There isn't any policy either way as regards locomotives and their designers.
In my biographies and locomotive pages I try to be as balanced as possible - especially as regards McDonnell and Thompson. Both were controversial figures who probably made some bad decisions, but both were designers who definitely did good things and designed good locomotives at one time or another.
Back to mixed traffic Pacifics: Thompson and Peppercorn both built A2 Pacifics which were intended to be the faster/heavier end of the traditional mixed traffic range - and not the Express Passenger locomotives of the A1/A3/A4s. I think I read somewhere that the idea started before Gresley died, but I'm not sure where. Either way, nothing was built until after his death.
Richard
Gresley and the 2-6-2 wheel arrangement
Moderators: 52D, Tom F, Rlangham, Atlantic 3279, Blink Bonny, Saint Johnstoun, richard
-
LNERandBR
- LNER Thompson L1 2-6-4T
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 8:53 am
- Location: Nr Skegness: The air is SO braceing
- Contact:
Only because there were only ever 2 built. The rest of the order for the class was canceled by Tompson. Had history been differemt and Gresley continued to be the CME of the LNER byond 1941 and the class could have been more sucsessful.Pyewipe Junction wrote: Form what I have read about this class it was an abysmal failure.
By Stephen
Mad about the LNER, BR Eastern region in the 50's, Rail Blue Diesels and Sectorisation era.
Mad about the LNER, BR Eastern region in the 50's, Rail Blue Diesels and Sectorisation era.
-
Andrew Craig-Bennett
- LNER N2 0-6-2T
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:05 pm
- Location: Woodbridge, suffolk
Turntables and 2-6-2s
I suspect that Colombo is right and it was to do with turntable lengths.
I imagine that any new design would have to be considered by a Running Committee, or some such animal, and the question would certainly be asked - "how widely available will this type be?" Given the LNER's straitened circumstances, any new design that even hinted at capital expenditure on maintenance facilities like turntables would be unwelcome.
By way of example, the LNER never spent money on locomotive facilities on the former GER routes if it could possibly help it -which was a contuinuation of the GER's own policy of never spending money on them! Ipswich, for example, a major MPD doing big overhauls - was an absolute shambles until BR days.
Turntables were expensive to buy and to instal. Even if the locomotive never strayed from the main routes, some blighter on a committee would be bound to ask "what if..."
I imagine that any new design would have to be considered by a Running Committee, or some such animal, and the question would certainly be asked - "how widely available will this type be?" Given the LNER's straitened circumstances, any new design that even hinted at capital expenditure on maintenance facilities like turntables would be unwelcome.
By way of example, the LNER never spent money on locomotive facilities on the former GER routes if it could possibly help it -which was a contuinuation of the GER's own policy of never spending money on them! Ipswich, for example, a major MPD doing big overhauls - was an absolute shambles until BR days.
Turntables were expensive to buy and to instal. Even if the locomotive never strayed from the main routes, some blighter on a committee would be bound to ask "what if..."
-
RSR Engineer
- NER Y7 0-4-0T
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:05 pm
- Location: Thannhausen, Germany
2-6-2s
The V4s were an expensive machine to build and maintain, especially compared to the Peppercorn K1s, which could do the same work. The V4s were described as a Rolls-Royce for a Ford job, and as the operating conditions had changed drastically after ther war, rugged and simple, rather than expensive and complicated was the direction taken. The V4s were excellent machines, and it is a pity they were not preserved.