Replica builds for heritage lines.

What "type for heritage lines" is what is says so I think he means a "one size fits all" loco.

One of the most neglected areas in Preservation is the 0-6-0 so I'm going to suggest LMS 3F 0-6-0 as the most acceptable countrywide. A small batch of 6 or 10 should fit the bill and be quite reasonably priced.

 

Preferably a tank, but if the extra water capacity of a tender were needed, a high/back cab tender would help in poor weather ,
Medium size, so useful at all times of the year
Max three cyl, preferably two.
No examples existing
In deference to the poor fitters, nothing with inside cylinders and valve motion.
So:-
Southern River,
Fowler class 3 or 4
Thompson L1
77xxx

More complex, but still compliant with above - (and I'd really like to see one of each)
Gresley V3 and V4

A LBSC K class would also be good, but it would need a modified tender front to comply

 

The sensible choice has been made 82045 and now all the background work has been done any railway needing additional motive power could build another one cheaper and quicker than starting from scratch.
Not for a heritage line but when I win the Euro millions I will get a heap of drawings from the NRM, take them to Crewe and say can you build me a side window cab K2 for the Jacobite. If there's any change then a Webb Greater Britain 2-2-2-2 just to see if it could be made to work.

 

A LSWR 700 0-6-0 for Swanage would be good as I like to think it could do anything it was asked to do. I have been led to believe that design shares certain parts with the M7 so could benifit 30053. Imagine if you had 700, M7, and T9 together that would be fun.

I think any 0-6-0 tender would be good considering how many were in the total British stock up to the 1950's compared to how many are left now...

 

I tend to agree with the mid Victorian era suggestions for the following reasons:

1, Simple, basic designs

2, A neglected era in preservation, a few from the very early period, ie 1820s/30 have survived and also some from about the 1870s onwards have as a few lasted into the preservation era, such as Brighton Terriers. The period 1850-70 has very little

I think a 2-4-0 or 0-6-0 from this period would be a reasonably practical choice, The SER and LCDR had some 2-4-0s which would be interesting, also a Midland Kirtley 1F 0-6-0.

PS you can paint one of those in BR black too, one lasted long enough to become BR 58110!

Second choice would be a 4-6-4 tank, several railways had these, the Brighton, GSWR, LTSR

 

No. Because railway enthusiasts are, by nature, fussy about minute details so unlikely to fund a proposal like this. Such locos might be OK for theme parks, I suppose.

 

They did work. Many of Webb's Compounds worked quite well, although probably not outstandingly so, especially the four-cylinder types. Alas, the Greater Britains and John Hicks were not among them.

 

We've been through similar before. The work of Dugald / Peter Drummond would be a good place to look: a lot of closely related designs built for several companies that have a degree of commonality of parts.

You also get groups of closely related 0-6-0 / 0-4-4T / 4-4-0 designs, i.e. three for the price of - well, a bit less than three. The aforementioned LSWR 0700 / M7 / K10 being one example that share cylinders, motion, driving wheels etc, and would not be dissimilar to certain related groups of Scottish locomotives.

The difficulty is that someone would have to take the plunge first: the first loco in a group would be just as expensive as any other new build, the cost savings only coming for subsequent identical or closely related locos. I suspect obtaining agreement between interested parties before commencing would be a big hurdle.

Tom

 

While I quite agree that a working 19th century single wheeler would be highly desirable, surely we should finish the almost complete Bloomer before starting a new one. If it is no longer a priority at Tyseley, would they loan or sell to someone else who would finish it?
Likewise a turn of the century 4-4-0 - while my personal choice would be for an Aspinall L&Y or Drummond Small Ben, I would say getting the LNWR George V finished would be the priority over starting something new.
My view would be if a couple of these smaller new build projects can be completed and shown to be useful and fundable, more may be built. Having dozens of frames started and nothing finished will strangle the lot of them.
I don't actually expect anyone to follow this counsel, however - we all like our pet loco classes too much to fund someone else's preference...

 

For sheer entertainment value, this... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crampton_Camden_and_Amboy_RR.jpg

 

As has been said further up the thread, different lines will have their own specific requirements...

Many of the shorter, less severely graded lines could probably make much use of a saturated loco, rather than the complexity of running a superheated loco which wouldn't necessarily require working to its full efficiency. Industrial locos would be ideal for this, as at the Embsay & Bolton Abbey Railway and others.
I'd think a good deal of lines could make good use of a push/pull set, I'm thinking of those lines which currently top & tail. It would save the cost of having to steam and crew a second engine. Also there would be scope for different loco types to be built, from M7s / Caley 0-4-4Ts through GWR 1400s & Panniers, to Ivatt Mickey Mouse tanks. The intrepid could even try a Railmotor such as the Lanky ones, although they were never considered a resounding success in their day.
Lines such as the NYMR, ESR, etc. will always need competent heavyweight locos, for their aim of shifting heavy loads at fairly low speeds, and as such are already well-equipped. I guess a second NER T3 wouldn't go amiss on the NYMR though!

Just some of my quick thoughts...

Richard.

 

The question is about replica builds for heritage line use, so whatever designs are chosen they will present all the flaws to be encountered in the original design. This goes for 82045 too.
If you are building for a heritage line then we should assume that the design chosen should be in keeping with the heritage of the line in question. A small batch of 15xx type would probably be viewed favourably by those lines with a Great Western heritage but would not find favour elsewhere. For the LNE patch the V3 would serve as an acceptable option, though there is something to be said for building a few of the more modest J6 0-6-0s or with more of an eye on the NYM, some O4s. The LM area could make good use of some ex-Midland types, say the 3F 0-6-0 or even the 2P 4-4-0 which had a good reputation on the old S & D particularly when its size was taken into consideration. The Southern deserves at least one Class K mogul, but Abergavenny appeals as does a Class L.
If you are wanting a type that would be vaguely acceptable anywhere then look to the standard designs. If you are wanting a modern design then you will have to produce one, preserved lines might thank you for it in the long run.

 

I know, on a preserved raiway it would provide a bit of entertainment trying to get a train on the move with the driving wheels revolving in opposite directions. It would need a replica Lady of the Lake or Problem class to help get it moving.

 

Yes I like the idea of an 0-6-0 but just for the difference I would go for Q1 'Coffee Pot'. Plenty of power. I know there is a museum piece but a working one would be much better.

 

This has been discussed on previous threads, particularly http://www.national-preservation.com/threads/tyseley-single-wheeler.27904/.

The Bloomer is Tyseley's baby, which they quite reasonably refuse to send for adoption, but my understanding is that they would be delighted to finish it as and when they have any spare capacity if someone organises the funding.

 

Not so; that was a problem at the beginning, and even then much exaggerated, which was solved by fitting a driver-operated bypass valve to the exhaust side of the high pressure cylinders, sending the steam to the blast pipe. Once the loco had moved forward a quarter turn of the driving wheels, the valve would be closed, the steam diverted into the low pressure cylinder and the train would be away. The 2-2-2-2s arrived after the introduction of the valve, so would not have suffered the problem.

 

I'd quite like to see a Cambrian loco - the trouble is a lot of what was built for them or they built was pretty dodgy. Having said that the Jones Goods clearly had enough about them to be "westernised" on grouping so might be a decent option - not least being fairly close to the GWR Dean Goods. Probably a fairly decent sized loco for most lines.

 

Where's that Tom? Curiouser and curiouser!