Information need - collision 11th or 12th August 1957

[LMS2968]

To be honest, I don't know for certain that there was such an accident on these dates, but if anyone knows of one, or has access to the magazines which would cover that period (Railway Observer, Trains Illustrated or Railway Magaine), I'd be grateful for any information.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Dave47549]

.

[DaveF]

The ony one I can find is just ouside your dates, a derailment at Staines Central on 9th August 1957.

 

The link below should lead to information.

 

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?eventID=1281

 

Edit:  Dave 47549 got there first!

David

[LMS2968]

Thank you, gentlemen, but that unfortunately isn't the one.

 

To expand, you've probably realised that I'm heavily involved with the Stanier Mogul Fund, and am in fact its Archivist. I suspect that our engine was involved in a heavy collision on one or other of these dates: I believe that she has had new front frames - the works plates have moved from their original position some time between 1955 and 1960, and there is no sign of the original holes. She has been fitted with two new cylinders by BR; most of the class retained their original cylinders to withdrawal. There is a rough patch in the lower frames at about the position of the cylinders' front mounting flange; and the Engine History Card shows she had a Heavy General repair from 12/8/57, 18,448 miles from the last Light Intermediate repair. She was a Crewe South engine at this time.

 

If our engine was involved in such an accident, it's an important part of her history, and I would love to know!

[roythebus]

So it may not have been reported to HM Railway Inspectorate; maybe a heavy shunting accident?

[LMS2968]

So it may not have been reported to HM Railway Inspectorate; maybe a heavy shunting accident?

This is true, Roy, but I can but hope. Loco frames take a bit of bending, sufficient to require replacement rather than heating and straightening, anyway! It would bea really heavy shunt!

[Boris]

This is true, Roy, but I can but hope. Loco frames take a bit of bending, sufficient to require replacement rather than heating and straightening, anyway! It would bea really heavy shunt!

Not necessarily, 63395 has a bend in the frames after being sideswiped by a J27 in the 50s, it wasn't reportable but it still occured.

[The Stationmaster]

So it may not have been reported to HM Railway Inspectorate; maybe a heavy shunting accident?

Nor even that Roy - not all running line collisions were reportable and even if it had been there was no requirement for HMRI to open an inquiry unless there was a fatality or such serious breach of Rules etc that they considered an Inquiry to be appropriate.  A collision might be mentioned in the Inspectorate's annual report but otherwise it would be a strictly internal matter.

[LMS2968]

Yes, folks, I know it's a bit of a long shot but worth trying; RMWeb does seem to come up with the goods on a regular basis. I'm also aware that my suggested scenario is based n entirely on circumstantial evidence, but if you don'r try, you can't achieve anything.

 

A point to be made is that many of these engines' diagrams were fittef freights, usually run at night, and I'd be the first to concede that a collision involving two such trains might not attract the attention of the Railway Inspectorate. The consequent disruption to traffic might though show up in the magazines.

 

The comments are appreciated, even if they haven't - so far - furthered the cause. Thanks all.

[LMS2968]

And a good one!

 

The EHC shows 'Taken Out of Traffic' 12/8/57; 'Returned to Traffic' 26/9/57; 'Waiting Repair Decision' None; 'Waiting Works' 4 Days; 'On Works' 35 Days; Total 39 Days (these would not incluse Sundays).

 

Mileages: 1953 - 27,700; 1954 - 30,879; 1955 - 25,780; 1956 - 24,272; 1957 - 23,285; 1958 - 28,821; 1959 - 26,850; 1960 - 25,833. A bit down in 1957, but nothing significant.

[Colin_McLeod]

LMS2968

Such major repairs would have needed some planning, so its possible that your mogul was damaged many weeks before August 1957 and was sitting in a cripple siding somewhere awaiting those repairs.  Have you checked further back for the accident?

[The Stationmaster]

LMS2968

Such major repairs would have needed some planning, so its possible that your mogul was damaged many weeks before August 1957 and was sitting in a cripple siding somewhere awaiting those repairs.  Have you checked further back for the accident?

Unlikely I would think.  The initial assessment would be made by either the Mechanical Forman at the shed it was taken to immediately after the incident (assuming it was fit to be moved) or by an HQ Inspector.  It seems pretty clear that a decision had been made before it went to works although it might have been stood somewhere in the Crewe area for the 4 days waiting a place on the line in shops.  So I would think whatever happened to it occurred within a few days of 12 August when the decision was officially made to take it out of traffic and certainly no more than a week previously (in terms of working days).

[Colin_McLeod]

Decisions were indeed made quicker back then.

[jamie92208]

Just a thought.  I don't know where the loco was allocated but there has been a project to track all loco workings on the West Coast main Line in the later 50's and 60's.  I belive the Manchester Locomotive Society or some of it's members are involved.  They have published some of their results.

 

Jamie

[LMS2968]

To sum up, there are three possibilities:

 

1 There was no collision involving 2968

2 There was a collision involving 2968 but it wasn't reportable

3 There was a collision involving 2968 and it was reportable, but no reports have yet come to light.

 

Obviously, only No 3 of this list is of use to me, but it is also possible that any such report will never see the light of day. As said, I can but try.

 

As for the decision period, the EHC states that this required zero days, and the time awaiting works entry was only four days. Previous sightings of the loco were:

 

11/06/1957 - Ashton - Up Goods
14/06/1957 - Morley Low
04/08/1957 - 5B Crewe South.

 

We have over 20,000 sightings of class members on our Archive, and some of these did cause issues. The EHCs stated distinctly that a particular loco was on Works (almost always Horwich) at particular dates, while enthusiasts reported them elsewhere. There were too many of these to be all in error, but it seems that the waiting time to enter Horwich works might be spent at a shed, not necessarily the loco's home shed. Even stranger, one of these storage places, in a couple of instances, was Crewe works, although the class was never overhauled there, even though that was where they were all built.

 

For the record, I have used The Railway Archive as a resourse over many years, and even contributed one or two items.

 

So there it is. If something comes up, all well and good. But I'm not holding my breath!

[Jon Fitness]

 Sorry I can't offer any help but,....

On a slightly different theme, I witnessed a derailment at Bolton West in (I think 1979) when a class 47 and the first 2 coaches of a Glasgow-Manchester service came off on No 40 points outside Bolton West box. It narrowly missed the footbridge support which would have brought the long bridge down on top of West box...in which I was on duty as a box lad at the time! Although I had my camera with me both the signalman and the AMI wouldn't let me take pictures and by the time I left duty it was too dark anyway.

Can I find any reference to it anywhwere? Not a thing, unless anyone knows better..

Jon Fitness

[Castle]

Hi LMS2968,

 

Here is a thought - does it have to be an accident? What if she was stripped down in the works or inspected at the shed and serious cracking of the frames was discovered? This is likely to have been sorted out at an internal level it won't show up as an accident. Once the decision to repair went ahead, the extent of the repairs to the front end means that if you are going that far then you probably fit some new cylinders too and get the most out of your slot in the works, the level of stripping down of the machine required and you get a locomotive that will remain serviceable for longer. Part worn cylinders taken off, especially if they are on the more heavy side of worn, are unlikely to get refitted. The new frames and cylinders could have been prepared prior to the engine entering the works too...

 

I hope this helps fellow preservationists!

 

All the best,

 

Castle