Bernard Lamb Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Danger. This post carries a health warning. Bulleid regarded these machines as an intermediate stage in steam locomotive development. He also wanted to use Caprotti valve gear but economic and political constraints put the kibosh on that idea. The oil bath was an experiment to reduce the need for skilled and therefore better paid men to oil up and prepare the machines for service. Now if a group got together and built the logical development of his ideas then it would be very interesting. If Bulleid could have brought over a couple of welding experts from Skoda after the war it would have been even more interesting. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I think they look much better without all that pseudo-aerodymanic cladding... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 How anyone could consider any of the ungainly Thompson Pacifics elegant (unless, of course its nether regions are hidden by a platform) is beyond me! I've never worked out how he made a relationship of cylinders to bogie that looks perfectly OK on a Castle/King/Princess Royal look so horribly wrong on his own locos! John You are entitled to your view, though I wonder if you think that way because you have been per conditioned to believe them "ungainly and ugly" by what is more or less sixty years of constant anti-Thompson commentary since he left the LNER. Mores the pity as his Pacifics (all four types) look absolutely magnificent in full LNER apple green livery. Thompsons Pacifics in my view look the least cluttered of all those described above, particularly due to the agreeably more beautiful and definitely elegant form of the LNER's traditional round topped boiler. The front end of the Thompson Pacifics was always purposeful, powerful, if not elegant in itself compared to the earlier Gresley A3. Far from ungainly, I'd say the Thompson Pacifics, though a deviation from the layout Gresley and later Thompson adopted, was a product of its time and Thompson was clearly following William Staniers work on the LMS in several respects (he of course was Swindon trained). I think the LNER actually avoided a very expensive mistake by hiring Thompson and not Bulleid. Whatever you may think of Thompsons locomotive policy overall, he produced the superb B1 which numbered over 400 examples and were used to substitute for Bulleids Pacifics, together with the excellent Gresley V2s, in the early 50s after Bibbey lines unfortunate happenstance. I've always maintained that Thompson is given far too much criticism, but perhaps I should qualify that by saying that Bulleid doesn't get enough criticism. Enthusiasts will happily forgive his Pacifics all ills yet ignore the obvious body of evidence that, though high performance and undoubtedly powerful machines, they were flawed to the extent that Jarvis was tasked with rebuilding them en masse. If that's not a direct and clear criticism of Bulleids work one wonders what is. Thompsons locomotives were never so rebuilt and most had long working lives to the end of the 50s, early 60s. That only two B1s were preserved is to railway preservations detriment I feel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 Danger. This post carries a health warning. Bulleid regarded these machines as an intermediate stage in steam locomotive development. He also wanted to use Caprotti valve gear but economic and political constraints put the kibosh on that idea. The oil bath was an experiment to reduce the need for skilled and therefore better paid men to oil up and prepare the machines for service. Now if a group got together and built the logical development of his ideas then it would be very interesting. If Bulleid could have brought over a couple of welding experts from Skoda after the war it would have been even more interesting. Bernard I think Bulleid originally wanted the MN to be a 2-8-2 (which would have made an interesting comparison with the P2) but he was persuaded that a leading bogie would be more prudent on certain of the lines he intended them for. The Caprotti valve gear idea was knocked on the head because the precision gear cutting facilities required to make it were being fully utilised producing machinery more critical to the war effort (mainly aero engines, I would think). The chain-driven Walschaerts derivative was very much 'Plan B' but couldn't have been as bad as some made out or they wouldn't have waited 15 years do do something about it. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Should read "and later Peppercorn adopted" I'm the above paragraph. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Of course the version that appeals to me is the least likely of all to be produced in plastic RTR - the original five with the 'widow's peak' front end in malachite. You mean this one Yes Graham. I've looked at your excellent Merchant Navy blog page that chronicles the early development of the Flannel Jackets many times. I think it is the most useful online resource for the differences in the appearance of Merchant Navies that I've found on the web. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 I too would like to thank Graham for his excellent page(s) and knowledge of early Bulleids.. I have in mind to create a photo of a wartime black version but photos are rare. The published books by Irwell and others show so many changes to the front end cowling and deflectors that I suspect I could get away with almost anything. I shall have to be careful with such as upsidedown horseshoes and raised relief letters and numbers on 21C1. As ever it's very subjective, but I thought I liked the deflector-front first series better than the full art-deco smooth-side version. Today at least. ... and expect I will choose 21C3 or 4 or 6 or 8 or 5 or back to 1 not sure about the interim flared-out deflectors, for a black-version photo. As to the wartime constraints on both Bulleid and Thompson, I like to go on the opinions of the men who drove and fired these machines. The first MNs certainly were thought of as 'interim'... even things like no ladders on the tender (but water-filling apparatus in the cab) climbing up wearing clogs to shift coal forward must have been fun on a cold wet night at Salisbury (if one got that far without breaking down). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Graham_Muz Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 Michael and Rob Many thanks for your kind comments about my blog I am glad it is of interest to some. Any of the first 10 are candidates for being in SR wartime black 21c1 and differed from 21c3 to 10 due to the limpet board side sheeting used on the latter that necessitated the horizontal strengthening rib along the sides. He is my 21c6 to show the form just after she was painted into malachite in 1946. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 Yes, that strengthening rib is a must have on 2C13-10. I shall have to fine-tune the shape (forward sweep, window position etc) of the original cab too. Of course it would easiest to show one pre-naming, but that would be cheating. <g> It might take a wee while to do my pic as I have a different angle WC pic to start from. And might do a bells and whistles shed scene with 35001 or 35011 first. p.s. Just recieved Pat Hammonds two-volume 8th Edition Ramsay's Catalogue today, what a tome! About 600pp. Great reading! All the best to you Muz. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Don't get me wrong though gents (noting the disagrees equal to the agrees for now above!) - I've no doubt Bulleid was an ideas man, and he certainly produced two Pacific locomotive types capable of exceptional performance. Whether it was the locomotive truly required for the Southern at the time, and whether it was a hindrance to British Railways thereafter is entirely up for debate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 I'm sure I read somewhere that the early Merchant Navies when built, used a lot of asbestos sheeting in the cladding, in an attempt to save weight... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 You are entitled to your view, though I wonder if you think that way because you have been per conditioned to believe them "ungainly and ugly" by what is more or less sixty years of constant anti-Thompson commentary since he left the LNER. Mores the pity as his Pacifics (all four types) look absolutely magnificent in full LNER apple green livery. Thompsons Pacifics in my view look the least cluttered of all those described above, particularly due to the agreeably more beautiful and definitely elegant form of the LNER's traditional round topped boiler. The front end of the Thompson Pacifics was always purposeful, powerful, if not elegant in itself compared to the earlier Gresley A3. Far from ungainly, I'd say the Thompson Pacifics, though a deviation from the layout Gresley and later Thompson adopted, was a product of its time and Thompson was clearly following William Staniers work on the LMS in several respects (he of course was Swindon trained). I think the LNER actually avoided a very expensive mistake by hiring Thompson and not Bulleid. Whatever you may think of Thompsons locomotive policy overall, he produced the superb B1 which numbered over 400 examples and were used to substitute for Bulleids Pacifics, together with the excellent Gresley V2s, in the early 50s after Bibbey lines unfortunate happenstance. I've always maintained that Thompson is given far too much criticism, but perhaps I should qualify that by saying that Bulleid doesn't get enough criticism. Enthusiasts will happily forgive his Pacifics all ills yet ignore the obvious body of evidence that, though high performance and undoubtedly powerful machines, they were flawed to the extent that Jarvis was tasked with rebuilding them en masse. If that's not a direct and clear criticism of Bulleids work one wonders what is. Thompsons locomotives were never so rebuilt and most had long working lives to the end of the 50s, early 60s. That only two B1s were preserved is to railway preservations detriment I feel. I've not been conditioned to anything as I've never been particularly interested in anything LNER, probably because I saw very little of it in my formative years. At the risk of stirring the pot even more, I don't actually like the LNER Apple green livery. I'm not sure if it's the colour or the rather garish (and very dated IMO) lining, but I just don't. An A3 in Brunswick with "German" smoke deflectors is much more my thing! To balance that, Bulleid's Malachite doesn't do much for me either. Shades of green are something I love or hate and most of them applied to cars are even worse!. As to the need to rebuild the Bulleid Pacifics, the visual change was far more more radical than what happened under the skin. Oil bath removed, chain driven Walschaerts replaced by the normal sort, better reverser (the biggest single improvement according to a lot of drivers). The new boiler cladding eradicated the tendency to catch fire but without any oil being thrown around it may not have been needed. I suspect its main function was to make the loco look as if a lot had been done to it for the money spent. Rebuilding took barely a week longer than a normal overhaul and most of the other changes were cosmetic, like the new smokebox provided to match the new BR corporate shape of the boiler cladding. Many drivers continued to prefer the 'originals' but there was a need to make day-to-day servicing less unpleasant in a period when many shed staff were leaving the railway for cleaner jobs. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 Welcome to the MN air smoothed OO model pressure group,gentlemen.Keep those posts coming.Someday....I like apple green,malachite,olive green and BR Brunswick too.GWR born and bred. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 Don't get me wrong though gents (noting the disagrees equal to the agrees for now above!) - I've no doubt Bulleid was an ideas man, and he certainly produced two Pacific locomotive types capable of exceptional performance. Whether it was the locomotive truly required for the Southern at the time, and whether it was a hindrance to British Railways thereafter is entirely up for debate. Nothing can compare with the raw,exhilarating experience of a fast start out of Victoria with a heavily laden Folkestone boat train.Straight up the bank and onto the bridge and a charge through the Weald. August 1959,34104,'Bere Alston'.No amount of debate can supplant that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibber25 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 i'm just completing a Golden Arrow kit for a Model Rail article on building resin kits. I confidently predict that it will lead to announcements from both Barwell and Margate before long! The original 'MN' is, after all, the only large passenger loco class not represented in either 'OO' ready-to-run form or full size 'preservation'. Blue 'MNs' are my earliest railway memory, so I just had to have one. Couldn't wait any longer. CHRIS LEIGH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 I agree some runs with Bulleids out of London, or in cases of making up time after complex signalling 'events' simply were brilliant examples of enginemanship, with regularly obtained speeds in the 90s and quite tight signalling margins, and the engines were fully 'up to it' the equal of anything out of King's Cross even perhaps including the famous speed run with a A3 (Duddington?) to Leeds and back c1935 ... the one where the check rails on points before Holloway showed signed of wheel impact... There are very fine pieces of writing in the Haynes book on the Original Bulleid Pacifics, by crewmen, many of whom like both forms of the engine, with a perhaps slight preference for an original version in good nick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Nothing can compare with the raw,exhilarating experience of a fast start out of Victoria with a heavily laden Folkestone boat train.Straight up the bank and onto the bridge and a charge through the Weald. August 1959,34104,'Beer Alston'.No amount of debate can supplant that. I'm happy to agree to disagree but I think I am being slightly misinterpreted. The Bulleid Pacifics are impressive steam locomotives and capable of exceptional performances. I simply feel there is a need to be objective about their merits and flaws, and to continuously run down another designer's locomotives when they were neither modified so much as the Bulleids nor withdrawn due to alarming failures at various times in their working lives is unfair in my books. For the record I fully intend to have a model of a Bulleid Pacific on my model railway - Belgian Marine in her guise for the 1948 interchange trials. If Hornby did make one, they'd get a sale out of me (but only if it does not exhibit the flaws apparent on my DoG). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 i'm just completing a Golden Arrow kit for a Model Rail article on building resin kits. I confidently predict that it will lead to announcements from both Barwell and Margate before long! The original 'MN' is, after all, the only large passenger loco class not represented in either 'OO' ready-to-run form or full size 'preservation'. Blue 'MNs' are my earliest railway memory, so I just had to have one. Couldn't wait any longer. CHRIS LEIGH My GAP one is still in 'raw' form, sitting on a Hornby MN chassis but unpainted and with bits Black-Tacked in place to see what it will look like when finished! If I can finish it by the end of this year, you can be sure Hornby really will announce one for 2015! As an aside, I have often wondered how they would have fared if the rebuilds had been a little less drastic (and cheaper, probably!), by retaining the air-smoothed casing but replacing the valve gear and possibly the centre cylinders and smokebox assemblies. Outwardly, they would have been still in the original style but with the 'mod cons' improving reliability and running costs. Still, we'll never know, now! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 I agree some runs with Bulleids out of London, or in cases of making up time after complex signalling 'events' simply were brilliant examples of enginemanship, with regularly obtained speeds in the 90s and quite tight signalling margins, and the engines were fully 'up to it' the equal of anything out of King's Cross even perhaps including the famous speed run with a A3 (Duddington?) to Leeds and back c1935 ... the one where the check rails on points before Holloway showed signed of wheel impact... There are very fine pieces of writing in the Haynes book on the Original Bulleid Pacifics, by crewmen, many of whom like both forms of the engine, with a perhaps slight preference for an original version in good nick. Actually 1 particular MN albeit in rebuilt form (Blue Funnel) achieved over 100 mph (104 & 106 to be precise) and that was in the last months of steam on Southern Rails... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 I agree some runs with Bulleids out of London, or in cases of making up time after complex signalling 'events' simply were brilliant examples of enginemanship, with regularly obtained speeds in the 90s and quite tight signalling margins, and the engines were fully 'up to it' the equal of anything out of King's Cross even perhaps including the famous speed run with a A3 (Duddington?) to Leeds and back c1935 ... the one where the check rails on points before Holloway showed signed of wheel impact... There are very fine pieces of writing in the Haynes book on the Original Bulleid Pacifics, by crewmen, many of whom like both forms of the engine, with a perhaps slight preference for an original version in good nick. I think the point is that, despite a voracious appetite for coal, footplate crews liked Bulleid pacifics and consistently turned in good performances with the things - it was a different story for the fitters though. This is echoed in preservation with original WCs and BoBs - good fun to drive (and fire) but not so good to work on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Brasher Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 According to page 197 of Speed Records on Britain's Railways by O.S.Nock rebuilt Merchant Navy Clan Line reached 104 mph at Axminster. I think I read somewhere that it also reached 104 mph in original form. This is faster than 103 mph for a GWR double-chimneyed Castle and 102 mph for an LNER A1 Pacific. I expect that Bachmann will make an original Merchant Navy first and then Hornby will make a Railroad version. They can check the sales of the Golden Age 00, Tri-ang TT and Graham Farish 00 gauge versions together with the badge engineered Wrenn, Tri-ang-Hornby 00 gauge and Graham Farish N gauge models to work out the likely demand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 The merits of Bulleid and Thompson don't really matter in model form. If you've got an East Coast mainline, you'll need a Merchant Navy like a hole in the head, and A2'3's storming out of Waterloo like a bad dream, so both are winners! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 Well, my 1961 AJS 650 CSR could do 105, so there! And it had oil-bath chain-driven valves too. harrumph off now to choose between 21C1 or 21C8 probably both, in semi-deflector 1945-6 form, in wartime black,.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 no sooner said than done, seeing as how we all need to have a wartime black engine somewhere... complete with asbestos rags over trailing truck axle box 21C8 'Orient Lines' and class leader within the year to run post-war inaugural 'Golden Arrow' , repainted of course.. 21C1 'Channel Packet' The engine names are poignant, with the Battle of the Atlantic at the time of their construction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 The merits of Bulleid and Thompson don't really matter in model form. If you've got an East Coast mainline, you'll need a Merchant Navy like a hole in the head, and A2'3's storming out of Waterloo like a bad dream, so both are winners! You know perfectly well Larry that express trains never left Waterloo with much fuss, they didn't open up till past Woking, but Victoria, and boat trains, now that was something different! <g> Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.