants would see that as a cost penalty) with the brunt of the traffic falling onto the Royal scots and other 4-6-0 types. I don't pretend to be an expert but I couldnt find any workings as arduous as some of those worked by the A1s, in terms of round trips in a day but of course the ER had more big engines to play with.  The A1s did work the west cost mainline out of Polmadie, usually on the Birmingham Glasgow and the return West coast postal.

How far south did the A1 run toward Birmingham?  Crewe or all the way?

[Focalplane]

I have been told by several men that were there that a S160 was studied in detail before the B1 design was finalised, particularly the cylinders and porting arrangements......

This would not surprise me.  One of the advantages coming out of WWII was the exchange of ideas from across the Atlantic.  Ease of maintenance was certainly one aspect that changed in the UK with an emphasis on raised footplates, outside two cylinder locos etc., etc.  Royal Scot, Coronation and KGV all went to America in the 1920s/30s but for the obvious reason there were no North American visitors to visit and run on UK rails until the USTC locos arrived.  The LMS learned a lot from their two locos going to America and made significant changes to their immediate post war designs.  The input from French locomotive design should also not be forgotten, but that's a different story.

[46256]

How far south did the A1 run toward Birmingham?  Crewe or all the way?

certainly not all the way to bham..nor I believe to Crewe...most likely Carlisle was the furthest south they ventured..look forward to being corrected. I also believe it was A2/3s that were transferred to Polmadie and used on the west coast postal. The line north of Carlisle including shap and beattock....it has been reported how they fared on the east coast cement trains... I think ...and it causes me extra pain to say it they handled these heavy trains on the west coast route equally well. My book on the Princesses has now been joined by my books on the a1s etc....

[Headstock]

How far south did the A1 run toward Birmingham?  Crewe or all the way?

They worked as far as Crewe.

 

As regards the evil Thompson pacifics I wonder if their shortcomings were relative to LNER experiance with other pacifics, or did they compare unfavourable to likes of the King, Merchant Navy or Duchess?

Edited December 9, 2015 by Headstock

[The Stationmaster]

This would not surprise me.  One of the advantages coming out of WWII was the exchange of ideas from across the Atlantic.  Ease of maintenance was certainly one aspect that changed in the UK with an emphasis on raised footplates, outside two cylinder locos etc., etc.  Royal Scot, Coronation and KGV all went to America in the 1920s/30s but for the obvious reason there were no North American visitors to visit and run on UK rails until the USTC locos arrived.  The LMS learned a lot from their two locos going to America and made significant changes to their immediate post war designs.  The input from French locomotive design should also not be forgotten, but that's a different story.

Maybe not any US visitors but definitely some imports - including these in 1899.  This is one of the Midland Railway ones but the GNR and GCR also had them (theirs were Baldwin built, I think this is a Schenectady built engine judging by the worksplate)

Edited December 9, 2015 by The Stationmaster

[Headstock]

certainly not all the way to bham..nor I believe to Crewe...most likely Carlisle was the furthest south they ventured..look forward to being corrected. I also believe it was A2/3s that were transferred to Polmadie and used on the west coast postal. The line north of Carlisle including shap and beattock....it has been reported how they fared on the east coast cement trains... I think ...and it causes me extra pain to say it they handled these heavy trains on the west coast route equally well. My book on the Princesses has now been joined by my books on the a1s etc..

Probably Great Northens finest moment was when the Loo attacked the climb to Copypit, I think with a Northen Rubber special.  The poor old banking engine was was left winded somewhere down the hill.  I think it was also Great Northen that disgraced herself by slipping so violently that she burnt through the rails, I think at Grantham.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

Just to catch up on a few things.......

 

The Polmadie-based A1s in the early-'50s worked as far south as Crewe. According to local reports, they were better than a Princess but not as good as a Duchess. 

 

As for the class as a whole, the A1s ran the highest mileage between major overhauls of any Class 8 and were the cheapest to maintain. The roller bearing examples were in a class of their own. The only loco which came close in the 'economy' stakes was a Skefko roller-bearing Black Five. In respect of economies, they were the 'best' express passenger locomotive ever to run in this country, especially since most of their work was heavy and at high speed. 

 

As a species, the Thompson Pacifics needed far more time in works than other equivalents. The difficulty in keeping the front end tight was the main problem, caused by the poor positioning of the outside cylinders. To that extent they were far more costly to maintain.

 

But, enough from me about Thompson. The arguments will go on as long as those who remember his engines (and probably those who don't) are still around. Had he not rebuilt the P2s and chosen another A1 rather than GREAT NORTHERN to rebuild (if, indeed, he did choose it), then he'd probably be remembered with some fondness, given the extreme conditions when he took over the CME's role. The B1s and O1s were extremely fine locos, as good as any equivalent. 

 

 

 

 

 

But it's not with locos of any kind that I've been concerned with today. No, weathering wagons where three self-proclaimed old gits spent a most pleasant time with acrylics, enamels and powders. The names have been withheld to protect the innocent, but one had never done any weathering before, so it became yet another tutorial session. More remains to be done on these RTR items, but I think it's a good start. Good enough for the newcomer to do all his own weathering in future. 

[gr.king]

Maybe not any US visitors but definitely some imports - including these in 1899.  This is one of the Midland Railway ones but the GNR and GCR also had them (theirs were Baldwin built, I think this is a Schenectady built engine judging by the worksplate)

 

Definitely Schenectady.

The Baldwins had straight running plates and parallel boilers. Bogie tenders too I believe....

[Willie Whizz]

Heck this old stuff is embarrasing.  This is the second kit I ever built, I thought and still do a major step forwads from Great Northen, looks to me more like a real engine. The union link is in the right place and I managed to improve the valve gear but it is cosmetic. The doge is that the expansion link is only two bar instead of three but the lifting link does pass through it. Still a bit of an ugly beast next to Micks beautiful creations.  I think Mr Thompson should have had him on the design staff.

 

Nice.  But far too clean, I'm afraid, from my vivid recollection of it as the only LNER pacific I ever saw 'in traffic', as a small boy - see my post a few days back.