E1 for the IOWSR and 46447 to go on loan to ESR

Why be disappointed? The most important thing is that she will be restored to working order, where she works subsequent to that is of secondary importance. Since the Bluebell and the IoWSR have enjoyed two way exchanges of locos in the past, it's not unreasonable to assume that 110 will visit Sussex sometime in the future but as another poster has so rightly said, let's get her working first before worrying about where she visits.

 

Brilliant news! Perhaps the best steam related news I've heard all year! As many others have already said, a win-win situation.

It's certainly a delightful coincidence for me, as only just a moment ago, I was re-reading Steam Railway's 40th Anniversary special on the IoW, and in that they we're mentioning their hopes to buy 110... and would you look at that, they've only gone and done it!

As for the comments on the Bluebell Railway, I think they've got enough small engines to be dealing with (No.488 to name one.), and I'm fairly sure they had a chance to buy 110 before, way, way back, but apparently didn't buy it in the end because they deemed too costly to repair at the time.

I'm pleased about 46447 too, as I was aware they were considering restoring it for static display, but for such a useful engine as a Ivatt Mogul it would have been a sad waste, so I'm very pleased with the result.

As an added note, I too hope they retain 110's vacuum brakes, if just for the sake of us ever demanding enthusiasts!

 

Christmas appears to have come early!

Chris

 

BP has pretty well summed things up. With regard the Island engines, it seems they all had the later pattern Marsh boilers, with the whistles on the cab roof - certainly there is a nice photo of W2 in Bradley's book in that condition. At the time they were sent, three of the four still had condensing gear and crosshead feed pumps; this was removed before going to the Island and conventional injectors fitted. The visible feature are the blanking plates on the front of the tanks where the condensing pipes entered the tanks. (Stepney, on the Bluebell, still has these). Vacuum brakes were also removed at this time, with the engines reverting to air brake only.

One other distinctive feature of engines in this form is that, with the overhauls actually taking place at Eastleigh, all the engines were fitted with Drummond chimneys, rather than the more attractive Stroudley pattern.

At some point in their lives, the engines had coal rails fitted and these were given backing on the Island. However, unlike the Terriers and O2s, they didn't have bunkers of new pattern fitted and they retained the behind the bunker toolbox to the end. They also seemed to retain the Stroudley pattern smokebox, distinguishable by smokebox wingplates and sandboxes above the leading splashers.

With regard liveries, they were painted in SR lined passenger green when overhauled before going to the Island. Bradley is vague about how long this lasted, but mentions in general that the other E1s were repainted into black with sunshine lettering around 1941-42, so presumably W1 - W4 followed suit. Also at some point around then, they gained cylinder drain cocks, though quite why is unclear, having lasted 70 years without them with no problems.

Bradley doesn't mention BR livery, and it seems likely to me that they were withdrawn still in Bulleid livery. Technically this wasn't until 1956 - 1960, but it seems they didn't do much work after 1954. Still, no disgrace for engines by then 80 years old and with more than a million miles under their wheels.

So, for an engine in Island condition, it seems you want Marsh boiler, Drummond chimney, backed coal rails on the bunker, air brakes only and Olive green or SR black livery. That said, I'd hope she would also have vacuum brakes so she can come and have a holiday on the Bluebell!

Tom

 

Absolutely so! This is the sort of "deal" which appeals both on practical and emotional levels and needs to be copied much more widely. When the E1 gets its new boiler it will be the largest locomotive to be re-boilered in preservation, which really ought to make people think harder about the future.

Paul.

 

With it being a unique locomotive in its own right does it really need to assume an IOW identity? -Seems a shame for it to become something it is not?

Hope that things move on swiftly with it anyway, one day I hope to get down to the IOW and have a poke about, it really sounds like things have moved on a long way since a visited when I was a nipper!

Chris

 

The issue has been established as the fact that it doesn't have its original boiler, so you effectively have a blank canvas as to what type you use. Whilst it would be nice to have it restored to LB&SCR condition (as I mentioned in my previous post, it never received Southern livery), if the IOWSR want to restore it to Island condition, then who am I to complain? Its actually a nice problem to have!

 

While the idea of resurrecting LBSCR No. 110 Burgundy in Stroudley Goods Green at the head of a rake of LBSCR four-wheelers at Sheffield Park is appealing, practicality says that a move the the Isle of Wight is the best option for the E1. As has been mentioned in another post, the IOWSR have a sizeable bequest available to finance a new boiler, and, I would expect, will treat the restoration of the E1 as a priority. Would it have been seen as a priority loco at the Bluebell? It's hard to imagine. True, 80151 and 65 jumped the restoration queue on arrival at Sheffield Park, but both these engines were privately owned. The Bluebell already have more than enough engines, not only to run to East Grinstead but also to operate the long-term extension to Ardingly and Haywards Heath.

 

Local newspaper article - "Full steam ahead for engine deal"

Jamessquared - i think they all received BR livery, there's a good photo of W4 on flickr for example showing her with a shedplate and cycling lions.

Chris

 

The IoWSR seem very keen on things having a genuine Island pedigree - AFAIK, there is only one carriage that isn't a genuine Island carriage, and that is of a type that was once common there, and they have given it what would have been the next available number in the Island sequence. So there would be a precedent for numbering 110 as Wxx. Personally, I find that one of the charms of the railway.

As for how to rebuild 110: it seems the current industrial boiler is life expired, so any rebuild requires a new boiler. At that point, you have a choice (as Bulleid Pacific pointed out) of Stroudley, Billinton or Marsh boilers. All the Island E1s had Marsh boilers as far as I can tell by time they crossed the water, but they shared that feature with many mainland E1s. So any putative rebuild could equally well represent a mainland loco - the only significant differences between an Island E1 and one that would at least be representative of mainland a E1 if restored to 1930s condition would be brakes (Island ones had the vacuum removed and were air brake only; a detail that could hopefully be overlooked in the interests of wider practicality on the mainland); number (which ultimately is just cosmetic) and name (ditto). Even the Drummond chimney was also carried by some mainland E1s - the point is, by the 1930s, like the Terriers, each one was pretty well individual looking. Personally I think they looked more handsome with Stroudley boiler, chimney and safety valves, but that is just an aesthetic choice: it is entirely logical that the IoWSR would want to restore her to how she might have been had she been selected to go to the IoW, rather than being sold out of service ten years earlier.

Incidentally, looking at the lifespans and mileages of some of his engines: were the shareholders of any pre-grouping company ever so well served by the efficient use of capital as those of the LBSC were with Mr Stroudley's designs? :smile:

Tom

 

Ah, interesting. Bradley makes no mention of that, except to note that none of them received numbers in the 30xxx series. Though it was only a hurried flick through at breakfast this morning!

Tom

 

Totally O/T but is there no prospect of the ESR being able to operate trains over the existing line towards the main line link at Witham? Or is that stretch used regularly for freight?

 

You've used the term 'industrial boiler' a couple of times, now. I'm just intrigued as to what you mean by this and what is therefore a non-industrial boiler?

 

Loose terminology on my part. I mean "the boiler she was fitted with when in industrial service". This was probably some boiler that was knocking around the colliery or which they were able to buy cheaply; the point being that it wasn't the Stroudley type boiler she arrived with, nor one of Marsh or Billinton pattern.

Tom

 

I am pretty sure that the boiler currently fitted was supplied by Bagnall of Stafford, which of course is very close to the Cannock system where 110 worked during its industrial use.

 

That boiler had seen just about 36 years of use by 1963, so it was probably pretty ropey even then, and the work done to get it to steam again in the 1990s was probably done in the knowledge that there wasn't much life left in the beast.

 

I'm pretty sure that the Drummond chimney currently on "Burgundy" came from Havenstreet in the 70s. Perhaps someone could confirm.

 

It would also be authentic for (pre-1937 re-boilering) Cannock and Rugeley Colliery No. 9, if a return visit to Chasewater was ever a possibility.

 

Boiler currently fitted to the E1 was manufactured by Bagnall's and tested 2 September 1929 to a water pressure of 270 psi and steam pressure of 175 psi. It was their Makers No. 7496. The chimney currently fitted came from IOW some years ago.

 

Ah - so if my 1937 date is wrong (where the hell did I get it from?) then maybe the industrial livery would be inappropriate for the Marsh boiler. Doh! Or did it run for a short while in CRC livery before re-boilering?