Current and Proposed New-Builds

So, Did Marsh copy from Ivatt, Or was it the other way round ? Which came first,

 

Marsh arrived at Brighton with a set of GNR drawings, which were then emended by the Brighton drawing office prior to building the Brighton locos.

Tom

 

"Good lord Mr Marsh, you must have left an awful lot of tea cups in your desk"
Doncaster gate guard 22 November 1904

 

The obvious difference of course is it doesn't have a flat-roofed cab - very much an Ivatt hallmark.

 

What's the current state of play with 1014 County of Glamorgan, could that be a contender?

 

There were two series of Marsh Atlantics.

The first, classified H1 by the LBSCR, were built with saturated 200psi boilers. The obvious visual clue for an H1 is the "up and down" running plate over the cylinders - similar to the Ivatt locos, but done rather more gracefully by the Brighton drawing office. More significantly - in addition to the different cab profile - the Brighton locos were fitted with air brakes. The boiler pressure was higher than the GNR locos, and the firebox slightly deeper, so clearly an adaptation of the GNR design rather than a copy. The LBSCR locos had an air-operated screw reverser as built (which copied Stroudley practice). I believe the GNR locos had a mix of lever and screw reversers, depending on the exact build date. The tenders were similar to existing LBSC tenders rather than of GNR pattern.

Subsequently, a second series of locos was built classified H2, which emerged under Lawson Billinton after Marsh's retirement from Brighton. These had superheaters, reduced boiler pressure to 170psi (a common change when fitting superheaters at the time, on account of the thermal properties of cylinder lubricants of the day); piston valves; and a more harmonious design of running plate. In parallel, the GNR was developing its own Atlantic's along the same development line (superheating, piston valves etc) but I think that really has to be seen as parallel evolution, not direct copying, since by time the H2s appeared, it was over five years since Marsh had left Doncaster. It is an example of this second series that has been recreated by the Bluebell. (To complete the story, in the SR era, the H1 locos had piston valves and superheated boilers fitted, bringing them essentially up to H2 standard, but retaining the distinctive running plates).

So in terms of design lineage, I think the LBSC H1 locos were clearly heavily based on the GNR locos, but with both detail and a few more substantive differences: they weren't built simply by sending Kitson the GNR drawings and asking them to get on with it. The H2 locos were then an evolutionary development that followed a similar design path as the GNR was making on their locos, but developed in detail terms independently at Brighton.

Tom

 

I think that was Steam Railway

 

The last updates I saw were all about work on the motion.

 

Dot think it would take much o make it authentic Great Northern...

 

So which new builds are properly in build?
P2
G5
F5
Hawksworth county
Churchward county
The GC 4-4-0
Patriot
Std3 tank
Standard 2 tank(?)

Any others?
V4 is still in the planning stage
The Bloomer is AWOL
There's a primaeval replica at the SVR (catch-me-who-can?)

 

Missed Std6 and B17, and if you are classing the std 2 tank as a build then maybe General steam Navigation is in there as well. Would say the Night Owl too but thats awfully quiet of late....

 

Fair point on the clan and the B17.
Is GSN "in build"? AIUI, they are stripping down and doing paper work. (This is no slur on them, I wish them well, but they aren't AIUI cutting new metal yet)

 

On that definition think you are right, and i am surprised how far down the track the 2mt is but its taken a long time to get there.
Without actually going there suspect the Night Owl wont be doing social media because of all the **** flinging, interesting to see if the page gets updated this August...

 

It is a mildly arbitrary distinction, but I think the thing that all new builds have and all not-new-builds don't have is new structures or components of a sort not carried by the original locomotive.

Also (and I would like to declare one honda superdream in bits) that the lowest energy-state of any project is the point when it is taken apart and putting it back together hasn't started

 

All new or not-entirely-new builds that will be running on the main line necessarily have electrical gubbins that the original locos did not have. Beyond that, what counts as "the original locomotive"? In the case of Beachy Head, the original is presumably the original loco of that name, which was scrapped. Some others (e.g. Tornado and Betton Grange) are declared to be new members of previously extinct classes. Tornado consists of all(?) new parts, some of which differ from those of the original A1s. Betton Grange has a mixture of new and re-used parts, all(?) of them of the same sorts as on the original Granges.

 

32424 has its original regulator handle and whistle - they are just held together by some new bits.
(On that basis the IOWSR could resurrect all the Island O2s, as I believe they possess all their regulator handles.)
Pat

 

A lot of flying Spitfires are new aircraft built around a tiny amount of recovered wreckage.

Beachy Head could be considered original on that basis lol

 

The same is true of certain classic cars, where the only original bit is the VIN plate...

 

Very common with classic landrovers

 

Without wishing to get too pretentious about it, nor to push the concept further than perhaps intended, but there is a difference in terminology in how certain projects describe themselves. For example those at the heart of the Beachy Head project have always described it as "recreating Beachy Head". Whereas Tornado was always seen as "building the next member of the Peppercorn A1 class".

Neither approach is right or wrong, but having clarity of vision on precisely what you are trying to do helps illuminate a preferred path when faced with a given engineering challenge.

Tom