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.

What if... the 1921 Railway Act nationalised the Railways ?

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by ADB968008, Dec 6, 2010.

  1. ADB968008

    ADB968008 Guest

    I think the Big Four certainly introduced an element of innovation to the industry, which otherwise may have been unclear.
    the LMS certainly came into it's own in the 1930's as a direct response to it's disparate collection of locomotives it inherited on grouping.
    However the GWR was also developed, and the LNER would appear to be mid-innovation cycle in the early 1920's.

    Any CME would probably have done what Riddles did in the 1950's and look at what was best of breed at the time, and suitable to develop further, the issue with the GWR is / was gauge, and the ROD's were the same... was Midland railway designs such as the 0-6-0T, 0-6-0 4F, 2-8-0 7F the way forwards at the time, could they have produced a Midland 4-6-0 design..something along the lines of the Patriot and could this have been the standard class 5 ?
     
  2. Martin Perry

    Martin Perry Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    16,510
    Likes Received:
    7,753
    Location:
    1012 / 60158
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    A lot would have depended in who got the CME job; as in 1948, they would have regarded their 'parent' railways designs as the best practice, probably regardless of actual fact. That said the thought of 'BR standard' MR designs with their questionable steaming qualities and dubious bearing provision does not inspire.
    Being a long way from any reference sources; do I recall correctly that at the same time that Woolwich Arsenal were building N Class 2-6-0s (as a UK standard design), there was a 2-8-0 version planned?
     
  3. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

     
  4. tomparryharry

    tomparryharry Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Renewable Energy
    Location:
    Isle of Wight
    I have a book in front of me as I write this. It is Harold Holcrofts book ' An outline of Great Western Locomotive Practice'. In there (page 138) Holcroft oulines that ARLE were sufficiently advanced to have designs for a 2-6-0 & 2-8-0, in the event of full state control. In the event, grouping put paid to these designs, as the groups went off to build their own designs.

    The Association of Railway Locomotive Engineers (ARLE) did much to standardise certain points, such as a near standard tyre width & profile. Remember, however, that Churchward retired in 1921, so It would have been a toss-up between the likes of Gresley, Robinson, etc, to take the job on.

    Regards,
    Ian.
     
  5. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    Just a few wider thoughts:

    - would railcars have seen the light of day? Very much a GWR thing from the '30s, not replicated by the others of the big four, and were non-GW management to have held sway....
    - being only a few years before the depression, how much duplicated route mileage would have been lost, earlier? This comes back to the "regional" question in part, but would all of the London-Midlands and trans-pennine routes have survived, other than for freight?
    - I wonder how trade union relations would have developed (only three years before the general strike) with harmonisation?
    - I guess the "common carrier" provisions would till have existed (am I right here?) and so the dynamics around loss of freight to road would still have happened?

    Patrick
     
  6. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Being contemporary with the essentially backward looking 1400 and "Dukedog" developments, the railcar programme has always surprised me but I wonder if it was not an attempt by a faction in management to strike out in the direction of modernity by bypassing Swindon altogether.

    The railcars, at least at first, were largely designed by the AEC group and, indeed were maintained by that organisation under contract. Many years ago I knew someone who was involved in the early development of AEC diesel engines including those used in railcars. It seems that most of the problems were sorted out fairly early on but one remained unsolved. A driver could be fully trained in handling a railcar but then be posted back to steam. Many months later he would be put back on railcar duties and having forgotten his training in the meantime could wreck the machine in a morning!

    Like the presence of AWS amongst the lower quadrant signals, the railcars remain a surprise but unlike a much later attempt to design rolling stock by engineers from outside the railway industry ( the APT) they were a successful novelty.
     
  7. tomparryharry

    tomparryharry Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    Renewable Energy
    Location:
    Isle of Wight
    Backward looking? I don't think so! If you are running a business, then you will want to extract every last red cent from your working assets. The Dukedog was a set of rebuilds from older locomotives, with fully worn out parts.

    The 48xx (1400 for trainspotters) was built for a recognised job, that of light traffic duty. Please remember that both of these classes were introduced during a depression, so full marks to Swindon for turning out cost effective kit.

    Finally.... Limits & fits. nearly all of the GW running sheds had previous experience with the 517 class, so the 48 & 58xx were just the same, and maintained to the same (high) standard.

    Regards,
    Ian
     
  8. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Something very similar happened on the LMS when a batch of what were, essentially, Midland 0-4-4Ts were built, camouflaged under a revised tin case. Then along came Stanier with an altogether different mindset.

    Stanier was a great loss to the GWR but even he could not always defeat the reactionaries in his new home. Thus batches of 4F 0-6-0s continued to be built into the nineteen forties.
     
  9. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    What was backward looking about the 1400/4800? Seriously. It had a lot of standard parts in common with 64s, 74s and 16s, it was engineered to the same standards as the rest of its contemporaries to run higher mileage between repairs than other lines, at 41 tons it could still handle 2 coaches on graded lines and 4 on flat ones, much the same work as was done by 60 and 70ton locos on other lines...

    As for the Dukedog: it was simply an exercise in economy. For a fraction of the price of a new engine they got another 10 years light passenger haulage *and* by calling it a new class were able to work around the problems of getting the money from the budget it was available in. The ten years of work they provided were enough for them to be replaced by DMUs, whereas if a new locomotive had been built the money would have been wasted.
     
  10. Marquis DeCarabas

    Marquis DeCarabas New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    A cad, a thief, a dandy and almost immortal
    Location:
    Neverwhere

    Hmm...... 10-BELs. Yes; very much so. :)
     

Share This Page