LMSR Castles - Detail differences.

[scots region]

Hello all, we all, or at least a good few of us are, aware of the legendary request by the LMSR to buy 25 'custom' 40XX class 4-6-0s off the GWR to make up for the need for more powerful locomotives on the WCML after No 5000 was trailed there. I say legendary not as a hollow word, I can't see the GWR just giving their key to success to their biggest rivals, even if they would pay through the nose for it, no if they did it would most likely be an el cheapo 'E for export version, you know of the kid that 'Arrives three months after Christmas/Birthday, theres no Allen key and it dies after two weeks. But lets handwave, lets say that the GWR is thrilled at the notion of giving their former arch nemesis a right royal comeuppance in the form of their own product being superior to anything they could do and LMSR gets its 40XX, which become the 'Royal Scots' in this scenario.

 

So what would the key detail differences between the LMSR Castles and the GWR ones be? I imagine there would be a different chimney, most likely of LNWR pattern, different superheater arrangements, a more substantial cab, LMSR style of Tenders, no cast numberplates obviously. Thats all I've got for now.

 

Let me know your thoughts.

 

Yours

ScR

Life is a train, unfortunately someone's nicked the regulator.          

[robmcg]

Why am I thinking of Jubilees?

[jjnewitt]

I would have thought that the cab would have been less substantial given the smaller LMS loading guage. The thought of a Castle with a Folwer tender makes me shiver!

 

Justin 

[scots region]

Why am I thinking of Jubilees?

Because...... Well played Stanier, well played.

[jjnewitt]

Thinking about it further if the plan had gone ahead then the LMS probably would have got what Swindon wanted to give them rather than modifying the Castle in any great way to suit another company. They wouldn't have and didn't need to do it after all. So the things would have been shrunk to fit the smaller loading gauge; smaller cab, shorter chimney and safety valves etc and most probably a Churchward tender to go with it. Swindon would have probably have painted them lined green as well! I'm sure Derby would have been thrilled.

 

Justin 

[kevinlms]

Weren't the railway companies prevented from building locos to sell to other companies? The private loco builders complained bitterly when the LNWR sold the L&Y a batch of new locos and they succeeded in getting a law preventing them.

[kevinlms]

Thinking about it further if the plan had gone ahead then the LMS probably would have got what Swindon wanted to give them rather than modifying the Castle in any great way to suit another company. They wouldn't have and didn't need to do it after all. So the things would have been shrunk to fit the smaller loading gauge; smaller cab, shorter chimney and safety valves etc and most probably a Churchward tender to go with it. Swindon would have probably have painted them lined green as well! I'm sure Derby would have been thrilled.

 

Justin 

Only if the GWR would have been happy to not get paid! Perhaps Derby could have provided a fleet of tenders to replace old GWR varieties.

 

!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 Unless I am much mistaken, all that Swindon could have done was supply the drawings. The railway companies were not permitted to trade between themselves in locomotives to protect whatever market there was for the independent loco manufacturing businesses. What would Derby have done from a set of Castle drawings if not controlled by someone who knew what he was about? Something pretty dreadful using all their standard parts, beginning with driving axle bearings barely adequate for a 2F...

Why am I thinking of Jubilees?

Here indeed was the equivalent design, executed under Stanier's direction and thus got right according to Swindon's precepts. Which with the Princess promptly revealed where the Swindon formula was going out of date for the necessary power production in express service. The rapid revisions to provide adequate superheat on both classes, would only be paralleled in the relatively undemanding GW environment after the formation of BR.

[scots region]

Weren't the railway companies prevented from building locos to sell to other companies? The private loco builders complained bitterly when the LNWR sold the L&Y a batch of new locos and they succeeded in getting a law preventing them.

 

Fair Point, but if the GWR had provided the drawings and they had been keep to design, what would they have looked like, would they have had a squatter look overall? How would Stanier have dealt with them? 

[chrisf]

Stanier was still at Swindon.  Was it not Fowler who was CME at the time?

 

Chris

[bluebottle]

Weren't the railway companies prevented from building locos to sell to other companies? The private loco builders complained bitterly when the LNWR sold the L&Y a batch of new locos and they succeeded in getting a law preventing them. 

 

Fair Point, but if the GWR had provided the drawings and they had been keep to design, what would they have looked like, would they have had a squatter look overall? How would Stanier have dealt with them? 

 

Another "legend" is the box of drawings that Stanier took with him from Swindon to Derby in 1932. Stanier was in a strong enough position to have chief draughtsman Herbert Chambers, a died-in-the wool Derby man, moved sideways and bring in ex-NSR (via Horwich) man Tom Coleman. Under Stanier, who recognised his own need to adapt, Coleman drew the locos the LMS needed and got, and deserves much of the credit.

Going back to the motive power crisis of 1927, the North British Locomotive Company saved the situation by producing 50 "Royal Scots"in record time. Those locos weren't perfect, but were a long way better than any other quick fix would have been.

IMHO, the story of what actually happened is of more interest than any alternative history.

 

Edit: corrected slip re Coleman's career path.

[Flying Pig]

Here indeed was the equivalent design, executed under Stanier's direction and thus got right according to Swindon's precepts.

Not quite - draughting a three cylinder engine gave Stanier a nasty surprise and it took a fair bit of tweaking to get the steaming as reliable as the Baby Scots.

 

Anyway, as regards Bolsover Castle, I'm thinking in terms of  Hughes cab; Fowler 3500 gal tender; boiler fittings  from the 2-6-4T; outside Walschaert's gear as 6201; running plate raised over the drivers a la Beames, but dropped at the front with curved plating again like the Crab and retaining the double buffer beam. I'm working on a sketch...

 

Oh, and can we give it a flat smokebox door with dogs?

[scots region]

 

Oh, and can we give it a flat smokebox door with dogs?

 

As offensive to any semblance of aesthetic taste as that would be.... Sure.  

[kevinlms]

Fair Point, but if the GWR had provided the drawings and they had been keep to design, what would they have looked like, would they have had a squatter look overall? How would Stanier have dealt with them? 

But Stanier didn't want to slavishly copy (assuming he'd transferred earlier - see Chrisf's post) his previous employers ideas. For an example of that look at the history of the first Stanier 2-6-0, where the GWR style top feed was removed very swiftly on Stanier's orders.

Sorry but the LMS, was never going to be part of a 'Greater GWR', the different operating conditions and variations in coal standards made this an impossibility, as later proved by the boiler alterations required of various locos, notably the Jubilees and to a lesser extent, the Princess Royals & Black Fives.

[Clive Mortimore]

In the Derby Drawing Office…OK Let us look at what we can do with this Swindon Castle locomotive drawing? Well we need to keep the price down so no fancy tapered boiler. The firebox can be squared, again getting rid of that fancy taper and tuck under. Put a proper dome on it and the safety valves in their proper place, on the firebox. Why waste money on giving the driver a side window on the cab, isn’t he supposed to look forward, so that is another saving. At the smokebox end, get rid of the silly twirlly thing to close the door and replace it with some dogs done up with a spanner.

 

Now to the undergubbins. Three cylinders are cheaper, we’ll keep the inside valve gear but move the piston valves so that they are all under the smokebox, looks neater.  Now not all our turntables will take such a long loco so let’s make it a bit shorter and lose one of those set of driving wheels. This will save quite a bit of money and construction time.

 

The GWR is mainly in the southwest of England so lastly to keep the ying and yang balance we should take some input from the NER, how about that nice Mr Smith’s compound driving system.

 

Ah!!! Doesn’t that feel better?

 

Edit Forgot to say in the meeting must save on copper, so a nice cast iron chminey.

[chrisf]

I've just refreshed my memory with the aid of O S Nock's History of the Great Western Railway vol 3 [page 54 if you want to check!].  The loan of 5000 to the LMS in 1926 stemmed from a disagreement between the LMS CME who wanted a 4-cylinder compound Pacific and the Operating Department who considered that a 4-6-0 would be adequate. The visiting Castle "was subjected to extended trials between Euston and Carlisle".  There is no suggestion that bits were lopped off it to fit the LMS loading gauge!  Why would that have been necessary?  Most railways had locos with restricted route availability - all those LNER Pacifics for starters - and surely the batch of 50 Castles for the LMS would have been just another.

 

Chris

[Worsdell forever]

What to do with drawings from Swindon? 

 

Well they could be cut into 6" squares and hung on a nail somewhere suitable, they might be a bit rough for that use though...   

[pete_mcfarlane]

I thought this topic was going to be about Broad Gauge 4-4-0s! 

[69843]

Surprised no-one has mentioned this yet:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/image/41425-lms-castle/

[bluebottle]

I thought this topic was going to be about Broad Gauge 4-4-0s! 

 

I thought it was going to be about the real LMSR Castles; the first 4-6-0s to carry the names of castles; Peter Drummond's design for the Highland Railway introduced in 1900. http://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Trains-Railways-British-Isles/Scottish-and-BRSc-gallery/Scottish-pre-grouping/23527588_R73Njp/2201499688_X3GxnCw#!i=2201499688&k=X3GxnCw Unlike many such pre-grouping express locos, all twenty of the class were taken into LMS stock at the grouping; the last, No. 14690 "Murthly Castle", failing to outlast the LMS by just a year.

[kevinlms]

In the Derby Drawing Office…OK Let us look at what we can do with this Swindon Castle locomotive drawing? Well we need to keep the price down so no fancy tapered boiler. The firebox can be squared, again getting rid of that fancy taper and tuck under. Put a proper dome on it and the safety valves in their proper place, on the firebox. Why waste money on giving the driver a side window on the cab, isn’t he supposed to look forward, so that is another saving. At the smokebox end, get rid of the silly twirlly thing to close the door and replace it with some dogs done up with a spanner.

 

Now to the undergubbins. Three cylinders are cheaper, we’ll keep the inside valve gear but move the piston valves so that they are all under the smokebox, looks neater.  Now not all our turntables will take such a long loco so let’s make it a bit shorter and lose one of those set of driving wheels. This will save quite a bit of money and construction time.

 

The GWR is mainly in the southwest of England so lastly to keep the ying and yang balance we should take some input from the NER, how about that nice Mr Smith’s compound driving system.

 

Ah!!! Doesn’t that feel better?

 

Edit Forgot to say in the meeting must save on copper, so a nice cast iron chminey.

And a decent paint job, none of that boring green.

[kevinlms]

I thought this topic was going to be about Broad Gauge 4-4-0s! 

Sorry, but the LNWR went out of its way to have nothing to do with a break of gauge location The Midland were less fussy though and purchased the Birmingham & Gloucester line, although quickly went about making it mixed gauge & later converting it to a 'proper' gauge.

[Flying Pig]

Surprised no-one has mentioned this yet:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/image/41425-lms-castle/

 

Matthew Cousins' image linked above shows GWR-built LMS 6100 "Royal Scot" running recently in preservation.  As is well-known, 6100 was the only member of the class actually built at Swindon, the rest being constructed by the LMS itself and a number of outside builders to a slightly modified design that included such Standard LMS features as left hand drive and outside Walschaert's valve gear.  All were renewed with Stanier cabs and replacement smokeboxes during the 1940s and ended their lives looking very similar to 6100, but it's known that they originally had Derby-style smokebox doors and an LMS-designed cab.  Unfortunately, there are no surviving photographs of these locomotives in their original condition and their precise styling has become a matter of perennial debate amongst historians and enthusiasts.

 

I therefore thought I'd have a go at modifying Matthew's excellent picture to show what these machines might originally have looked like. I've produced variants with Horwich and Derby cabs and with Matthew's kind permission these are posted below:

 

 

[scots region]

Matthew Cousins' image linked above shows GWR-built LMS 6100 "Royal Scot" running recently in preservation.  As is well-known, 6100 was the only member of the class actually built at Swindon, the rest being constructed by the LMS itself and a number of outside builders to a slightly modified design that included such Standard LMS features as left hand drive and outside Walschaert's valve gear.  All were renewed with Stanier cabs and replacement smokeboxes during the 1940s and ended their lives looking very similar to 6100, but it's known that they originally had Derby-style smokebox doors and an LMS-designed cab.  Unfortunately, there are no surviving photographs of these locomotives in their original condition and their precise styling has become a matter of perennial debate amongst historians and enthusiasts.

 

I therefore thought I'd have a go at modifying Matthew's excellent picture to show what these machines might originally have looked like. I've produced variants with Horwich and Derby cabs and with Matthew's kind permission these are posted below:

 

MatthewsLMSCastle_SG_Horwich.jpg

 

MatthewsLMSCastle_SG_Derby.jpg

 

 

Now this I would model, I quite like the Horwich version.