Unidentified loco

[sss750]

Does anyone have any info on this Loco, either it’s maker, t railway company it was made for or the location. Looks like it’s somewhere up north (maybe Yorkshire or Lancashire) with all the mill chimneys in the background. It must be a very early Loco as it has no cab. Also strange as it has no railway company initials on the tender as they normally do.

[Atlantic 3279]

I haven't checked specific features, but I wondered about very early MS&LR (possibly before Sacre's time) or one of Sturrock's early GNR specimens.

[giner]

I've no clue either, but can some photo software wizard get a clean look at the works plate on the cab side? That might, erm, clear things up.

[john coffin]

pretty sure it is neither GNR or MSL, it looks more likely to be a Neilson built loco for a Scottish railway,
maybe pre the Caledonian. The curved front splasher/cab side sheet should be a clue to someone.

Paul

[Atlantic 3279]

I did wonder about Scotland too, partly because of the three storey (tenement?) structure on the right of the picture.

[john coffin]

I am sure it is either a Hawthorn built or Sharp Stewart loco, not least because of the spectacle plate,
and the compensating arm at the front. But they built a lot of locos in the early years.

I wonder whether or not the location is somewhere in the L&Y part of the country, either the mill towns in
Lancashire, or West Yorkshire.

The important thing to understand is that for instance on the GNR before Stirling, the locos were very indistinct
from those of other railways, and checking the works plate is unlikely to highlight anything more.

Paul

[john coffin]

Not being a GCR/MSL man, I do however have copies of DOW, and looking carefully at Vols 1+2, it does seem to
match the Class 23 outside frame 0-6-0 initially some were built by Kitson. The front sand boxes look very MSL,
whilst the tender looks similar.

However, the real problem is that the photos in Dow are not very clear, and I certainly do not have any early ones.

The design does look very Sacre, but not sure.

Paul

[billbedford]

There is a drawing in Dow vol 1 which matches the curved 'cab' side sheets. However it has fluted dome and saftey valve covers. This loco was one of seven supplied to the South Yorkshire Railway by E.B.Wilson. No.4 was built in 1849 and was slightly smaller than the others while Nos 10-12 and 14-16 were built in 1856. From these dates I presume that the drawing shows No 4 and this photo one of the others.

[john coffin]

There is indeed a drawing in Vol 1, but it is pretty unclear and open to a lot of speculation.

What is however possible is that the loco was built by WIlson, since although each builder worked to the
client spec, they often put in certain of their own specific design items. There is a better picture of a
S&Y loco built by Bayer Peacock, but it has a longer tender than the one in the above picture.

Speculating about early MSL and GCR locos is difficult due to the lack of published data available

I wonder whether this is a loco designed or ordered by W.G.Craig the predecessor to C.R.Sacre,
but the spectacle plate looks very like a Sacre one. so maybe it is a rebuild.
However, I do still think it is a class 23.

Paul

[Hatfield Shed]

... can some photo software wizard get a clean look at the works plate on the cab side? ...

Although it would only reveal the supplier rather than the operating owner, that would be interesting. The photograph is sufficiently good that if the original photographic plate still exists, this information probably could be obtained. However, does it still exist, and if so where is it?

Physical location when photographed, practically any centre of industry in the UK. But there are nowhere near enough chimneys to suggest a large mill town, unless the photograph was taken on the outskirts with countryside beyond. (My parents retired to Oxenhope W Yorks., and it had more remaining tall chimneys than that in 1981...)

Unless further evidence is available, Paul's ('John Coffin') opinion seems likely. One feature not discussed is the absence of a raised firebox, the boiler shell is a uniform cylinder which suggests a date in the 1860's to me, but others more knowledgeable should advise.

[john coffin]

It is of course possible to wonder whether it is in fact a rebuilt loco, as Hatfield says it is interesting to see that
the firebox although not raised above the boiler has excess sides that were typical of raised fireboxes.

that would have been after Kirtley and his team and devised a method to allow locos to burn coal not coke,
which negated the need for a raised firebox, I am still not sure I understand the whole area of mid feathers and
so on, but than I didn't ever work with steam engines, rather internal combustions ones. But my knowledge
has been gleaned from both reading and asking questions of those few who were still around about the simple
things that have got lost because the books we read were produced at a time when the knowledge was current
and now much of it is lost because no one thought to ask.

Paul