Railway World
Volume 35 (1974)

Facts and fables of Fowler's Ghost. 18-22; 60-5.
See also comment from M. Seymour in October Issue pp. 416-20.

August (Number 412)

John F. Clay and J.N.C. Law. How great was the Great Western?—2. (Studies in locomotive performance—No. 3. 326-31.

B.K. Cooper. Dart Vallley's two aspects. 332-5.

S. Blencowe. Austrian steam—a 1974 review. 336-9.

John A. Lines. NER No. 712 and its R class companions. (Locomotive portraits—12).. 340-1.

Intensive transport of ore for steelmaking. 341. illustration
Imported ore into Immingham for transport in 1575 ton trains to British Steel Corporation at Scunthorpe. Motive power pairs of Type 37

N.E. Preedy. A night on a banker. 342-3.
From Tebay to Shap Summit in May 1965

J.W. Braithwaite. In praise of Johnson. 348-50

John Routly, Surface travelm to scenery and sun. 356

October (Number 414)

M. Seymour. The Ghost walks again. 416-20. illustrations and diagrams
Comment on Steamologist's interesting two-part "Ghost story" in the January and February issues of Railway World. If some of the comments seem critical, I hope it will be appreciated that my purpose is to strive for accuracy in a subject more than usually wrapped in confusion. While I have no quarrel with the general conclusions offered by Steamologist, I feel that his ruminations are at times confusing; I would like to draw particular attention to some points that did not receive sufficient emphasis.
Firstly, comparison of the side elevation of the factual Ghost (reproduced at the top of pI8, January) and the original photograph [reproduced above] reveals many drawing errors, some minor, some important:-
1. Less than justice has been done to the handsome Stephenson chimney, which is less sharply tapered and should have a slight ridge at top and bottom curves;
2. The smokebox door is flush, and has a single handle only; a small lubricator is mounted each side below the door;
3. The buffer shanks are bulbous (typical GWR broad-gauge design) the buffer heads having wooden faces. The front cou'pling chain is more than a simple three-link coupling, and ends in a hook. The. guard irons are set on the front of the buffer beam outside the buffers;
4. There should be a steam pipe curving down and back from each steamchest, leading to the condenser. The cylinder cock gear is set much lower, below the cylinders;
5. On the smokebox side there are, reading upwards and front to back, a lamp bracket, the tall crank and pivot of the condensing gear and the short crank for the venetian blind gear;
6. There are three rods along the boiler side: the topmost works the venetian blind, the middle rod works the condenser gear (being controlled by the handwheel at the base of the cab weatherboard), and the lowest is a handrail which stops short in front of the air pump;
7. The lock-up safety valve in the front dome is set across the boiler centre-line, not fore-and-aft; the rear safety valve is a Salter spring balance, the lever and screw spindle being omitted in Steamologist's drawings. The boiler has at least four boiler bands visible;
8. There should be a reversing rod above the front carrying wheel spring. The engine is arranged for left-hand drive. Note the two levers on the footplate, one the reversing lever, the other possibly for controlling the air pumps?
9. Steamologist has omitted the crosshead-driven feed- pump and the sand pipe leading in front of the leading driving wheel. The sand valve rod is on top of the sandbox; in front of the sandbox is the vertical rod leading to a shut-off cock on the feed pump, its control rod running to the cab along the top of the splashers. Another vertical rod is placed between the coupled wheels and is presumably a water valve connected with the condenser tank. It would be these feed pumps which failed on trial; injectors were still a relative novelty, and there are no signs of them on the factual Ghost;
10. Steamologist shows brake blocks on the engine: there is no visible evidence for such brakes except on the tender, typical of the period, as for example on the Stephenson 160 class 4-4-0s for the Stockton & Darlington Railway;
11. The connecting rod should be inside the coupling rod, an arrangement also typical of Stephenson practice. This is important, as the cylinder centres are thereby brought closer together. Another important detail overlooked is a rod drive from the trailing crank pin inside the coupling rod to a vertically-mounted rocker arm between the wheel splashers; this I assume to be connected to the condenser agitator (referred to in Fowler's 1862 memorandum). The rocker arm pivot is seen in the photograph in front of the condenser pump exhaust;
12. The long, low vertical plates on the footplate, between the cab and smokebox, are to protect men's feet from the coupling rod, wheels and rocker arm: the low handrail would be vital to give a safe hand-hold;
13. The cab side-sheet has a vertical pillar at the front corner as well as the rear. There is only one works plate, on the front driving wheel splasher;
14. Steamologist shows a weird pipe leading above the cab side-sheet from the engine to the tender. This seems to be a misunderstanding of a drawing roll held by the man standing on the footplate;
15. The tender springs should have a more pronounced curve on the top leaf. The rear wheel's tyre tread is bare in the photograph, showing that the tender brake-blocks are behind the wheels, not in front. I doubt whether there is room for a tool-box at the rear of the tender (not shown by Rosling Bennett), and whether there are any rear guard irons. The top of the side flare appears to be parallel, not tapered.
The accompanying drawing, based on the photograph of the factual Ghost, is intended to emphasise these points. Incidentally, in this photograph as in the Gladstone photograph, the engine is seen running wrong line on mixed-gauge track, whereas the rails in the foreground are clearly tem- porary and broad-gauge only-presumably only one running line had as yet been properly laid. Under the tunnel arch behind the engine can be seen the contractor's wagon with a ladder propped against it; odd that the passengers should be in shadow—was it raining?
Steamologist is wrong when he states that the group seen in the other photograph [see p. 418] is the Prime Minister and Cabinet; in 1862 Gladstone was Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Palmerston being Prime Minister. The party includes the Duke of Sutherland, Lord Richard Grosvenor, Mr Fowler, the Resident Engineer, the Contractor and Contractor's Agent.
Though all the reproductions of this 1862 photograph have been retouched, there is enough visible of the engine pulling the two wagons to deserve attention. I would suggest that it is in fact the Ghost; the accompanying sketch of what can be distinguished appears to correspond remarkably:-
Cab weatherboard shape, and low-set spectacles;
Left-hand drive regulator;
Four-wheel tender.
Steamologist states that this photograph shows the rear two vehicles; are they not the only wagons in the train—note the rear lamps. In view of this photographic evidence, it does not seem right to suggest that the Ghost did not haul a train.
Steamologist belittles the Times report of the test run (January p20), as a "typical lay press account". Surely, if the venetian blinds were closed and the exhaust steam turned into the condensing tank, the engine would fit the Times description precisely.
It is not entirely correct to speak of a boiler pressure of 120lb per sq in as being "not greatly in excess of contemporary practice": it was typical of the period, and was the pressure adopted in the Met tanks until 1868. Steamologist (January p22) makes heavy weather of accounting for the 12 engines referred to by Fowler in his 1862 memorandum. These can only be the GWR Gooch 2-4-0WTs, six from Vu1can Foundry and six from Kitson between June and September 1862. His other reference to the Gladstone trip and the Ghost is irrelevant on the grounds previously mentioned.
Some points in Part 2 of the article (February) deserve dn comment. It should perhaps be stressed that BruneI's remark, quoted on p61, was made in 1854, as he was no longer alive to witness the Fowler schemes of 1860 and 1861. On the same page, concerning Stephenson's promise to deliver the Ghost in five months, Steamologist seems to infer that' urgency was stressed '. To set this in perspective, one can quote Brian Reed, who, in Loco Profile 10 on the Met tanks, records Beyer, Peacock as willing in January 1863 to build six engines for the Metropolitan by June. The problem of passing condensed water back to the boiler (p62) may be explained by the valve control seen between the coupled wheels of the factual Ghost, and the feed pumps. On p62 Steamologist is surely wrong in giving preference to the derivation of the Met tanks from the solitary Craven 4-4-0T. The Tudela-Bilbao designs are incontestably the progenitors.
I suggest that Steamologist has laboured excessively over the 2-2-2T design and in so doing has overlooked one or two vital points in the Ghost story. Reading pp60 and 61, one wonders how many 2-2-2 designs Steamologist identifies; he gives two illustrations which, from the captions, are apparently two different ideas, whereas I can only see one and the same design. From the text on p60 I understand the illustration on that page to be derived from the drawing in The Railway Magazine of 1901 (which seems acceptable as an authentic general arrangement drawing); yet on p61 it appears that the diagram on that page is also derived from the 1901 drawing. To illustrate further comments I reproduce diagrams of the 2-2-2T and the 2-4-0 drawn to the same scale and related to each other in position to emphasize the remarkable similarities between the two, both in the boiler and in the running gear. Under the 2-2-2T cylinder the arrangement of pipes strongly suggests a valve and union for a fireless engine steam supply and the boiler clearly has no firebox. The 1901 drawing must be the original Fowler fireless scheme, antedating February 1860, the date of Stephenson's order book entry: as stated by Brian Reed (Loco Profile 10), the drawings at this date included a proposed modification of the locomotive and a heating furnace for the regenerator. I wonder if a big problem in 1860 might not have been the provision of a practical steamtight coupling for recharging at the termini. I would suggest that the 2-2-2T was developed into the factual Ghost by the following stages:-
(1) tacking a firebox on the back of the original boiler design, which is otherwise retained in all respects such as plate dimensions, positions of dome seatings, height of centre-line above rail level and position in relation to cylinders;
(2) improving the engine as a vehicle by a 6in longer wheelbase and four coupled wheels (still in front of the firebox-the lingering Step hens on long boiler tradi- tion);
(3) providing a tender for fuel and water (it would also no doubt help to steady the engine).
Incidentally the 2-2-2T saddle tank on the 1901 drawing does not appear to have any beading round the top; Steam- ologist's assumption of a square tank seems less likely than a curved tank, as on the 1861 4-2-2T.
Two other important points need to be stressed. Firstly, on the 2-2-2T a rod drive from the crankpin is taken to a rocking lever on the footplate; on the 2-4-0, which has a firebox in place of the 2-2-2's rear condensing tank, there is an identical drive from the trailing crank-pin. I suggest that this is part of the apparatus for agitating the condenser water, as mentioned in Fowler's 1862 memorandum, and shown vestigially on the drawing in that account. Secondly, the valve gear: the reversing rod on the factual Ghost is in a conventional position, so the valve gear layout must have been straightforward. But with a condenser tank quoted as 6ft wide and frames only 6ft 3in apart, how on earth did the designer pack in eccentrics and links, not to mention adequate bearings?
In his 1862 memorandum Fowler referred to the 12 engines nearly finished 'all similar to this' (the Ghost), though he did qualify the similarity by acknowledging the substitution of a heavier boiler without a fireclay chamber. This may be seen as an adroit choice of words to mask the abandonment of his pet ideas, but comparison of the GW 2-4-0T diagram with the Ghost development shows that the ancestry is clear; it also goes to explain more markedly the features of Gooch's design foreign to normal GW broad- gauge practice-the outside cylinders, the footplate valance, raised low plate and coupling rod cover alongside the driving wheels; the condensing pipe and tank arrangement and the crosshead-driven feed pumps also perpetuate earlier thinking. By contrast, the connecting rods are set outside the coupling rods.
I am not sure why the cylinders were inclined at about 1 in 7 above the centre-line, as this must have made firm attachment to the frames difficult. E. L. Ahrons stated that the reason was the need to clear the front carrying wheels, which hardly seems convincing: the Ghost managed to combine horizontally-set cylinders with carrying wheels of 3in larger diameter.
Some final questions: would it be true to say that the factual Ghost was the only broad-gauge long boiler engine ever built? Who paid for the Ghost? Are there details of any contractor's engines used to build the Metropolitan? Did Rosling Bennett's relatives meet the Ghost in the? tunnel?

R. Powell Hendry. Celebrating the IOM Centenary. 421. illustration
R. Preston Hendry is shown leaving footplate of No. 10 G.H. Wood

H.A.V Bulleid. Raiway noises. 422-4.
Begins with the shock inflicted by pop-type safety valves blowing off; followed by the plop encountered when a train enters a tunnel, especially marked at Linslade Tunnel at Leighton Buzzard. Sllipping is a cause of noise, especially with steam and could even occur on light engines and the mushroom type regulator valves fitted at Horwich shut easily but could be difficult to open. Whistles could be heard at great distances. The author remarked to Stanier about the elaborate auxililarries manifold on his boilers who replied that "Of course your uncle [H.G. Ivatt] would have had a bit of string for the whistle, like on the London and North Western". The Cardiff to Liverpool trains starting from Abergavenny when hauled by Hall class locomotives produced a majestically noisy start as they tackled the 1 in 85 gradient. Roaring rails were first encountered by H.A.V. in Clayton Tunnel and then  at Manningham. The sound of Scottish expresses passing Pilmoor was awesome as he waited for the branch train for Ampleforth..

New books. 436-7

Spell of steam. Eric Treacy. Ian Allan Ltd. 208pp. Reviewed by Basil K. Cooper
A Treacy photograph has a rich tonal quality that proclaims the photographer before one looks at the credit line. In this personal selection of Eric Treacy's best work over 40 years, plus some new material, the reproduction fully supports the photographer's skill, creating a volume that can be opened anywhere with pleasure. The locomotive nearly always dominates the picture, but then so it does in the mind's eye when looking back. Sometimes one could wish for more examples of the train as a focal point in a wider sweep of country as exemplified in a view of the Thames-Clyde Express in Ribblesdale, or a Keighley & Worth Valley train crossing Mytholme Viaduct. Smoke and steam are often extraordinarily vivid, almost starting out of the paper with stereoscopic effect. Such displays symbolised the power of the steam locomotive. In print they are as picturesque as the straining sails of a square-rigger, and because we open this book to enter the kingdom of faery and old romance we prefer not to remember that they betrayed the fundamental weakness of the steam locomotive that led to its decline. To round off the romantic atmosphere, the locomotive is personalised. "A young fireman reports for work under the watchful eye of Al Pacific No 60149, Amadis." How fortunate that Eric Treacy's camera can command the wilful suspension of disbelief.

Railways in the transition from steam. O.S. Nock. Blandford Press. Reviewed by K.H.S.
This is an addition to the publisher's Railways of the world in colour series with pictures by Clifford and Wendy Meadway and commentary by O.S. Nock. The period covered is 1940 to 1965—going far enough back, therefore, to include an ex-SECR E class 4-4-0 and a King Arthur among the "Engines of Dunkirk." Subjects are taken from all over the world and bring in diesels and electrics as the years pass by. The selection concludes with a Class 47 and a Japanese Railways Hikari super express. A wealth of motive power history is contained in Nock's notes on the pictures in the second half of the book. Coats of arms, rolling stock and Canadian signal aspects diversify the interest, the latter totalling 13 with a startling combinations of reds, yellows and greens displayed simultaneously. It is a pity that the meanings are not shown on the same page, and curiosity over the driver's correct reaction to a yellow over a green over a red goes unsatisfied.

Studies in British transport history 1870-1970. Derek H. Aldcroft. David & Charles. Reviewed by Basil K. Cooper
The studies collected here are reprinted from various specialised publications and are concerned with economic and legislative aspects of rail, road and sea transport. In one of them the author examines railway performance from 1870 to 1914 and shows static productivity in a period of rising costs. Innovation was slow, equipment individualistic rather than effective, and the steam locomotive as a heat engine neglected. Indeed, a remark made at the Institution of Electrical Engineers in 1938 is quoted, to the effect that when the speaker had joined the railway service "the price of locomotive coal was still so low that the majority of railwavs did not consider it worthwhile to undertake research on the locomotive considered as a heat engine with a view to more economical design". The author's conclusion is that at this period railway returns were diminishing because of extension of the railway net- work into less productive areas, but some help could have been gained from more scientific methods of handling traffic. He feels an important factor in reluctance to innovate was the fact that "railway managers and directors were still influenced by the construction phase of railway history, and hence they were more interested in extending their empires than in operating their undertakings on a scientific basis." In a later essay Aldcroft examines in detail the reasons for the slow changeover in this country to diesel and electric traction, and he finds, among many other interesting suggestions, that the success of the pre-war streamlined trains gave management the cosy feeling of security they enjoyed and encouraged the easy line of staying with steam despite changing conditions. It is a pity he quotes the Cheltenham Flyer as a streamliner, for this train, having no down counterpart, was a phenomenon rather than a service and did not serve centres of population with a high traffic potential as the real streamliners did. A direction in which the railways did innovate, although to their financial disadvantage, was in internal air transport. The author presents a general study of the pioneer stage of the 1930s and follows this with an account of the railways' role. This is a little- known aspect of pre-war railway history and much of interest emerges.

Metre gauge railways in south and east Switzerland. John Marshall. David & Charles. Reviewed by K.H.S.
The metre gauge railways described by the author form a chain extending north-eastwards from the shadow of the Matterhorn to the proximity of the Austrian frontier, with a southward swoop to the Italian border at Tirano. Detached from this network but also dealt with are the Ticino metre gauge lines. This geographical plan brings into the author's scope the Zermatt and Gornergrat Railways, the Rhaetian and Bernina Railways, the Chur-Arosa, Furka Oberalp and the Schollenen. The Ticino lines described are those based on Bisaca, Bellinzona, Locarno and Lugano. Marshall has assembled much interesting information on the history, technical equipment, civil engineering and train services of all these lines. Drawings of notable civil engineering works, gradient profiles and maps are all reproduced on a useful scale. How often does one see such details, if given at all, spoiled by lettering or close detail which is hard to decipher. Most of the drawings here, however, are the author's own and he has clearly planned them with care. There are also numerous diagrams of motive power and rolling stock, and he who insists on his ration of nostalgia can weep for the days when the interiors of electric locomotives were occupied by vast, low-speed motors driving through jackshafts, yokes and side rods; or, more reasonably, for the days when there were 25 Swiss Francs to the Pound.

November 1974 Number 415

D.H. Landau. The fiery Duke. (Studies in locomotive performance—No. 4. 450-3.
See also postscript

December 1974 Number 416

T.G. Fllinders. History is junk. 492-5

D. Trevor Rowe. Railtours remembered. 498-502

L.A. Nixon. The Worsborough branch in retrospect. 503-8.
Author hd been brought up near to the Worsborough Incline which was graded at 1 in 40 and up ehich loaded coal trains for Lancashire were lifted up towards Penistone. The U1 class 2-8-8-2 six-cylinder Beyer Garratt had been built to work on the Incline, but was assiosted by other classes notably 2-8-0s of O1, O2, O3, O4, O5 and WD classes. Robinson had considered an 0-10-2T tank engine for the job. The ascent was timed for 22 minutes and speeds were very low. The line was electrified in 1954. Other than enthusiast specials the branch was not used by passsenger trains. Illustrations: O4/3 approaches Silkstone Tunnels banked by class 76; U1 No. 9999 running light (R.M. Casserley); gradient profile, map; two Class 76  electrics pass Wentworth Silkstone Junction with train of miner emptioes in March 1965;  Class EM1 No. 26049 heads for Manchester in August 1969; Jubille Class 4-6-0 No. 45581 Bihar and Orissa takes the Barnsley line at West Silkstone Junction with Bradford to Poole train in July 1966, EM1 No. 26011 banking a freigh.

Anatomy of the diesel: automatic controls ensure efficient use of engine power at all speeds. 509

W.J. Rugman. The Croydon & Oxted Joint and Woodside & South Croydon Railways, 512-15
Built and operated by the LB&SC and South Eastern Railways. The Oxted Tunnel is 1 mile 506 yards long. Oxted had its own Joint Station staff with special uniforms; the other stations were built and operated in the manner of each of either the owning companies. The 07.26 Edenbriidge to London Bridge via the Crowhurst spur lasted until 10 June 1955 when the spur was lifted. Experiments were made with six and seven coach push & pull working with diesel locomotives when diesel electric multiple units took over most workings. Illustrations:Marsh Atlantic No.3245 Trevose Head near Upper Warlingham on 17.40 London Bridge to East Grinstead on 29 May 1952; E class 4-4-0 No. 1547 leaves Oxted with 08.03 London Bridge to Brighton;