The Locomotive Magazine and Railway Carriage and Wagon Review

Volume 48 (1942)
Key file

Number 593 (15 January 1942)

Balancing locomotives. 1-2.

4-6-2 metre gauge locomotives, Assam-Bengal Railway. 2-3. illustration.

Stirling Everard. Cowlairs commentary. 3-6. 4 illustrations (drawings: side elevations)

Locomotive balancing. 7-11. 2 diagrams, table

Fireboxes. 11

Miniature railways. 14-17. 5 illustrations.
Duffield Bank Railway

Number 594 (14 February 1942)

A large locomotive. 19

Southern electric locomotive. 20. illustration, diagram (side elevation)

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 33-7. 2 illustrations
SCR No, 7 with Alexander Allan on footplate.

Number 595 (14 March 1942)

Electric locomotives. 41.

Some reminiscences of the late A. C. W. Lowe by an Old Friend (signed T.F.B.: KPJ must be Budden). 56
We first met on the platform of the G.E.R. Station at Cambridge in 1886, we were both looking at an engine, and on speaking to one another we soon found that we had many interests in common. He was an undergraduate at "Trinity" and I was at "Gonville and Caius." After that we met casually many times at the same place, and struck up a friendship which lasted over 50 years. In those days the G.E.R. trains were mostly worked by Worsdell's compounds or the old "Sinclair" 2-4-0, while the "Doncaster" or in common parlance "The Donkey" had one of the Bromley 4-2-2 type. The L. & N.W.R. often used a 2-2-2 Fortuna or a 2-4-0 Sphinx. The G.N.R. had usually a "Stirling" 2-4-0 of the 87 class or occasionally an old "Sturrock" 2-2-2. The G.E.R. down trains stopped at the North end of the long platform, and the up trains at the Southern end, this of course necessitated a crossing in the centre, usually called the Scissors. There was great interest when 710 the first of Holden's 2-4-0s made its appearance. The reversing gear was worked by a wheel instead of the old-fashioned lever; Lowe and I were watching a down-train pass over the "scissors" and the driver had his hand on this wheel. A stranger came up to us and remarked "That driver steers well doesn't he "! This amused Lowe immensely, and we often used to refer to it in later days. Lowe was very interested in the Paris Exhibition of 1889, to which three English Railway Companies sent engines. The Midland was represented by one of Johnson's singles, the L.B. & S.C.R. sent Edward Blount a 0-4-2, and the S.E.R. 240 a Jarnes Stirling 4-4-0. A special trial was arranged over a stretch of line on the P.L.M. ; the Midland was an easy winner. Then the coupled engines had their coupling-rods removed and ran as singles. They did better, but even then were not so fast as the Midland. For experimental reasons one of Holden's 2-4-0 engines had its coupling rods removed and was tried as a "single." The results were so successful that No. 789 a 2-2-2 was built and was followed a little later by a batch of very similar engines.
When Lowe left Cambridge he went as a pupil to Stratford Works and I became a medical student at University College in Gower Street. He had lodgings first at Stratford and afterwards at Wood Green where at both places I frequently visited him. \Ve also used to meet at various Termini and look round the engines. On one occasion when we were at Euston Greater Britain made one of its first visits to London. "Almost long enough for a cricket pitch" remarked Lowe. We both admired the beautiful way in which the Midland engines were kept, Lowe said "he believed they varnished their chimneys every day." Even the lamps had the drivers' names neatly painted on them. One day I received a letter from him asking me to meet him at Stratford the following afternoon, and "bring your camera" he wrote. On a siding a "Sinclair" 2-2-2 was standing, waiting its turn for the scrap heap. I was fortunate enough to get a fairly good photo of this old veteran.
Later on he went to Norwich as District Locomotive Superintendent and I took a medical post at Worcester, so our opportunities of meeting were very much reduced but we corresponded fairly regularly; whenever I wanted information about railways I always asked him, and I think that in practically every instance he was able to tell me what I wanted to know. I never knew anyone with such a good and accurate memory, and his knowledge of railway matters was simply colossal! In his death railway enthusiasts have suffered a great and irreparable loss! T.F.B.

The Irish Railway Society's Bulletin. 56
No. 50, contains amnng its interesting contributions one by Mr. H. Fayle, "Waterford as a Railway Centre." In describing the Waterford and Tramore Railway and - its rolling stock, the author refers to the chief officers and says:-" undoubtedly the locomotive superintendent, Henry Waugh, was one of the most remarkable railwaymen that it has ever been my good fortune to meet; born in Dublin in 1827, he was apprenticed to Rendell & Lamphrey, a Dublin firm of engineers, in 1841, and remained there till JS5I, when he went to the Dublin & Drogheda Railway as a fitter till 1854. He then joined the Waterford & Kilkenny Railway as a driver and fitter, becoming assistant locomotive superintendent in 1858, and locomotive superintendent of the Waterford & Tramore Railway in 1860. He held this last post right up to his death, about 1905, and when I met him, he was already approaching eighty.
In his early years he must have been a striking figure about 6 ft. in height, though a slight stoop and considerable lameness, necessitating the use of a stick, had somewhat reduced his activities; his hair was white and his face was bearded. The remuneration attached to the job cannot have been very high, it is-doubtful if it reached £3 a week, so Henry had a second string to his bow in the form of a shoe-repairing business, which was carried on in premises not far from the station. Just how he came to take up this profession has never been explained, but my own surmise is that he inherited the business from a relative. I regret to say that I sadly neglected my opportunities, as Henry Waugh would have been just the person to clear up the lacunae in our early locomotive histories. He told me the Tramore Board of Directors had never grudged him a penny for repairs or paint for the rolling stock, and certainly it was always very spick and span during his period of office; indeed he made a very good job of reboilering and rebuilding three of the locomotives, considering the limited resources at his command.
" When the D.W.W.R. extended their line to Waterford in 1904 he opined that this railway' would be a very useful feeder to the Tramore line,' a somewhat naive statement considering the relative sizes of the two systems. He could not understand why Waterford had not a tramway system, though it was patent that there was not sufficient traffic to support one. On one point, however, Henry was firm- riding on the footplate could not be permitted; , it's against Board of Trade regulations' he exclaimed in horror when the subject was broached, and nothing would induce him to budge from this attitude."

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 73-6.

Number 507 (15 May 1942)

The modern 0-6-0.  83.

Stirling Everard. Cowlairs commentary. 94-5. 3 illustrations (drawings: side elevations)

Number 598 (15 June 1942)

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 107-10.
SCR  2-2-2

Number 599 (15 July 1942)

Post-War locomotive practice. 117.

Converted 0-8-0 tank, London and North Eastern Railway. 118-19. 3 illustrations
Q1: No. 5058 and Q4 No. 5059 0-8-0 (then converted to 0-8-0T and O2 No. 3834 fitted with tender from Q4 converted to shunter

2-6-6-6 articulated locomotive, Chesapeake and Ohio R.R. 119. diagram (sectionalised side elevation)

L.L. Sanders. Carriage and wagon design and construction. III. The bogie. 120-2, diagram

O.J. Morris. Standardising Southern Railway locomotives, Central Section. 122-5. 3 illustrations
Notes that George Thompson the painter at Brighton Works who painted the names of the Stroudley and Robert Billinton locomotives had inspired Eric Gill to produce his famous typefaces and quotes Peterborough in The Telegraph

Stirling Everard. Cowlairs commentary. 125-7. 3 illustrations (drawings: side elevations)

R.A. Whitehead. Miniature railways. 128-30. 2 illustrations
Ravenglass & Eskdale Railway: brief mention of 2ft 9in gauge line, but mainly 15in developments including the Poultney patent articulated locomotive

New L.M.S. control office. 131. illustration

Number 600 (15 August 1942)

Locomotive boiler balance. 133

Institution of Locomotive Engineers. 133
Paper [439] by L.K. Sillcox read by J.S. Tritton on 29 July

E.A. Phillipson. The steam locomotive in traffic. X. Engine failures. 136-8. diagram

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 139-41. illustration, diagram (side elevation)

Number 601 (15 September 1942)

Diesel-electric locomotives. 149.

Stirling Everard. Cowlairs commentary. 156-8. 3 illustrations (drawings: side elevations)
Continued from page 127.
The small shunting "pug" came into being towards the end of the eighteen fifties, but here the railway companies were prepared to leave the design entirely in the hands of the builder. The engines were, for the most part, of 0-4-0 design with square pannier tanks, inside frames and outside cylinders. Those on the Edinburgh and Glasgow came from Messrs. eilson, being varia- tions of the design used by railway contractors, and to be found also on the Caledonian, the West of Fife and the Findhorn Railways among others. In 1861 there arrived at Cowlairs as works manager a young Englishman, William Stroudley, who had just left the employ of the Great Northern Railway. The locomotive department of that line was presided over at the time by Arohibald Sturrock, whose choice of engines was in accord with that of William Paton, so that Stroudley was already acquainted with the mysteries of " Sharpies;" "Hawthorns" and similar machines; while Bury's goods locomotives were to be found at Doncaster as at Cowlairs. Stroudley had had the further advantage of a period at Swindon under Gooch.
What he found on the Edinburgh and Glasgow fitted in with his past experience, and he was to be influenced more by the work of William Paton than has, perhaps, been hitherto recognised.
At Cowlairs, however, there were changes. Paton had been succeeded by William Steel Brown, who held the view, then becoming prevalent, that a main line railway should not be entirely dependent upon contractors for its new locomotive construction, but should build at least a proportion of ats engines in its own shops.
It has been seen that, after the purchase of the Sharp singles of 1854, Paton abandoned the use of double frames for new construction, and adopted types with only inside bearings for driving and coupled wheels. In 1862 this policy was reversed by his successor when a new series of double-framed 2-4-0 passenger engines began to appear from Cowdairs, built under Stroudley's supervision, to Brown's designs. They later became North British Nos. 351-354. The coupled wheels were 6 ft. in diameter, and the cylinders 16 in. by 22 in. Except for the domeless boilers they were very unlike previous Edinburgh and Glasgow types, but bare a resemblance to the contemporary designs of Messrs. R. & W. Hawthorn. It is, perhaps, pertinent to remark upon the similarity between the Cowlairs engines and another design, namely Stroudley's Belgravia, built in 1872 for the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway, in which the double frames and  the domeless boiler again appeared, and to draw the conclusion that Stroudley was not unmindful of the Edinburgh and Glasgow machines when he set out to design his first main line passenger engines for the Brighton concern.
Turning to engines received by the Edinburgh and Glasgow from other lines. The agreement to work the Stirling and Dunfermline in 1855 spread the Cowlairs influence. Matthew Holmes was appointed superintendent of the railway as nominee of the larger company. The locomotive stock appears to have been somewhat nondescript, which is not surprising under the circumstances, the Hawthorn types being used, and the designs those not unknown at Cowlairs. In 1862, however, the amalgamation of the Glasgow, Dumbarton and Helensburgh brought into the Cowlairs' fold a handful of locomotives of a very alien conception, namely one Allan type 6 ft. 2-2-2, one Allan type 6 ft. 2-4-0 and an outside cylindered goods engine, all by Messrs. Jones & Potts, and dated 1857/8. Jones & Potts had been one of the suppliers of the original Caledonian engines, but had modified that company's specifications in building domeless boilers with safety valves on the front and rear of the barrel.
Together with the Allan-type engines the Edinburgh and Glasgow received from the Glasgow, Dumbarton and Helensburgh four Neilson outside-cylindered 2-2-2 tanks of 1850, sometime the property of the Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction Railway, one of which was the sister engine of Atalanta, while the others were larger and of more orthodox design, having 5 ft. driving wheels and 14 in. by 20 in. cylinders. The North British renumbered the latter 309-311.
The Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction Railway, small as it was, is interesting in that Patrick Stirling was at one time its locomotive superintendent, while the father of Dugald and Peter Drummond was also in its employ.
Dugald Drummond joined the Edinburgh and Glasgow at Cowlairs shortly after Stroudley, and when in 1864 Stroudley was appointed locomotive superintendent of the Highland Railway in succession to Allan's nephew, Barclay, Drummond went with him. At Lochgorm the two men gained experience with the locomotives of the rival school of thought to Paton, for all Barclay's engines were Allan-type singles and 2-4-0 goods. Stroudley, as is well known, left Lochgorm in due course for Brighton, where Dugald Drummond followed him, to be his works manager. Many of Stroudley's designs showed marked traces of Paton's influence. Grosuenor and the other singles were derived from Paton's Beyer, Peacock singles, with, however, the improvement of inside frames in place of Paton's relatively heavier mixed frames. Stroudley's 0-4-2 types were not radically different from the Edinburgh and Glasgow Beyer, Peacock goods.
S.W. Johnson became the Edinburgh and Glasgow company's next locomotive superintendent, taking up office in 1864. He made few changes, contenting himself with building. at Cowlairs four further double framed 2-4-0 engmes of the 1862 type (subsequently N.B.R. Nos. 355-356 and 349-350) and three of the Beyer, Peacock design of 2-4-0, modified by the adoption of the domeless boiler, for passenger service. The last named engines became N.B.R. Nos. 235, 236 and 239. It is rather a mystery why he found it necessary to turn out during the same period engines of two different types but of very similar power for the same class of work. For goods traffic he built six additional 0-4-2 locomotives of the Beyer, Peacock type, but with domeless boilers, which became N.B.R. Nos. 329-334, and one double-framed 0-4-2 of very similar dimensions (N.B.R. No. 262) to replace an old Bury goods of which the boiler had regrettably exploded. He also received from Messrs. R. & W. Hawthorn two inside-framed inside-cylindered 0-4-0 tender engines (N.B.R. Nos. 268 and 269) with, 4 ft. wheels and 16 in. by 20 in. cylinders. These machines of apparently obsolete type were necessary for use on the tortuous and lightly built colliery branches, the requirements of these lines accounting also for the complete absence of six coupled locomotives on the Edinburgh and Glasgow except for the special Cowlairs bankers. At about the time of the amalgamation with the North British three heavy double-framed 0-6-0 tanks with 4 ft. 2 in. wheels and 16 in. by 22 in. cylinders were delivered by Messrs. Dubs. Two at least, Nos. 209 and 210, were delivered to the North British company, but the first of the batch, N.B.R. No. 282, may have been built for the Edinburgh and Glasgow to Johnson's requirements, in which case this was the first deviation from the general rule to employ only singles and four-coupled engines.
There are certain further points in connection with the earlier Edinburgh and Glasgow engines which should be mentioned here.
The author is indebted to Mr. Jas. McEwan for pointing out that 0-6-0 tanks Hercules and Samson were not, in fact, sold by the Edinburgh and Glasgow, but were cut up at Cowlairs in the early sixties. There is also some doubt as to the diameter of the coupled wheels of the Hawthorn 0-4-2 engines Nos. 23-31, some accounts giving 4 ft. 6 in., against the 5 ft. 3 in. quoted in t:hese articles. Mr. McEwan gives the cylinders of Nos. 23 and 24 as 14 in. in diameter when built. A further point that he raises is that the photograph of the 2-2-2 "light express tank" No. 88, mentioned in the May number, was taken. not in 1856, as has frequently been stated, but in 1864, and, in consequence, it shows not the Edinburgh and Glasgow's company's Atalanta but the sister engine, builrt originally for the Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Railway.
Finally, before leaving the history of the Edinburgjh and Glasgow in Paton's days, through the courtesy of Messrs. Hick, Hargreaves & Co., Ltd., who have supplied a drawing, it is possible to give some details of the two E. & G. locomotives supplied by Benjamin Hick & Son. In ordering these machines Paten deviated from his general rule to use inside-cylindered engines for passenger duties, for the "Hicks" were 5 ft. 6 in. singles with 15 in. x 22 in. outside cylinders, 10ft. boilers, 3 ft. 6 in. in diameter, pitched very low: in the frames, and inside Stephenson link motion. The dome, a very large one, was placed well forward.
These engines, No. 42 and 43 in the Edinburgh and Glasgow Iist, remained in service for a few years only, when they were sold , It is recorded that they went to the Fife and Kinross Railway m June, 1857, but it is felt that there may possibly be an element of doubt in this, for Mr. L. Ward points out that in 1855 the Stockton and Darlington acquired two identical engines named Uranus and Neptune, which were bought second hand, and which ran on that line until the late sixties. The data still available of Hick-built engines of the forties makes no suggestion that further engines of the Edinburgh and Glasgow type were built for any other Iine, and when it is remembered that the Stockton and Darlington company had already bought second-hand engines from the Edmburgh and Glasgow in 1854 the possibility that Uranus and Neptune had once been Edinburgh and Glasgow Nos. 42 and 43 cannot be oompletely dismissed.
When in 1865 the Edinburgh and Glasgow and the Monkland concerns were absorbed into the North British the locomotive affairs of the original North British and the Edimburgh, Perth and Dundee, together with those of several smaller constituent companies of the enlarged North British, continued to be run from St. Margarets works, Edinburgh. Cowlairs became responsible for the engines taken over from the Edinburgh and Glasgow and the Monkland, which undertakings constituted the Western Division.
The Monkland contributed a number of additional Neilson outside-cylindered 0-4-2 mineral engines, which were numbered 295-303, and also some Hawthorn double-framed 0-6-0 locomotives built between 1850 and 1856. These were numbered 276-279. All had 16 in. by 24 in. cylinders, while all but No. 277 had 5 ft. wheels. Those of No. 277 were 4 ft. 6 in. The greater number of the remaining Monkland machines were of the 0-4-0 tender mineral type or were "pugs." A Hawthorn 0-6-0 similar to the Monkland batch was No. 280, sometime the property of the Stirling and Dunfermline Railway.
For a year after the amalgamation Cowlairs remained under the control of Johnson; but in 1866 he became locomotive superintendent of the Great Eastern, succeeding Robert Sinclair. At Stratford he immediately set to work to replaoe the St. Rollox sohool of rthoug;ht by that of Cowlairs, for he built a large number of 2-4-0 mixed-traffic locomotives which were small editions of the Paton-Beyer, Peacock engines of the Edinburgh and Glasgow. Illustrations: E. & G.R. W. Steel Brown's 2-4-0. 1862-1867; E. & G.R. 2·2·2 Benjamin Hick & Sons' 1846; Monkland Ry. Hawthorn's 0-6-0 1850 (later NBR 276 class).

R.A. Whitehead. Miniature railways. The Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch Railway. 159-61. 3 illustrations

Number 602 (15 October 1942)

Edward H. Livesay. Transatlantic footplate experiences. 168-9. illustration
Riding on the locomotive through the Rockies both on the footplate which could be exceedingly hot in some of the narrow bore tunnels and on the pilot (the front of the locomotive) through the spiral tunnels on the descent. Includes notes on oil-firing. Photograph of train in Fraser Canyon.

E.A. Phillipson. The steam locomotive in traffic. X. Engine failures. 170-1. XI. Breakdown work and equiment. 171-2.

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 173-5.
Earl of Airlie.

Crampton's patents. 179-80.
 Patent 9261.

Number 603 (15 November 1942)

Locomotive tyres. 183.

L.N.E.R. class A4 Pacific locomotive: No. 4901 "Charles H. Newton". 184. 2 illustrations
To ease maintenance and reduce the risk of overheated bearings the side valences from the streamlining were removed. Locomotive was painted black with "NE" on tender: locomotive had formerly been named Capercaillie. Newton is shown on footplate.

Crampton's patents. 187-9

Number 604 (15 December 1942)

Diesel vehicle repairs. 201.
Diesel Vehicle Repairs A consideration af the maintenance and repair methods of diesel locomotives and railcars compared with those of steam locomotives indicates that the life of either type of unit may be virtually unlimited. It has not been uncommon practice to. glorify the performance of steam locomotives 30, 40 and 50 years old, regardless of the fact that at such an age there is little of the original locomotive left except the spaces between the wheels. Similar methods may be applied to. the engines and mechanical portions of diesel locomotives and railcars by routine renewals, and by building-up through welding and by metal deposition.
This passible similarity of the methods applied to. steam and diesel power an railways was not featured in the remarkably comprehensive paper an the repair of railway oil engines on the Central Argentine Railway presented recently by C.A. Parker, of that line, to the Diesel Engine Users' Association, and read in London, on November 5, before a joint meeting of that Association and the Institution of Locomotive Engineers. But that paper did result. in an appreciation of the way and degree in which the proportions of a maintenance-and-repair programme may vary. For example, with. the Chicago-California and other long-distance diesel-powered trains in the United States the travelling-fitter system and the work done during a few hours of lie-over time at each end of the run, mean that say, 75 or 80 per cent. of all maintenance and repair work comes under the heading of maintenance, and that repair work "within the meaning of the Act" is undertaken only at infrequent intervals. On the other hand, the method practised on the Central Argentine Railway for the power plants of the 12 twin-car 640 b.h.p. Ganz diesel sets incorporates the mmimum of shed work, and the running department has teen relieved of the responsibility for engine maintenance except for odd details, practically all of the necessary work being carried out in the course of visits to the central repair shops. The claim is made that this Central Argentme Railway practice in no way invalidates "preventive" maintenance and repair, which is probably the key to the successful running af motive pawer of all types. On the Central Argentine system the power plants are taken to. the repair establishment for a light overhaul every 43,000 miles, and for heavy repairs every 125,000/140,000 miles, and It is judged that these mileages enable attention to be given to all the major and minor constituents before they begin to give trouble either through excessive wear, fatigue, or deterioration. Nevertheless, the extent to which the Central Argentine Railway has relieved the running department of much minor work and tuning-up the engines is greater than found on the majority of railways owning diesel stock, and possibly the success with which this has been done may be traced in a large measure to. the fact that these twin-car trains are concentrated in one area and work an certain definite services without variation. For mare widely-scattered vehicles it would seem that the shed staffs would still have to. be entrusted with a greater proportion of the total maintenance-and- repair work. These remarks, of course, apply to. medium and large-sized railways, for an the smaller lines maintenance and repair are usually undertaken in the same shed by the same men just as they happen to be needed.
Although a certain amount of trouble has been experienced with the main constituents of these oil engines an the Central Argentine Railway—the shopping periods, for instance, seem to be governed by the mileage which can be expected before trouble is given by the inverted main bearings bolted to the light-alloy crankcase—Mr. Parker's paper emphasised the feature which has been found in practically all diesel railcars designed and built from about 1937 onwards, and that is the great majority of failures booked against the vehicles are not due to the engines or to the gearboxes themselves, but to. the auxiliaries associated with those two main constituents, Many of these troubles are trifling, and may result in the lass of only a few minutes on schedule, or a day laid off. On the other hand, the consequential damage resulting from the failure of a relatively unimportant part may be great, and that is one of the principal reasons for the necessity of an immediate advance in the standard of design and construction of all ancillary equipment. Far too often the standards have been almost nonsensical, and if found in conjunction with a conscientious running department officer who. books every defect, however small, may give a totally incorrect impression as to what modern diesel locomotives and railcars can do in the way of performance.

[United States locomotives for service in Britain]. 201
The first consignment of American built locomotives for service in this country recently arrived at a British port. These engines will be used principally for shunting and hauling short distance freight trains.

Ministry of Supply "Austerity" locomotive. 202. diagr. (s. el.)

L.N.E.R. 202
1942nd locomotive built at Doncaster Works: Works number plate identical to that of year. Running number 3844: 2-8-0 type

King's Cross Station. 203

The real team spirit: rail, road, Army and others worked as one after raid on Middlesbrough Station. 202-3. illustration.
Picture shows serious damage to station, locomotive (Gresley 2-6-2T) and train which led to several deaths and injuries. Repllacement bus services were provided by Middlesbrough Corporation and United Automobile Services for passengers and Stockton station handled the newspaper, mail, milk and parcels traffic swhich was forwarded by road.

E.A. Phillipson. The steam locomotive in traffic. XI. Breakdown work and equipment. 204-6.

Netherlands Railways. 206.
All forty articulated diesel railcars had been confiscated by the Nazi regime and sent to Germany

[Skefco Ball Bearing Co. Ltd.]. 206
G.A.R. Mead appointed Managing Director, formerly Assistant Managing Director.

Gilbert S. Szlumper. 206
Appointed Director-General supply Services to Ministry of Supply.

Southern Railway. 206
King Arthur class Nos. 739, 740, 742, 744, 747-51 and 754 lent to LNER North Eastern Area

James McEwan. Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway. 207-8.
Dundee & Perth and Dundee & Arbroath Railways.

New York Central locomotives: further notes by E.C. Poultney. 208-12. 5 illustrations.
Information further to that in Volume 41 (1935) by same author.

Diesel locomotives for tunnels. 212

Obituary. 212
Charles S. Lake:
died 19 November 1942: engineer and technical writer
T.S. Finlayson:
former Chief Locomotive Draughtsman LSWR

Crampton's patents. 213-14.
Continued from p. 189

60 ton breakdown cranes: Victorian Railways. 214-15. illus.
The Victorian Railways had recently constructed two 60 ton breakdown cranes at the Newport Workshops. The elements of the design were due to Cowans, Sheldon & Co. Ltd. of Carlisle with modifications introduced by the Chief Mechanical Engineer, A.C. Ahlston. In 1911 the Newport Workshops had built a 30 ton crane; and another in 1914, but these were inadequate for handling the Pacific and Mikado types introduced from 1928/9. The new cranes were fitted with squat Spencer Hopwood boilers.

The coming of the extended smokebox. 215-16. 4 diagrs.
In these days of multiple blastpipes, and the almost universal employment of extended smokeboxes an experiment tried by F. W. Webb on the L.N.W.R. as far back as 1897 is not without interest. The extended smokebox, apart from one or two tentative efforts on the G. & S.W.R. and G.E.R. was first brought into regular use in England by William Dean, who, in 1895, provided his Duke of Cornwall class with this novelty.
In America the idea had been adopted previous to this date, as it was found that an extended smokebox acted as a spark arrester, since there was both room for the provision of a wire net placed just below the level of the blastpipe orifice, as well as space to allow the hot cinders to settle on the floor of the box. This obviated the back pressure caused by the earlier forms of spark-arresters placed in the chimney itself. On the G.W.R. engines Dean followed the American scheme, and with cylinders 18 by 26 in., 5ft. 7!in. driving wheels and 160lb. pressure, gave the smokebox a length of 5ft. 0¼in., and an internal diameter of 4ft. 11¾in. The chimney had a liner with the rather small diameter of 1ft. 0in., and the spark arresting grid was made of No. 16 B.W.G. wire.
As is well known, these engines proved a great success, burning an average of 30.8 lb. of coal over the heavy road between Plymouth and Exeter. When, on 2 August 1897, the new L.N.vV.R. four-cylinder compound 4-4-0 Black Prince began her trial trips, it was seen that F.W. Webb had also given this engine and her non-compound sister, Iron Duke, extended smokeboxes. These were not so long as the G.W.R. examples, as they measured internally 3ft. 65/8in., and had a diameter of 4ft. 9in. They were also differently planned, since they contained a horizontal partition placed slightly below the centre line of the boiler. The blast pipes from the low pressure cylinders did not unite, but discharged into separate chimneys each 1ft, 0in. in diameter. The right-hand low-pressure cylinder blast pipe exhausted the upper part of the smoke-box, and the left-hand low-pressure blast-pipe exhausted the lower compartment. The two chimneys were made less unsightly by having side-plates fitted, which made the external shape that of a flat box with rounded ends, the whole being surmounted by the familiar standard L.N.W. chimney heading. For a short period Iron Duke was tried with the usual chimney, but the double one was soon replaced. Black Prince, in November, 1897, had the standard moulding replaced by a half-round beading, and thus adorned she resembled, in this respect, the 6ft. 6in. 2-4-0 Jumbo Hampden , to which Webb had previously fitted a cylindrical extension on the front of the smokebox when trying out the horizontal position and separated blast-pipes. In January, 1898, these unusual ideas, like so many locomotive novelties, passed into oblivion, but nevertheless, once Webb had settled the size of the low pressure cylinders at 20½ by 24in., and raised the boiler pressure to 200Ib., he placed the extended smokebox on the whole of the eighty 4-4-0 engines he subsequently built. From this time onwards, all L.N.W.R. and G.W.R. express engines carried these large boxes, and it was realised that the extended smokebox had become an essential part of the modern locomotive.


Dr. Church's Tank Engine. P.C. Dewhurst.  216
The communication from Mr. Dendy Marshall in the June Issue of citing a report relatiring to the Bromsgrove explosion of November, 1840, raises the question of the relatively sparse—and sometimes inaccurate—information published concerning the above interesting engine. Mr. Marshall refers to the 1840 explosion as " the end of the story," but this is no longer the case as in recent years the writer has become able to supplement that information not only in respect to after, but also before, the event of November1840. It should first be emphasized that it is the victims of the said November 1840 explosion whose memory is perpetuated by the two well-known tombstones in Bromsgrove Churchyard—upon which most excellent representations of Norris pattern locomotives appear—and not as it often supposed— the victims of a Norris locomotive boiler explosion, which did occur—but of lesser gravity—in 184I. The results of this error have disfigured "railway" books and even as. late as 1912 these two occurrences were confused in the technical press and with the added embellishment that the victims were "two of the American drivers sent with the engines.
The engine was constructed during 1837 at Birmingham to the design of Dr. William Church for Mr. S.A. Goddard and it was placed on the London & Birmingham Railway in January, 1838, where it worked for a time as a ballast engine; later it went to the Grand Junction Railway, at that time having the name Victoria, but it was not a success. It was a tank, not a tender engine. In November, 1840—then named Surprise —it was sent for trial to the Birmingham & Gloucester Railway, but exploded at Bromsgrove before doing any service on that line. In 1842, by which time it had been re-named Eclipse, the engine was again offered to the Birmingham & Gloucester Railway for trial but was declined, and. later, in 1844, offered to the same railway a third time; on this occasion it was agreed to allow a trial to be made, but no record exists of such having actually taken place.
The next record of its "appearance" was. in 1850, as according to D. K. Clark (1855) it "stood" at Camp Hill Station, Birmingham in that year, from which date nothing definite is known of it until 1861, when it was authoritatively stated to have then been in use upon the Swansea Valley Railway, since its rebuilding there into a 0-6-0 tank locomotive about 1857-8. In this rebuilding, the boiler, which had been supplied to Eclipse somewhere between 1842 and 1850 and differed entirely from the original boiler of 1837, was utilised and there is reason to believe that this rebuilt engine eventually came into the- hands of the Midland Railway in 1874.

L.M.S.R. 216
Lt.-Col. Harold Rudgard, R.E. (Retd.), has been appointed to succeed Mr. D. C. Urie as Superintendent of Motive Power of the L.M.S. Railway. Lt.-Col. Rudgard was a pupil of the late Samuel Waite- Johnson, Locomotive Superintendent of the old Midland Railway. The position he held before being appointed Superintendent of Motive Power was Divisional Superintendent of Operation (Midland Division) of the Railway. which position he has held for over five years. Since the war he has been acting with Mr. J. E. Kitching, Mineral Manager of the L.N.E. Railway as Liaison Officer with the Midland (Amalgamated) District Coal Mines Scheme and jointly there has been developed a very successful system of Block Coal Train working.
Mr. J. W. Watkins has been appointed Divisional Superintendent of Operation at Derby