Affording new locos

[4903]

One thing that always puzzled me was how did Thompson get to build so many locos. In 18 years Gresley got to build around 800 locos, in 5 years Thompson had nearly 400 built. The figures are a bit approximate and are skewed as Gresley was happy to build locos to existing designs, but it still feels proportionally more were built under Thompson. Given the Lner was virtually bankrupt how did they afford such an extensive build program? I know that there was a big need for B1 type loco to replace pre grouping types but having the need and affording it aren't the same. Any insights would be welcome

[richard]

What do those numbers include and exclude?

Are you including all the B1s, for example? A few hundred were built, but they were mostly by BR, very few during Thompson's actual tenure.
He initiated a lot of rebuilds with varying degrees of success. So he knew he had a limited budget but a lot of invested capital at his fingertips (eg. the RODs were good solid engines but dated, so the Thompson O1 rebuilds made a lot of sense)

Also there were the WD builds (Austerities and 8Fs) - the LNER workshops built a lot of 2-8-0s for the war effort.

[4903]

I couldn't easily find a breakdown of builds by year so I just took total numbers built of each designers locos.

Ordering loads of B1s and getting BR to pay for them sounds like a very cunning plan.....

[manna]

G'Day Gents

I think 'Government Secured Loans' were also a big help.

manna

[richard]

Yes the government loans were responsible for a lot of the 2-8-0s iirc.

They were needed for the war effort, and the LNER would have recognised them as a worthy investment (see how quickly they bought war surplus RODs in the 1920s). Speaking of which, they also bought war surplus WD Austerities and J94s...

[Hatfield Shed]

... In 18 years Gresley got to build around 800 locos...

Or possibly the thick end of 1400 under his signature while in the LNER CME's chair. That's disregarding the existing orders of the pre-group companies, but includes the various GCR, GER and NER designs he standardised, and which went on being constructed by the LNER.

The LNER was never remotely close to bankruptcy, in that assets comfortably exceeded liabilities. The problem was insufficient income deriving from the operation, to support the level of investment the business really required. The result was inevitably a concentration of what investments could be made in the business on the most profitable sections and traffics.

[4903]

Thanks. I knew the loan option had covered the work on Woodhead but not that it had been used for more general matters.

It was a mark of Gresley that he was happy to build locos from other designers which must have smoothed the integration of the Lner in the early years. See the Midlandisation of the LMS for a contrary, less successful approach