EddieB

Here's a teaser then. Follow the logic in the preamble for a clue to the question.

Swindon, as we all know, never allocated works numbers to the locomotives it built. It did however complete a locomotive in 1960 which was numbered 92220 by British Railways.

What then is the significance of the locomotive built at Darlington with works number 2156 and the locomotive built by Yorkshire Engine Co. with works number 2584 (subcontracted by Hunslet Engine Co. which had allocated their works number 3739)?

Both locomotives - and their significance - need to be identified.

Wath?

The Great Central Railway had four 0-8-4T locomotives built by Beyer Peacock in 1907, which became LNER class S1. Gresley added a booster to one of the locomotives and added two more new-builds to the same design (also fitted with boosters) in 1932. Collectively they were known as the "Wath Daisies". Not totally unique as the new locos replaced two of the originals transferred to March for the new hump yard at Whitemoor.

1506

Quite correct. From the second batch ("A73") of Stephen Holden's Great Eastern Railway S69 class 4-6-0 (which became LNER B12). Delivered in early 1913, damaged beyond economic repair in an accident at Colchester, written off and scrapped within the same year. Had it survived it would have become LNER 8506, reverting to 1506 in the 1946 renumbering.

Father James Holden spent some time at Swindon before becoming Locomotive Superintendent at Stratford. His uncle, Edward Tennant held a similar post on the North Eastern Railway.

Time to give a little more information, I think.

In addition to the standard reference works on the company's locomotives, the locomotive in question was so identified in one of Philip Atkins' excellent survey articles in Backtrack. The year of its building and scrappage has been described as a "Halcyon year" in another of that same author's pieces in the same magazine. Had the locomotive survived, it's last number prior to nationalisation would have been the same as the number originally carried.

The father of the son responsible for the design had an uncle who was Locomotive Superintendent at a third railway company (i.e. not the one for which this locomotive was built, nor the Great Western as identified by reference to Swindon in the original question).

Right then, how about this?

Me love dat, irie man!

Bob Crowe

Common spelling mistake, there's no "e" in "Crow".

Thanks to Bob Crow, there's no "f" in "trains" either!

Hi Chris

you forgot Trott, still only 3 South Africans this time, perhaps things are improving.

I wonder if we will ever see a true ENGLISH team again, come to think of it , can anyone remember the last time there was one.

 

Bob

So Matthew Prior doesn't count as a Saffie, despite being born in Johannesburg? Make than four.

There's nary an England team that was fully English. Try this little lot for starters...

Alan Lamb, Robin Smith, Basil D'Olivera, all South Africans

Robert Croft - Welsh

Mike Denness - Scots

Eoin Morgan - Irish

Derek Pringle - Kenyan

Dominic Reeve - Hong Kong

Phil Defreitas - Dominican

Devon Malcolm - Jamaican

Nasser Hussein - Indian

Geoffrey Boycott - Yorkshire

.

Father and son are not too difficult (I think) but finding the loco most definitely is!!!!

Let me know what you're thinking here, Mike...

There was me thinking this was so well known that that someone would be along with the right answer before I'd finished typing the question. All I can say is you should see the "stinker" I'm keeping for another occasion!

46202

That would be two months after rebuilding, rather than when first built.

Good try, but not right.

Remember that the preamble about the father and son should help to confirm the right locomotive.

A800?

"River Cray", the K class 2-6-4T that was involved in the Sevenoaks accident of 1927?

I've had to do some hasty checking, but that loco was built at Brighton works and entered service in 1926. It was only lightly damaged in the accident and survived to be rebuilt as a tender loco in 1928.

So it doesn't fit the bill, I'm afraid.

Sorry guys, I feel I'm hogging this thread.

Hopefully a fairly easy question, the preamble should help to confirm the right answer.

Son succeeded father, and father had previously spent time at Swindon. Son was responsible for some successful locomotive designs, but unfortunately one of his locomotives is generally reckoned to have had the shortest working life of any British main line steam locomotive. It was built, written off after an accident and scrapped, all within the same year (but I'm not giving the year).

What was the running number of this locomotive?

No. 10 G. H. WOOD?

Boiler donated from no. 13 KISSACK.

Was it the Sharp Stewart that was rebuilt by the North London Railway as a crane tank that was numbered 58865 under BR?

Indeed it was. built for the South Acton to Hammersmith branch of the North and South Western Junction Railway, taken over by the North London Railway shortly after delivery. It was rebuilt as an 0-4-2ST with 3-ton crane in the NLR Bow Works.

Over to you LH&JC...

Thanks, Graham.

Returning to the theme of locomotives built in 1858, I think this was possibly the oldest locomotive to pass into British Railways' ownership, surviving for a further three years after nationalisation (when, sadly it was scrapped).

A conventional four-coupled tank locomotive when first built, it passed to another company shortly after entering service, who extensively rebuilt it at their own works in 1872.

Into what form was it rebuilt, and what was its BR number?

2B or nor 2B? (well 5E as it became), that is the question.

Loco no. 78059, a standard 2MT 2-6-0 is to be rebuilt as "84030", a standard 2MT 2-6-2T.

Birkenhead Railway no.41 built as a 2-4-0 by Sharp Stewart in 1858. Became LNWR 124 Marquis Douro. Renumbered 1176 in 1865 then 1837 in 1871. Rebuilt as an 0-6-0 in 1869. Became MT no.9.

BR no.42 became LNWR 231 Firefly. Renumbered 1178 then 1838, rebuilt in 1865 as an 0-6-0. Became MT no.10.

 

Graham

Correct.

The original owner was the Birkenhead, Lancashire & Cheshire Junction Railway, which later shortened its name to Birkenhead Railway.

The only thing to add is that Arthur Wellesley took the title "Marquess of Douro" on the occasion that he was elevated to the peerage, becoming at the same time Duke of Wellington. The following year he led a famous victory against Napoleon Bonaparte somewhere in Belgium!

Over to you, Graham.

As an aside, here is a table of locos sold to the Malines & Terneuzen by the LNWR (excluding nos. 9 and 10, of course).

6 Crewe /1845 2-2-2T Orig. Grand Junction (later L&NWR) 2-2-2 75 "APOLLO", rbt. as 2-2-2T 1860, renum 1869 in 1872 and sold 5/1872.

7 SS 1757/1867 2-4-0 Orig. Caernarvonshire Railway no. 1 "GLYNLLIVON", later L&NWR 1790.

8 SS 1899/1868 2-4-0 Orig. Caernarvonshire Railway no. 2 "CARNARVONSHIRE", later L&NWR 1791.

9

10

11 Crewe 1187/1868 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 1801 (SDX 410).

12 Crewe 552/1862 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 1877 (34 "PHOEBUS"), sold 7/1888.

13 Crewe 583/1862 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 1916 (761), sold 1900?

14 Crewe 745/1864 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 1985 (1332), sold 1893.

15 Crewe 1374/1871 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 3112 (1978), sold 1901.

16 Crewe 1226/1869 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 3115 (1775), sold 1901. Also given as 1366/1869 from Crewe list.

17 Crewe 899/1866 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 3275 (1459), sold 1901.

18 Crewe 1500/1872 0-6-0 Ex-L&NWR 3287 (1221), sold 1901.

Well Hercule Poirot might have been a Belgian, but I assure you there are no red herrings in my question.

This locomotive (and its twin) originally belonged to a company which, after a change of name, passed into joint ownership of the LNWR and another company (I don't want to make it too easy!!!), these locomotives passing into LNWR stock. The railway itself remained a joint line until nationalisation. You were along the right lines with your suggestions of companies taken over by the LNWR, but it was neither of those you identified.

The locomotives were neither DX, nor predecessors of DX (except that they were 0-6-0s). They were not built at Crewe (nor Jones and Potts for that matter), but by one of the major locomotive building firms extant at that time.

As mentioned earlier, the "Portuguese connection" refers to a title borne by a very famous figure from the nineteenth century, and was taken up on the same day that he received the title he is more familiarly known by. Oddly enough, he is famously connected to a place in Belgium - purely coincidental to the sale of the locomotive there.

You are a very awkward chap Eddie; I have actually got a picture of that Company's Loco No.4 and a lot of net searching has led me to pics of at least 7 other locos owned at some time by the but nothing at all about No.9 - in either English, French, or Dutch/Flemish

I'll take that as a compliment.

But c'mon, have I not led you on an interesting little journey?

No. 4 was a lovely Beyer Peacock 2-4-0 constructed new for the Malines & Terneuzen. Wouldn't the Malines & Terneuzen make an excellent prototype for a model?

There are no less than five photographs of no. 9 in the second volume of the definitive French language work on Belgian steam and you'll find all the required information there too. Alternatively there was an article in the Locomotive Magazine in 1908, which I suspect is the ultimate source of the information published in the book.

However there should be enough information to answer the question in various LNWR archives. I don't have the book of locomotive names, and can't lay my hands on my copy of Livesey - either could be of assistance. One further clue/warning is that the loco won't be found in Jack's work on locomotives of the LNWR Southern Division, as it was absorbed into the northern divsion.

And as I'm in a generous mood, one more clue. The locomotive had a classmate "twin" that had a similar journey, also being sold to MT (becoming no. 10) in 1874. It received an LNWR name reminiscent of a famous working replica.

Back to locos, and I'll try something a little more tricky.

The Malines & Terneuzen was a private railway company which finally was taken over by the national systems of Belgium and Holland after the second world war. In its early days it was notable for a fleet of ancient locomotives acquired second- or third-hand from the London and North Western Railway.

MT locomotive no. 9 was a 0-6-0 built in 1858, which it bought from the LNWR in 1874. What was its original owner and number, and what was the Portuguese connection bestowed on it by the LNWR?

(I'll add a clarification to the "Portuguese connection", that it relates to a title borne by a very famous Briton in the nineteenth century).

The Wiki entry for the locomotive 4771 "Green Arrow" is misleading, as it references but misquotes the RCTS "Green Book". Wiki describes it as an express freight service, when the source actually gives it as a "registered goods" service (as quoted verbatim here: http://www.lner.info/locos/V/v2.shtml).

Green Arrow was actually a registered overnight transit service inaugurated by the LNER in 1928. It was a service not confined to a single route, and in some ways was similar to Red Star in that respect, although it was based on full wagon loads. Suspended during the war years, it was reinstated by BR in 1953.

A certain Mr Annett.

Indeed, but I have no knowledge whether Mr J E Annett was of certain or uncertain disposition!

I thought you'd get that one.

Over to you, Mike.

I've a few lined up, but I'll do a fairly easy one to keep the thread moving.

What was the name of the LB&SCR employee who patented a locking device for levers and ground frames, widely adopted and used by railways across the UK?

Er, so near and yet so far. (Should have gone to the "18 inch Specials" section in volume 2 of Harman's work, rather than straight to the works list in volume 3).

Ok then, MW 1853/1914, which was an inside-cylindered 0-8-0T named "KATHERINE" and built for the Earl of Ellesmere, Walkden. 18" bore x 26" stroke.

Hi Phil,

As I now knew your question was coming....

I think there were two of them, both built for the Littleton Collieries, Staffordshire.

MW 1759/1910 LITTLETON No. 4

MW 2018/1922 LITTLETON No. 5 (Now at Foxfield)

Both had cylinders 18" bore x 24" stroke.