New build M&GN C class

Should really be numbered 814 as it's only 80% of a County. Don't worry though, once its 10 year ticket is up, it'll be dumped in the shed to await an overhaul that'll never come while they concoct some other long lost creation.

 

At least 48518 was a proper, actual 8F, and if it was complete -ish it would have the potential to be restored. Now it no longer exists. BTW, I like 8Fs!

 

Nowt wrong wi' 8Fs, but I think we have enough of them in preservation. Remember the two that were repatriated from Turkey a few years ago? One of them ended up being re-exported. I think that tells you all you need to know about how much demand there is among our heritage railways for engines of that size.

Sent from my SM-A125F using Tapatalk

 

A County 4-6-0 is of similar size

 

Although they didn’t seem to be actively advertised for sale, so we don’t know if there would’ve been more interest had people known about them.
We also don’t know the asking price, so maybe they were priced too highly.

 

Surely more suited than a Black 5?

I was surprised they both weren't snapped up, but maybe as mentioned price was a factor (I have no idea how they were priced- presumably if they were seen as 'value' they would have sold quickly)

Chris

 

If you can accept Beachy Head as a replica with an lvatt boiler(reduced boiler pressure ) and fabricated cylinders , and l do, You can just as easily accept 1014 as a County. That is of course if you haven't got an anti GWR bias !

 

So, back to the M&GN new-build.

Any parts they can re-use from other new-builds? Thinking of wheel patterns etc

 

Driving wheels for the GCR 4-4-0 are 6'9", so 2.5" too big for the M&GN one....unless they doctor the design to suit! (same goes for the bogie wheels - 2.5" larger on the GCR one.....)

 

Ooh, that's annoying...

 

"In researching the new-build No.567 further confirmation as to the Kitson origin of the design has emerged. Kitson & Co, builders of the first of the class, went into receivership in 1937 and in 1938 the patterns, drawings and goodwill of the company were acquired by Robert Stephenson and Hawthorns (RSH). This company is well known for the production of a large number of 0-6-0 industrial locomotives two of which, No.56 of 1950 and No.63 “Corby” of 1954, are based at Ruddington. Close examination of these locomotives has determined that the cylinder block, pistons, connecting rods and coupling rods are amongst the components that are identical or very similar to those on No.567. This gives confirmation that the original design of the GCR Class 2 was very much a Kitson design."
from: 4-4-0 Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway (MS&LR)/Great Central Railway Class 2 – GCR 567 – Preserved British Steam Locomotives

 

Given the cost of those wooden patterns, it might be more economical to doctor the design to fit - if possible!
Visually, 2.5" diameter difference isn't going to be particularly noticable, assuming the mechanical constraints can be satisfied.
I'm sure the GCR 567 Project would welcome some form of contribution for their use, even if they have already been paid for ...........

 

That way lies a world of pain. Change the wheel diameter and that puts the wheels in a different centre line. So what now? OK, you can drop the frames and keep the relative disposition of crank axle, motion bracket and cylinders the same, but now they are no longer in the same plane relative to the bogie and buffers / draw gear, boiler supports etc. Pretty soon you are having to redesign everything to cope with what you thought was just a minor dimensional change.

Tom

 

And no longer a replica but a visual representation. You might as well fit traction motors and a diesel engine in the boiler

 

Have a word with the Cambrian Railways Museum. They had a lot of wheel patterns from Beyer Peacock when the Foundry closed...

 

Simple sums should tell us that GWS locomotives will typically spend at least twice as long on display between overhauls as they will with an active boiler ticket. That's probably true of quite a few lines.

 

I vaguely recall something in the museum, but could not tell you details off hand. If anyone really wants to I can check next time I am at Oswestry.

 

This post needs deleting before someone reads it and does it!

 

The notion that "Joe Public doesn't know the difference" probably does have a lot of truth to it. But does Joe Public know the difference between a black 5 and a Std5, or any of the several 9f's, or GWR 4-6-0s, or any other two locomotives in BR green, or BR Black......it is difficult to not be partisan, and assume that the public will not like what we ourselves do not like.
A nice looking, Victorian kettle would certainly be different, and could well be a draw. If the similar S&DJR prototype were chosen, it might generate more interest and support as (I believe) there is more interest/sympathy for that railway than the Midland & Great Northern but it wouldn't be yellow. I bet Mrs Public would be more drawn to the M&GN version.
Whether, in 20 years, Joe and Jane Public will be in the slightest interested in steam railways is more likely to be the limiting factor, and if public don't pay to visit, there will be a radical change in the heritage scene, as there aren't enough enthusiasts to be staff and sufficient custom for even half the railways we currently have.

 

You are right about this. However, I can see that where a need arises for a heritage/tourist railway to survive, it may well become more commercial in its outlook. Yes, we may well lose a few of them, and a thinning out of what we have may not be a bad thing. What we end up with in say 20 years' time may be something we cannot see or imagine today.

Who would have thought that Collection X would be broken up a bit, and my understanding is that some of these locos may, in time, end up on loan to other narrow-gauge railways.