50 years since last V3 withdrawn

[v3man]

It is 50 years today since the V3 class became extinct with the withdrawal of 67620/8/46/90/1 on 23/11/64

[manna]

G'day Gents

I would have thought, that they would have been the perfect loco for todays preserved railway.

RIP

manna

[Solario]

I would have thought, that they would have been the perfect loco for todays preserved railway.

Hear! Hear!

In my opinion, it would be a much better option than some of the current new build projects.

Maybe the G5 people could consider it for their next build.

Looking forward to seeing the G5 turn a wheel, by the way.

[Hatfield Shed]

I would have thought, that they would have been the perfect loco for todays preserved railway.

Indeed, had one or more survived. We are lucky to have the N2 and N7. If only the V3s had been multiplied for the GN suburban instead of the Thompsonian direness that was the L1; then there might have been a chance? [Misty rose tinted alternative past on] The V3s would have been well liked for their speedy transits on the outer suburban runs, and travelled behind daily by city gents with significant wedge to splash on their favourite.[/Misty rose tinted alternative past on]

[richard]

I thought the A1SLT group had it on their short list for loco #3 - along with a K3 and a V4.

Obviously a way off, but they've started the discussion. All would make fine new build locos I think.

[Hatfield Shed]

The V3 would be my favourite of those three. New build competent 4MTT power that would arrive just as many of the presently operable 2-6-4T and 2-6-2T are reaching the 'FS' point, where they are essentially life expired...

[ArthurK]

A visit to Gateshead in 1963(?) produced two of the last five listed above. 67691 and 67646 and 67620 were missing but 67636 was there instead.

67628 was a new one for me newly transferred to the Northeast from Scotland to workout its last days on Tyneside. I photographed all three on that occasion. On another occasion 67683 was still around.

ArthurK

[MidlandExcursion]

G'day Gents

I would have thought, that they would have been the perfect loco for todays preserved railway.

manna

Much as I may like the V1s and V3s for their chunky looks, my guess if I were the chairman (or financial officer) of a preserved railway, my vote would be "no way" Mr Manna.

3-cyl loco, bad (expensive to maintain), 2-cyl loco good. At least for bobbing up a 10 mile branch at 25 mph.

OK, 1 in 1,000 visitors may appreciate the V3, but 999 would not notice any difference between that and a regular Stanier/Standard 4 2-6-4T - or even (tin hat on) a poor benighted L1.

AFAIR, the LMR scrapped the LT&SR 3-cylinder Stanier tanks almost immediately once the line was electrified - despite the fact that (I'm sure) some were in decent condition and could have given some months' service elsewhere. There was a reason for that.
br,

[richard]

I thought a V1/V3 was one of the candidates for A1SLT's Loco #3?

Wouldn't mind a Thompson L1 either! Or a Robinson one for that matter, but that is almost certainly too obscure and old.

[manna]

G'day Gents

From the size point of view, a V3 would be ideal and if the idea of a three cylinder engine makes you bulk, build it as a two cylinder, if you must, but the LNER had quite a few three cylinder locos, and they seemed to do OK.

A L1, with it's small wheels would be another good loco for pottering along a 25mph, shouldn't think that would wear it out to quick

manna

[MidlandExcursion]

G'day Gents

From the size point of view, a V3 would be ideal and if the idea of a three cylinder engine makes you bulk, build it as a two cylinder, if you must, but the LNER had quite a few three cylinder locos, and they seemed to do OK.
...
manna

If size and efficiency, both in terms of the capital cost of a new locomotive and running costs are priorities, i'd have thought a straight copy of an 82xxx Class 3* or (if you need a bit more oomph on your particular railway) an 800xx Cl 4 tank would be the best answer. Even an 840xx would probably do in most cases.
(* Indeed, this is the rational behind one of the plans to build an example, AIUI)

However, I think your point does make interesting discussion material to add onto a question or two that I was going to ask this august group, namely:

How effective were the V1/V3s? I seem to have seen photos of them plying their trade on Middlesbro' - Whitby/Guiseboro' trains - which to my mind (I admit, I am not acquainted first hand with those routes) seems to be a waste. Even Newcastle - Middlesbrough hardly seems ideal use for them.

Why not?
Because I would assume that the operating department wanted fast acceleration and reasonably high-speed running (for tank hauled trains, ie 65-70 mph.) That is why the LNER board would have opted for a 3-cylinder design - it helps for better, smoother acceleration, and reduces hammer blow.
OK, the Durham coast road probably needed the acceleration - but could trains get beyond 60 mph in steam days? I'd have thought not. And I assume such speeds on the Whitby roads was out of the question - difficult to get much above 50 mph I would have guessed.

So, I could see why you could effectively use V1/V3s on eg Glasgow- Edinburgh, Kings X - Hitchin/Cambridge (which they didn't, right?) or even Newcastle-Carlisle or Edinburgh stoppers (did the tanks on such trains?) - but Whitby?

Otherwise, why not just build a 2-cylinder loco in the first place? Cheaper to build, cheaper to run (unless, like the L1, it shakes itself to bits )

Maybe I'm too influenced by the thinking behind the LMS builds - which was to go for 3-cylnders only on the LT&SR as justified.

In fact, it has just struck me - were these locomotives the only 3-cylnder 2-6-2T design in the country?

[richard]

The Whitby coastal route was notorious for tight curves, grades, and bridges with load limits. Add to that the North Sea fogs, and you want something sure footed too!

I've only walked a mile or so either side of Robin Hood's Bay - from what I remember the south side was pretty flat, but there's a nasty gradient going south towards Robin Hood's Bay.

[manna]

G'day Gents

One V1/3 was tried out around Kings Cross, for about 6 months, it was well received by the locomen and did well on trains, but I think the reason large quantities of 2-6-2 tanks didn't arrive, was the Moorgate trains, N1's and N2'swere the loco of choice, another class of loco meant rostering problems, switching loco's about so that a V1/3 wasn't on a train bound for Moorgate.

manna

[MidlandExcursion]

G'day Gents

One V1/3 was tried out around Kings Cross, for about 6 months, it was well received by the locomen and did well on trains, but I think the reason large quantities of 2-6-2 tanks didn't arrive, was the Moorgate trains, N1's and N2'swere the loco of choice, another class of loco meant rostering problems, switching loco's about so that a V1/3 wasn't on a train bound for Moorgate.

manna

hmmmm. I'm sure the operating department had their reasons, but good Lord - as Hatfield Shed implies - a 3-cylinder V1 and even more, the V3 with 200 psi boiler, should surely have revolutionised GN suburban timings compared to anything an N1, N2 or N anything could do?

I suspect the tale was wagging the dog here. What percentage of trains went to Moorgate anyway, as opposed to KX suburban? and in any case, the introduced L1s later - which presented them with the very same 'problem'. Strikes me not putting V1s/V3s onto the GN was an opportunity missed.

[MidlandExcursion]

A visit to Gateshead in 1963(?) produced two of the last five listed above. 67691 and 67646 and 67620 were missing but 67636 was there instead.

67628 was a new one for me newly transferred to the Northeast from Scotland to workout its last days on Tyneside. I photographed all three on that occasion. On another occasion 67683 was still around.

ArthurK

What did these locos actually DO so late in the day? The Durham coast was long since DMU, ditto (I assume) almost any suburban service that was not electrified? The tanks were not suitable for freight/mineral trains - there were still scores of J27s and Q6s that were ideal for handling such traffic.

Pilot duties? ECS to Heaton? Was there need for seasonal holiday reliefs, i don't know eg, Newcastle - Whitby?

ps As an aside - I never tried to 'bunk' Gateshead - was it a tough one?