Why no A1s? BR (ScR) policy at end with LNER Pacifics

[Midland Excursion]

Dear all,

Thinking about the swan song of the Gresley/LNER pacifics, we had at the end on the Scottish Region a handful of A4s, A2s (Peppercorns) and a couple of A3s. I think the A3s were fundamentally St Margarets engines for the Waverley (please correct if wrong) while the bulk of the others were for the Aberdeen - Glasgow expresses. And of course, we had some V2s on both routes, which were very effecive back up locos (but I'm not sure they were normally entrusted with expresses on either route mentioned).

My question: Why no A1s? You'd have thought A1s would have been the logical last locos to be retained as standard, being relatively modern and, I thought, the most efficient of the Class 8s, rather than the hotch-potch mixture of classes requiring far more spares and detailed knowledge for the best maintainance standards? Was the CM&EE just not taking notice of steam by then? Was it an accident? Who actually dictated what locos should be allocated at the time - we are talking 1965-66? Were the depots just allowed to keep what the asked for, if they so lobbied, regardless? Or were the A1s not liked in Scotland?

I dare say nobody today knows the answers, but I thought I'd return in here, just in case. It seems very strange outcome to me, given BR had supposedly been hell bent on standardisation since its formation. Best regards.

[STAFFORDA4]

It’s an interesting post and the subject, no doubt, has been considered elsewhere.
Looking back to the BR post war era I believe there were only ever a handful of A1s allocated to Scotland , 60152/59/60/61/62.
At the end of 1963 the latter 4 by then allocated to St Margaret’s had been in store for a few months at Bathgate before going for scrap, with 60152, presumably still in good condition, transferred to the N E Region at York.
Now York and the nearby Leeds sheds were well known for having an overflow of A1s which saw little work in their final years through 1965 to 1966. I’m guessing then that the regions stuck with what they knew. ScR like you say with A3s, A2s, and A4s, plus V2s which got everywhere, even my own local depot at one time,Thornaby.
I imagine the A2s were well liked north of the border because of their 6ft 2ins driving wheels for the windy East Coast Edinburgh-Dundee-Aberdeen route and there’d be no benefit of taking on A1s at this late stage.
The A4s had the Aberdeen-Glasgows well covered from 1962 so yes, sad to say, the more modern A1 just wasn’t wanted.
Hope we may see other’s views on this too

[Hatfield Shed]

The A4s were specifically allocated for fast relatively lightweight expresses. The 41 sq ft grate will have been more than adequate for the power requirement, I suspect the 50 sq ft of the A1 would often have meant firing coal to maintain a firebed across the whole grate. (I was so pleased in my youth to see the Streaks in operation one last time, on a family holiday to Edinburgh and the East coast of Scotland in 1966.)

...It seems a very strange outcome to me, given BR had supposedly been hell bent on standardisation since its formation.

That was the message for public consumption. Regarding steam traction, had it been a serious intention, then new steam designs would not have been introduced, (further increase in variety). Instead a very few of the best existing classes perpetuated with no fiddling about to 'improve' them; built as required to enable scrapping of locos gone beyond economic repair. That's the way to reduce variety most economically.

Compare to the standardisation that did work: BR's mk1 carriage fleet. New design systematically displacing most of the inherited stock over 15 years.

[kingfisher24]

Good question, and one needs to understand the circumstances dictating ScR motive power philosophy in the early 1960's. It became very evident to the M&EE and the ScR general manager (James Ness) that the diesels which he currently had on his region were not going to do much to enable timetables to be sped up, particularly where the reliability figures of the NBL type 2's were concerned. The class 40's were better, but too heavy and relatively under-powered for the various routes on which they worked. I recall when I used to work at Ferryhill that the drivers would tell me an A2 (they liked both the Thompson and Peppercorn machines) was better, having more oomph than a class 40, and lots in reserve too, especially on the Edinburgh road.
So James Ness contacted his chums at York, who had recently received the Deltics, and asked what was going to happen to the A4's. ER wasn't releasing A1's at this time, but the A4's were definitely surplus, and were well known in Scotland (as were the A1's). So a group of recently overhauled/low mileage A4's were assembled, some already allocated to 64B and others from England...if they couldn't be used immediately Ness very wisely had them put in store for when they would be needed, knowing that as time went on their working bretheren wouldn't be eligible for works overhauls/major repairs.
So to sum up, if the A1's had been available in sufficient numbers they may have been chosen instead.
I think there may have been an element of romance in this too....pictures of A4's on railway poster boards advertising accelerated services between Aberdeen and Glasgow were probably seen as having more appeal than the rather more prosaic A1.
Sadly a couple of years later the 64B A1's were surplus in Scotland, with no work. One as I recall was sent south to York, having been recently overhauled, but the remainder made the one way trip to Inverurie to be cut. Strangely enough, I have never seen any photographic evidence of the A1's being dismantled there...but all the records suggest that's where they ended their days. Any photos??