The LNER's Mountain

[scots region]

Hello all, my shunter is firmly on the back burner, so I've decided to post a topic in the meantime.

 

Not all designs proposed at the great works of Doncaster, Derby, Swindon and Eastleigh made it further than the drawing board, usually for a variety of good reasons, ranging from finance, war or the designer simply losing interest and abandoning it. The fabled "Hawksworth Pacific" stands testament to this. In modelling terms these are known as 'Never weres', fortunately the reverse of this is that as Modellers we can create 'Never weres'. I have long since wondered about modelling one and one proposal in particular stands out.

 

In 1938 N.H.Gresley gave thought toward's taking the P2 experiment further, whilst flawed in many ways, the P2 had proven the ability of 8-coupled passenger designs " they could lift any load out of any hole" indeed the saving grace of the Mikados was there ability to walk away with any weight behind them. To this he proposed a new passenger type, a massive 4-8-2. 'Low the mikado doth meet the mountain' based on the existing A3 it would have carried an elongated A3 boiler, an A4 cab and an extended smoke box, three cylinders of 21in+26in, same as the P2s, 6ft 8in driving wheels, a boiler pressure of 250 lb and a tractive effort of 45'700 lb. All on an enormous wheelbase of 70 ft (plus eight wheel tender) the project was canceled with the outbreak of war.

 

I do plan some time in the future to model one of these beasts, however because it never went into production this locomotive never received LNER classification, numbering or naming, with your help I'd like to assemble a pool of numbers, both LNER and BR, assuming they survived the wrath of Thompson, and Names, as well as a classification. For some inspiration I've attached a number of drawings, made and very, very kindly emailed to me and permitted to use by Saint Johnstoune, I would also like to thank the artist Robin Barnes for his book 'LOCOMOTIVES THAT NEVER WERE' ,from which inspiration for this came, and contains a lovely painting of an example, ominously numbered 60606 CITY OF YORK.

 

 

Here we have the first example of single chimneyed version, that I imagine would have been in Apple green.

 

 

The second example, doubled chimneyed with Kylchap exhaust, BR Blue I think

 

 

The final verison, in BR brunswick, doubled chimneyed and German style smoke deflectors.

 

 

Plus a stremlined version. you choose.

 

 

Finally for Pep and Thomp fans, a post war Peppercorn example.

[Mod5]

Topic moved from the Forum Help section. Whatever possessed you to put it in there in the first place I have no idea.

[scots region]

Nice idea, like it a lot!

 

IMO the streamline version is easier to model, as it allows you room underneath for the mechanical parts. You may want to choose a tender-drive option Continental style to make your life even more easier Pickup on all non-bogie axles, including the tender should give you reliable running. I think the BR versions should have their chimneys moved a little further back, away from the smokebox door, like the Peppercorn. It's ecstatically more pleasing to the eye

 

 

thanks for the tips, any ideas on where it would fit in the LNER's Classification?

[scots region]

Topic moved from the Forum Help section. Whatever possessed you to put it in there in the first place I have no idea.

 

 

sorry, its because I clicked the 'Start a new topic' bar from my last topic, which was in Forum help. Apologies for any inconvenience I'm still getting the hang of posting.

[scots region]

No, sorry. I'm not into LNER, only FR/WHR (which both encountered the LNER in Bleanau Ffestiniog and Dinas Junction respectively ) so I'll leave that to the experts...

 

thanks anyway.

[Mod5]

sorry, its because I clicked the 'Start a new topic' bar from my last topic, which was in Forum help. Apologies for any inconvenience I'm still getting the hang of posting.

 

No inconvenience. I was only on the floor looking for lost bits in that alternative world known as the carpet.

[Phil Traxson]

No, sorry. I'm not into LNER, only FR/WHR (which both encountered the LNER in Bleanau Ffestiniog and Dinas Junction respectively ) so I'll leave that to the experts...

 

Slight mistake here, they met the LNWR at Blaenau and Dinas.

 

Phil Traxson

[micklner]

A stretched A4 here amongst many others

 

http://www.lner.info/forums/loco-workbench-b2-p1-w1-o2-p10-p2-4-8-2-o1-now-k4-t2443s315.html

[62613]

I'm pretty sure the classification 'R' was never used; and by that date, wasn't 'H' also spare?

[jamieb]

I'm no expert on LNER but think R1 was used for an 0-8-2T.Z was used for "miscellaneous" but these seem to be mainly 0-4-0 types.My feeling is they would either have gone for W2 (W1 being the HushHush loco which was 4-6-4) or as the intended pride of the fleet , maybe an AA classification e.g AA1 or even A100.

 

Jamie

[boogaloo]

R was 0-8-2, H was 4-4-4.

 

HTH

 

Boogy

 

Beat me to it Jamie

[scots region]

Did some research and found http://www.gresley.org.uk/classes.htm Based on that, and the fact this was a rather late design, I think LNER would have had to resort to double letter classification codes, in this case TP: it's a combination of the 4-8-0 T-Class and the 2-8-2 P-Class.

 

As for the actual fleet numbers, take a cue from http://en.wikipedia...._classification

 

 

so from that I envisage:

 

Class TP1 4-8-2

LNER No,

2007

2008

2009

2010

 

BR No

60507

60508

60509

60510

 

NAME

Aonach Beag

Aonach Mor

Cairn Gorm

Cairn Toul

do let me know what you think

[t-b-g]

The last R (GNR 0-8-2T) was withdrawn in 1934 so the classification would have been vacant and available for use in 1938. It also happens to be right amongst the other 8 coupled classifications O,P,Q,S and T. I can't imagine why a double letter class would be used as a one off when a suitable letter was available and as the LNER had a history of re-using class numbers (two lots of B1s and L1s etc.) then I say the Rs should have it and it would have been Class R1.

 

It would have been a magnificent beast and I wish you good luck building it.

[coachmann]

A lot of "Draughtsmans fancies" were done....doodling with too much time of their hands.

 

A drawing in itself is only a start and maybe this is what these are. A weight diagram was important.....How much weight was carried by each of the axles?....Would it pass current bridge restrictions?......What was the minimum curvature the loco could traverse? What kind of train was the loco designed to haul?

 

As the drawings stand, the boiler looks too long, or at least the smokebox does. Thompsons, Raven and Robinson encountered similar problems when they designed bigger locomotives. The BR loading gauge restricted the diameter of boilers seeing as they had to clear the driving wheels. Ideally, getting longer meant getting fatter, but only one dimension could be altered. A bigger boiler would demand a bigger firebox. How do you do that while clearing a driving axle and allowing for adequate draughtingvia the ashpan and grate. I doubt the LNER had need of a 4-8-2 though when the Pacifics and V2 could haul 15 coach trains at decent speeds. Beyond that and you need to consider platform lengths.

 

Not trying to put a dampenner on things. Just being fairly realistic. You need old Tuplin to look over this one...

[PhilJ W]

The only letter not used was 'I' but as t-b-g said 'R' was vacant and would be logical.

[scots region]

The only letter not used was 'I' but as t-b-g said 'R' was vacant and would be logical.

 

 

so the choice is I, R or TP, personally I prefer TP simple because it was very celverly put together and plus it would add some spice. I gave some thought to calling it an I1 and I see how R could be used as well

[edcayton]

Of course Thompson would have rebuilt them as ugly Pacifics with an even longer space between the bogie and the leading driving wheels for the cylinders to look lost in!

 

Ed

PS Y's were 0-4-0's and Z's were 0-4-2T's.

[Ohmisterporter]

The 4-8-2s on the RHDR are in the LNER style, and very good looking they are. The wheels are proportionally smaller than the LNER would have used, but the overall impression is very attractive IMHO.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:P9300425.JPG

 

Edit:- Forgot the link.

 

Geoff.

[coachmann]

The 4-8-2s on the RHDR are in the LNER style, and very good looking they are. The wheels are proportionally smaller than the LNER would have used, but the overall impression is very attractive IMHO.

 

On 4ft 8½ins, that would make one very attractive freight machine. However, the leading and trailing carrying wheels would have taken adhesion off the drivers, and so the BR 9F 2-10-0 was probably the best freight machine of all. A 2-10-0 version of a Peppercorn A2 anybody?

[Mallard60022]

On 4ft 8½ins, that would make one very attractive freight machine. However, the leading and trailing carrying wheels would have taken adhesion off the drivers, and so the BR 9F 2-10-0 was probably the best freight machine of all. A 2-10-0 version of a Peppercorn A2 anybody?

 

Don't tempt me (or Redgate)

36E

[Guest Max Stafford]

A Peppercorn P3 with 5'3" wheels might look pretty good!

 

Dave.

[scots region]

All good points but does anyone have any ideas about names or numbers?

 

 

[Guest Max Stafford]

Anything from 200-600 in the 1946 series would seem to be logical.

 

Dave.

[scots region]

Anything from 200-600 in the 1946 series would seem to be logical.

 

Dave.

 

 

thanks for the help, now how many of these monstrosities would there be?

[coachmann]

All good points but does anyone have any ideas about names or numbers?

"Mountain Ben Nevis" on one side and "Beinn Nibheis" on 'tother.

 

Others...

Aonach Beag

Aonach Mòr

Ben Macdui,

Braeriach,

Cairn Toul,

Sgor an Lochain Uaine

Cairn Gorm