SVR Loco Newsy News / discussions

OK, still can't see the difference between that and what the owners want, all their doing is replacing the 9 with a 13.

 

Wait till it's done!

 

It’ll be lined out for a start. A big difference. Then it’ll carry its 13268 number. A lot of gold leaf im told will be involved too. Its quite big difference.

 

Like this?





Tom

 

Sir William imitating a top, I imagine.
Pat

 

Nope! William (as he then was) was very annoyed about it.

 

Looking closely at that photo of 13245, it has a boiler that is tapered on one ring and parallel at the front, rather than tapered throughout. Was it the only boiler like that? Seems like it is a lot of work to go to to design a whole different boiler design - a copper capped top feed is one thing, but that's a whole new boiler design which at the very least must have used drawing office time.

Was that design unique, or were there others like that?

Tom

 

Did Stanier think there were taking the Mickey? Were they?

 

Wasn’t there a similar situation with 6200/01?

 

The Ivatt 2MTs came later

 

The boilers were the first of the Class 3 series fitted to the 2-6-0s, Black Fives, 8Fs and 5XPs. They were of different barrel lengths in that only the rear section was tapered and the front ring parallel; this could easily be made longer or shorter to suit the engine. But they all had that parallel - taper barrel; it was only the cladding that had a continuous taper profile. With the first thirteen 2-6-0s the cladding followed the shape of the boiler but all others had a continuous taper. These first engines were later given continuous taper cladding to conform, except 2955 which for some reason retained the split taper cladding to withdrawal.

 

The story goes that when the initial 'concept' drawings were prepared, Stanier had specified GWR-type safety valves combined with the top feed. You had to cover these with something, and the GWR flower pot was a logical thing to use, so this was what was sent to Horwich to do the detail design. Stanbier, however, decreed that he did not want his engines to be simple copies of GWR types(!) so an instruction to delete this was sent to and acknowledged by Horwich, but somewhere this was lost in the Drawing Office and 13245 was built with the flower pot. WAS was furious and ordered its immediate removal and that all negatives of the engine so adorned should be destroyed. Fortunately, as Tom has shown, some survived.

There was a follow on in that, once the flower pot was removed, what do you replace it with? The answer turned out to be something like a bowler hat and was a particularly ugly piece of kit - the GWR equivalent would have been a better choice. Another was that all the negatives with the engine in photographic grey were thought to have been destroyed so another engine of a later series, probably 13265, was so painted but with the number 13245 and presented as the first of the class.

 

Exactly. Spinning in his grave was what I was alluding to.
Pat

 

Ah sorry! A bit too cryptic this side of Christmas!

 

Would that be the Steam on Met year?

 

Yes, 1998.

 

Why was there never the line up of 2968, 45110 and 48773 that year?
(Apologies I appreciate you might not know the answer)

 

You're right, I don't. That would have been a matter for the SVR. It just didn't happen, and now never can. Pitt!

 

If I could find my old photographs from the mid 2000s. I took maybe a dozen photos ( on film) of 42968, 48773, 45110 and 46443 in the yard at Bridgnorth. 2 facing north and 2 facing south.