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.

Sir Nigel Gresley - The L.N.E.R.’s First C.M.E.

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by S.A.C. Martin, Dec 3, 2021.

  1. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,492
    Likes Received:
    23,721
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I'm glad to hear it - my response was to the language used in these posts.
    Understood and accepted. But my question was not whether the board challenged on these things, but what objectives they set him that those challenges were based on. So not whether they asked "why aren't your fleet meeting x% availability" but whether he was overtly given the instruction to deliver x% in the first place. And there, including in the Thompson book which I've purchased and read, I was struggling to get that sense of an objective.
     
    S.A.C. Martin likes this.
  2. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    A fair question. I would say Gresley was tasked with improving the locomotive and rolling stock.

    In this he achieved it by producing on the whole, mostly smaller groups of more complicated (design wise) locomotives that in theory and practice with enough staff performed more than admirably in ideal conditions.

    Removing ideal conditions and replacing that with a wartime narrative and the story changed substantially.

    I can’t shake the feeling his first new design after the K3 2-6-0 should have been a go anywhere and highly numerous 4-6-0, a type that he spent a lot of time looking at (building or upgrading older classes) but only built new with the rather late on B17.

    As we know, he persisted with many tender loco classes using a pony truck instead.

    Of course, there’s the objectively sound argument that why would he build more 4-6-0s when there were so many pre existing ones at the grouping that were relatively young?
     
  3. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Would physical constraints such as turntable lengths and headshunts perhaps go some way to explaining that?
     
    Hirn and Jamessquared like this.
  4. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    No, because the CME and civils side of things on the LNER would have been discussing what should be improved from an infrastructure side of things.

    I - personally - don’t see the civils as a constraint to the design of a 4-6-0. Every other railway managed it.
     
  5. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,492
    Likes Received:
    23,721
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    An interesting answer, for which many thanks. My supplementary (which I do think reflects a post war mode of thinking) is how the board defined "improving", and how they related that target to the performance of the LNER as a whole.
     
    S.A.C. Martin and jwr4472 like this.
  6. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Thanks Simon. I was wondering about some of the facilities inherited from companies which made the LNER look flush with funds, though point of order ..... The GNRI never developed any locomotive design bigger than 4-4-0 (or their 0-6-0 goods derivatives) for such reasons .... and physical constraints certainly informed decisions on the Southern (think of use of 2-6-0s on the Lymington branch, or the six-wheeled tenders attached to the 4-6-0s, of the Eastleigh school of design, on the Central Section).
     
  7. 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
    Its an interesting question though. The GWR had 30 locomotives (the Kings) that exceeded their red weight restriction (between LNER 6 and 7). In my 1958 Observers book I count 284 ex LNER class locomotives at RA8 and 387 at RA9. Unless their lines were notably free of underbridges the LNER and predecessors would seem to have spent a great deal more money on upgrading bridges than their opposite numbers to the west.
     
    Jamessquared and S.A.C. Martin like this.
  8. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    It may raise some questions about Board dynamics and competence, for example and I a no expert on this Stamp started asking a lot of what we might consider to be the right questions on the LMS board, I gather that The Southern did the same and Portal in the GWR constantly thought about the 'Ordinary' shareholders.

    Did the LNER board do the same and/or manage Gresley properly?
     
  9. 30567

    30567 Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    5,610
    Likes Received:
    3,510
    I did enjoy Churchward's comment on hearing that Gresley was building a Pacific : 'Why is the young man doing that when we could have sold him one of ours?'
     
    Bluenosejohn likes this.
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,422
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Apologies for taking one statement, but I am a bit intrigued by that one - that every locomotive class had at least two boiler types. I'd have expected there to be fewer boiler designs than classes, not more.

    Again, an SECR example. At the formation of the SECR in 1898, they inherited, amongst others:
    • 122 SER O class 0-6-0s (including a handful built in 1899 by the SECR)
    • 118 SER Q class 0-4-4Ts
    • 25 SER R class 0-6-0Ts
    • 18 LCDR A class 0-4-4Ts
    • 12 LCDR A1 class 0-4-4Ts
    • 6 LCDR A2 class 0-4-4Ts
    • 18 LCDR R class 0-4-4Ts
    • 15 LCDR R1 class 0-4-4Ts (built 1900 by the SECR)
    25 years later, they handed over to the SR
    • 66 SECR H class 0-4-4Ts
    • 58 SER O1 class 0-6-0s reboilered with the H class boiler (plus one more done by the SR)
    • 55 SER Q1 class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with the H class boiler
    • 13 SER R1 class 0-6-0Ts reboilered with the H class boiler
    • 18 LCDR A class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with a new A class boiler
    • 12 LCDR A1 class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with a new A class boiler
    • 6 LCDR A2 class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with a new A class boiler
    • 15 LCDR R class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with the H class boiler (and the remaining three subsequently done by the SR)
    • 2 LCDR R1 class 0-4-4Ts reboilered with the H class boiler (with 11 more done by the SR)
    In other words, 8 disparate classes of locos but by the end of their lives - and many lived into the BR era - they were all concentrated on just two boiler designs.

    Now, the SECR (and the SER before it) were railway's that had a long history of standardisation. But I'm surprised if every LNER class had two boiler designs: if nothing else, the respective CMEs were somewhat asleep at the wheel.

    Tom
     
    30854 and bluetrain like this.
  11. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,422
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Yes, but that doesn't always mean there is the capital to make those improvements. A new turntable was an expensive thing - comparable in cost to a locomotive - and that is before you consider site constraints. Good luck increasing the size of either of the turntables at the south end of Cannon Street!

    Again, from a Southern perspective, the infrastructure improvements that had an impact on locomotive design / operation included bridge strengthening, water softening, new sheds, enlarged turntables (and electrification). Generally, bridge strengthening (and electrification) took precedence, hence - as others have noted - the need even in the 1960s for cascaded S15s and N15s to receive 6 wheel tenders on transfer to the Central Division; and a generation earlier the very clever design of the L1 that packed a tremendous punch in a loco that could still fit a 55 foot turntable.

    Tom
     
    30854 and S.A.C. Martin like this.
  12. Fred Kerr

    Fred Kerr Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    8,239
    Likes Received:
    5,250
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Freelance photo - journalist
    Location:
    Southport
    But surely this must be the nub of your analysis ? IMHO Gresley represented the philosophy of "horses for courses" whereas Thompson represented the philosophy of "standardisation" with its reduction in spares handling and thereby costs. Related to this argument is the response of staff (i.e. drivers, firemen, fitters) at the depots where those locomotives were allocated. A case in point is the A4s which were based at few depots hence can provide a quicker understanding of the effect staff had on availability in terms of days available / under repair / maintenance / on workshops. In a wider context is the view that if depots had locomotives that performed the work adequately their reaction to new / different locomotives being added to the depot's fleet might prove to prove unacceptable as adherence to the "tried and tested" locomotives would temper their opinions of the new locomotives.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2022
    30854 and S.A.C. Martin like this.
  13. 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
    But how different were the designs? RCTS lists 18 variations on the GWR Std 1 boiler, although admittedly the vast majority were built in small numbers before WW1. They were all interchangeable though to a greater or lesser extent.
     
  14. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Not the case with the LNER and in some cases there were up to four boiler types, with potentially belpaire and round topped variants together with other changes. Problem is, all of these different boiler diagrams had different drawings/formers/etc and this actually adds to the overall non-standardisation.
     
  15. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,422
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Certainly the H class boilers were interchangeable between classes, which from the point of view of controlling maintenance costs is a key point.

    Tom
     
  16. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,422
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Which surprises me (though I’m sure you are right). You wouldn’t necessarily suspect similar boiler designs between pre-grouping designs of different companies (though some LCDR locos got spare GNR boilers bought second hand - go figure!) but I’m still slightly surprised at a lack of standardisation between locos of one company. For example, on formation of the SR, locos of e.g. Stirling class Q / Q1 typically had two different boiler designs (that is, Stirling original and Wainwright replacement) but they were at least the same two boiler designs as on class O / O1; and R / R1. Are you saying that e.g. an ex-GER 0-6-0 might not only have subtypes with two boiler designs, but that those designs weren’t interchangeable with those on e.g. a 2-4-0 or 2-4-2T of comparable size. That does sound profligate!

    Tom
     
    S.A.C. Martin likes this.
  17. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    6,546
    I don't like to question your vast knowledge of Southern loco matters Tom, but I don't think there was a large scale tender swap of S15 and N15 class locos in the 1960s for Central Devision work. N15s 30793 - 30806 had six wheeled tenders, for Brighton line work from when built in the 1920s and kept them all their lives. Only one S15, 30847 (remember that one?) was ever equiped with a six wheeled tender, admittedly in about 1960, for Brighton line use. The appearence of either class on the Brighton line by the 1960s was very rare indeed.

    Peter
     
  18. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Try a look at what the Irish CIÉ inherited from the GSR in 1945. Some classes could boast multiple boiler types (even externally identical boilers could boast different tube sizes and arrangments) and withdrawals almost never targeted a class, meaning low numbers of many designs which were already completely obsolete back in 1925 when the GSR was formed!
     
    bluetrain likes this.
  19. bluetrain

    bluetrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    1,460
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wiltshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Reasons for early class withdrawals will vary - inferior performance, maintenance issues, non-standard in respect of boilers and other components, etc. In the case of the Ivatt GN "Long Toms", a key factor was the acquisition by the LNER in the 1920s of a large fleet of ex-ROD 2-8-0s, most of which went to the GN and GC Sections. That made some of the existing 0-8-0 types surplus, with the "Long Toms" selected for early withdrawal ahead of the contemporary ex-GC Class Q4. After WW2, history repeated when an influx of WD 2-8-0s swept aside the remaining Q4s and the ex-NE Q5s.
     
    Richard Roper likes this.
  20. Bikermike

    Bikermike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2020
    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    1,595
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Thameslink territory
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    It would be interesting to know what level of thought on standardisation existed. After all if you have n many different types of boiler that are all interchangeable, then it doesn't matter as you just build more of the best version (minor type change), on the other hand, if you only have 2 versions, but they are not interchangeable, you need to keep twice as many spares in stock.

    I'd be interested also to know how much part-swapping v repairing went on. Swindon could presumably to a large extent simply swap out failed components and repair centrally at their own pace. The limiting factor is then that Aberflyhalf shed still needs to fix stuff as it can't keep all the bits in, and can't get them fast enough to get the engine back in service
     
    S.A.C. Martin likes this.

Share This Page