If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

LMS 2P 4-4-0

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by joshs, Dec 30, 2012.

  1. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,186
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    If I might make a couple of points..................

    Firstly there are quite a lot of 4-4-0's in preservation several of which could be either returned to service or put into main line condition. This would probably have to include some kind of subsidy for the hire fees.

    Secondly there are a lot of pre nationalisation or pre grouping carriages that are unrestored or worse still not even undercover - to say nothing of course of the MK1 fleet. How about starting to get them al undercover before we look at building new locos. We can build new at any time, but the original coaches are irreplaceable.

    If we wanted to recreate the authentic experience what about getting some non corridor stock back in service - even if its only MK1 as that represents the experience of the vast majority of rail travellers prior to the 1960's - again the idea of simply including parcels stock in trains has been discussed in the past as the Swanage sometimes does with a milk tanker.
     
  2. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Certainly Stroudley did - the class C and C1 0-6-0 tender engines; the one-off tank engines "Barcelona" and "West Brighton" and the "Gladstones" were all arranged with the (slide) valve below the cylinders. The advantages claimed were reduced wear on the valves on account of good lubrication from oil draining from the cylinders; more even valve wear relative to a loco with vertical slide valves between the cylinders; no need for drain cocks (because condensed water in the cylinders could freely drain if there was no steam applied, as the valves fell open at the lowest point); and - perhaps pertinently - a very direct exhaust passage with the exhaust passing between the cylinders and directly into the blast pipe. How much that was borne out in practice I don't know, though the figures on valve wear at least seem objective enough.

    Stroudley stated that he aimed for 1 square inch of valve port for every 250 cubic inches of cylinder volume, and the figures for the Terriers (1 to 236, with 13" x 20" cylinders); and the D tanks (1 to 242 with 17" x 24" cylinders) are very close to that ratio. As initially built, the Gladstones (with 18.25" x 26" cylinders) had the rather poorer ratio of 1 to 330, i.e. bigger cylinders but without corresponding increase in the size of the valves; interestingly, the later "Gladstones" got bigger valve ports which would rather suggest there was an issue with getting steam in and out as originally built. There is another complicating factor, which was that his locos all had feed water heating, and a proportion of the exhaust was taken back to be condensed, which further complicates any view about how effective they were at clearing the exhaust.

    And of course, the demands on an 1880's front-line express loco were less - certainly in load and possibly speed - than on a 1930s secondary passenger loco.

    Tom
     
  3. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    5,084
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The 2Ps had the lowest repair costs of any engine on the LMS, which was one justification for building more of them. It simply proves that statistics can be manipulated to give any desired result: the reason for these low costs was that it was impossible to work them hard - it just couldn't be done - so they never wore out!
     
  4. 8126

    8126 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    962
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm always wary of games of locomotive Top Trumps, because even in such a seemingly similar field as the pre-grouping 4-4-0, there's so much detail difference and occasionally very little correlation between certain features and classes being well regarded. For instance, I always thought of the GER/LNER Super Claud as quite a big 4-4-0, but nearly all the vital statistics except for firetube heating area turn out to be smaller than the dainty looking LSWR T9; they just have big boiler barrels and coupled wheels. In a lot of stats, they're near enough equal to the Midland 2P.

    The Claud family, with slide valves under the cylinders, have a good reputation for their feats of fast running with heavy loads on the GER main line. When, late in life, some were fitted with piston valves above the cylinders actuated by rockers, performance was notably improved again, but they suffered heavily from frame fractures and so the piston valve examples were the among the earliest withdrawn. Neither of these reputations could really be said to apply to the 2P.

    The superheated T9s were reckoned to be as good as the SECR D1 and E1 rebuilds, when working on the old SECR lines. D.L. Bradley quotes everyday performances and repair costs that seem to bear this out. But the T9 has Drummond split slide valves between the cylinders, whereas the D1 and E1 had rocker actuated piston valves above. I think the T9 valve gear is probably a bit better, even though they're both Stephenson's, but it goes to show that it's not always as simple as: "This feature makes a good engine, that one is bad." Clearly both worked, whereas E.S. Cox was rather scathing about the chances of the 2P being able to do what the E1 and D1 were built for:

    "The result was a locomotive very similar in size and even appearance to the new L.M. engines, but the difference in their performance was as day is to night. I sometimes wonder how the latter would have fared hauling the heavy continental expresses as their counterparts did before the 'King Arthur' Class 4-6-0's became available. But I don't really wonder, I know!"
     
  5. LesterBrown

    LesterBrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    761
    Location:
    Devon
    OK, I suppose the demands on speed for a 1930s secondary loco were more than on, for instance, 3440 decades earlier.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2017
  6. MuzTrem

    MuzTrem Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    937
    Likes Received:
    1,225
    I thoroughly agree with you as far as coaches are concerned. However, I would say that sometimes, a new build loco can make coach restoration more worthwhile by giving them something appropriate to run with. The GCR's Victorian Train project is probably the best example at the moment.

    Also, although we have a number of 4-4-0s preserved, most of the classic Victorian and Edwardian examples are in the NRM collection, and they are not getting any younger! Eventually, the day will come when York decides to retire them all for good. The inside-cylinder 4-4-0 is one of the all-time classic British locomotive designs, and I think every child in this country should have the chance to see one running. So from that point of view projects like the GCR 567 or the George the Fifth are well worthwhile.

    Personally, I would have less enthusiasm for a 2P though - personally I think No. 1000 is enough to represent the Midland 4-4-0s. Now, a Kirtley 0-6-0 or a Johnson 2-4-0, on the other hand...!
     
    Gav106, LMS2968 and Jamessquared like this.
  7. andrewshimmin

    andrewshimmin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,761
    Likes Received:
    2,160
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Why not finish some of the new builds already started, including such excellent and well-regarded 4-4-0s as the George the Fifth, which represent genuine gaps in preservation, before starting an inferior one which doesn't.
    Or better still, how about a nice Class 3 tank loco which might be more useful?
    If you must have a Midland simple Belpaire 4-4-0, the sort of money needed for a new build 2P would allow Dunluce Castle to be restored. For the BR livery fetishists, UTA livery is near enough.
     
  8. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    That argument has been well rehearsed before, but it assumes that those who wish to fund e.g. a Midland 2P would be equally happy funding a LNWR George the Fifth instead - and there is little evidence that that is the case. In other words, the rate at which the George the Fifth gets finished is entirely in the hands of the supporters of that project, regardless of whether there is or isn't another project starting up; there's no evidence I know of that starting a second project takes resources away from an entirely unrelated first. (*)

    It's probably inevitable that most enthusiasts look at new builds as engineering-led projects (and possibly some are even run in that way). But really, those that are progressing most rapidly might be better described as marketing-led projects: put bluntly, the more effective the marketing is at persuading ordinary people to put money into a project, the quicker the engineers can get on with making things.

    (*) The one place I have my doubts is within the various GWS projects, where I suspect it could be argued that having several projects on the go simultaneously is fishing from the same pool of resources, both in engineering and finance. But those projects are all closely related, not least within the demographic likely to provide the core financial support. It's notable that amongst the other major places and organisations pursuing new builds, none except the GWS has two on the go simultaneously.

    Tom
     
    Bean-counter likes this.
  9. Reading General

    Reading General Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,081
    Likes Received:
    2,217
    47xx and Grange? Both at Llangollen?

    I agree with your though about the GWS. I think the two projects on the go alongside a major rebuild of 4079 and other restoration appears to me to be diverting resources from the collection as a whole, and the place is not what it once was to visit.
     
    Gav106 likes this.
  10. Shed9C

    Shed9C New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Not much support for the 2P, I'll try and add a little :)
    From what I've heard and read they were fairly decent loco's for their size, although well known not to be very free running at speed, but that wouldn't matter for heritage lines.
    On the S&D for example they were always worked very hard and did regularly take 6 over the Mendips unassisted, and on occasion (just about) managed 10 - well over 300 tons on severe gradients from a smallish 4-4-0 with not much TE can't be too shabby.
    And also amongst the most reliable and sure-footed for a big wheeler, and IMO quite a handsome machine especially in S&D Prussian blue :cool:
    But whether any of that would justify another new-build is of course a very different matter!
     
  11. Gav106

    Gav106 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,741
    Likes Received:
    2,017
    Location:
    Nantwich, Cheshire
    Actually it's funny. As someone who gets out and about talking to actual people (not us here on nat pres) there is a lot of people out there that would like to see a 2P. Now I'm not for one second saying to anyone go and start a group (as I don't actually like this constant new group after new group that appears in the newbuild scene and I fully believe an established group building a second loco is far wiser and probably quicker in the long run) but while talking to people about a second loco (obviously the Fowler 2-6-4t) it's amazing how many people say they would love to see a 2P again. Maybe that's because the type of people I'm speaking to are generally fans of the Patriot class and this type of loco is also of interest but just because a loco doesn't have the best reputation or isn't the biggest loco on the planet doesn't mean people wouldn't pay to see one again.
     
    Shed9C likes this.
  12. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    I don't think it's black and white. Some of those who currently support a particular project may have no interest whatsoever in any other project. But there are surely many like me who have some interest in several projects. We have to choose how much, if any, to give to each one. Each additional project potentially appeals to some of us who are already supporting existing projects, so would probably divert some of the funding from those existing projects.
     
    andrewshimmin likes this.
  13. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    That's a very sweeping statement! I can't think of many outside the NRM - which ones do you have in mind? I would have said that actually the preservation scene outside the NRM is relatively light on both 4-4-0 and 0-6-0 tender engines, not to mention 4-6-2, 0-4-4 and 0-6-2 tanks (other than the GWR variety of the latter) - in other words all the staple pre-grouping types.
     
  14. std tank

    std tank Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,808
    Likes Received:
    946
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You surprise me. Cheltenham, Repton and Stowe for three.
     
  15. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,186
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    D49, Butler Henderson, The Compound, City of Truro, Earl of Berkley, T9, the other LSWR 440 in the NRM, the three Scottish Loco's ......................
     
  16. 8126

    8126 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    962
    Gender:
    Male
    But a lot of those are NRM or museum-owned engines, whether inside it or out (including Cheltenham), which I think is the point @61624 was trying to make. Ultimately, their operation is dependent on the NRM agreeing to it. I rather hope some of them are treated a little like Scotsman - as running ambassadors as long as somebody can pay for it and look after them well - but you wouldn't count on it.

    Although they're excellent engines that enliven the scene (IMO), the Schools can hardly be said to be representative of the pre-grouping 4-4-0, nor can the D49. That leaves the Earl, which is suitably prehistoric even if it was 'built' in the 1930s.
     
  17. bob.meanley

    bob.meanley Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Messages:
    255
    Likes Received:
    770
    I shall always remeber asking a Crewe man about the small number of 2P's which were allocated at the North shed at one time. The conversation went along the lines of:-
    "What did they get used for at Crewe?"
    "Decorative piloting - they weren't at all popular."
    "Why not"
    "They weren't a lot of use, they used to struggle to keep out of the way, and how would you like to stand on one at 70mph and watch a big Lizzie trying to come over the tender at you?

    Enough said really.
    Regards
    Bob
     
  18. andrewshimmin

    andrewshimmin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,761
    Likes Received:
    2,160
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The Irish version was
     
    ghost likes this.
  19. LesterBrown

    LesterBrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    761
    Location:
    Devon
    Whilst it wouldn't incorporate the (mythical?) 4F boiler one of the small wheeled S&D Johnson 4-4-0s would probably be more useful, and more decorative, on a heritage line than a large wheeled superheater 2P.

    It just wouldn't have a rake of matching blue coaches to pull!
     
  20. Shed9C

    Shed9C New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed, have heard and read about similar tales about a 2P's dislike of high speed, but on a heritage line that's not really an issue. They'd pull 5 or 6 well enough and economically, and look unique in S&D livery.
     
    Gav106 likes this.

Share This Page