Biritish Railways Standards

[Pyewipe Junction]

Does anyone know of a distinctive piece of LNER loco design that was incorporated into the BR standard locos?

I am a technical ignoramus and all I can say is that from the outside they seem to fit the LMS/GWR paradigm to a T.

[Muzza]

3 cylinders on 71000?

[CVR1865]

Being technically challenged myself, the only thing i can think of is the arrangement of valve gear reflects that on the LNER pacifics. From appearance on the outside cylinders.

Beyond that... who knows.

[richard]

Riddles had a background with the LMS - so it is natural that he followed those principles.

BR borrowed more heavily from LNER wagon designs. Many standard BR designs were essentially LNER or modified-from LNER - eg. the 16 ton steel coal wagons, the 15ft brake vans, "Blue Spot" fish vans, and some of the mineral hoppers (anhydrite rings a bell, but I'd have to look them up).

Richard

[sirbrian]

I believe that the crosshead slide bars on the Standard steam locomotives followed LNER design practice closely.

Sir Brian (30782)

[sirbrian]

There is one more LNER concept that was adopted on the BR Standards that I had overlooked in my previous posting. The BR standards, at least the ones that I can remember, used the LNER pull-out type of regulator. This choice may have been made at the time because the pull-out type of regulator is the most ergonomically correct technique for controlling steam flow. It goes back a very long way on the LNER.

As a matter of interest, the New York Central Niagara 4-8-4's also used the LNER type of pull-out regulator. I remember this well because I had a ride on a Niagara - 6022 - in 1954, and I was surprised to see this familiar LNER type arrangement in use in the USA. The LNER pull-out type regulator was also used on the Bulleid Pacifics, presumably carried over by Oliver Bulleid from his LNER days.

Sir Brian

[lielestosbrat]

The BR standard 9's where originally built with the square pin for securing the return crank to the wheel set. This was replaced though with the LNER 4 stud method. I don't know if any other standard classes where originally built with the LNER style crank pin arrangement.

Rob

[Bullhead]

From "British Steam Locomotive Builders" by J.W.Lowe, "the LNE contributed [to BR standard designs] 3-bar slide bars and crosshead; nameplates and brake blocks."

[Pyewipe Junction]

All in all then, not a great deal!

[Bullhead]

All in all then, not a great deal!

Yes. It's difficult to get terribly excited about brake blocks.

[johni]

The LNER provided the design basis for the following components:

Three bar slidebars and crosshead, Piston rod packing, Whistle (larger engines), Nameplates, Gudgeon pin and little end lubrication (three bar arrangement), Brakeblocks & Drawhook.

Not a lot really. even the southern done better.

This is not really surprising as the designs were produced by ex LMS engineers.

The Doncaster Drawing Office didn't contribute a lot either, they only produced the designs for Coupling and connecting rods, valve gear and cylinder details for Class 5 4-6-0 and Class 4 2-6-0.

Despite the lack of LNER contributuion the Standards were not bad engines.

[Sir Nigel Gresley]

Certain of the Peppercorn A2s, including Blue Peter, were fitted with MLS regulators (hence the ugly rods on the RHS of the boiler). I believe this is the same regulator that was subsequently fitted to the Britannias and Clans.

[Steve]

There is one more LNER concept that was adopted on the BR Standards that I had overlooked in my previous posting. The BR standards, at least the ones that I can remember, used the LNER pull-out type of regulator. This choice may have been made at the time because the pull-out type of regulator is the most ergonomically correct technique for controlling steam flow. It goes back a very long way on the LNER.

As a matter of interest, the New York Central Niagara 4-8-4's also used the LNER type of pull-out regulator. I remember this well because I had a ride on a Niagara - 6022 - in 1954, and I was surprised to see this familiar LNER type arrangement in use in the USA. The LNER pull-out type regulator was also used on the Bulleid Pacifics, presumably carried over by Oliver Bulleid from his LNER days.

Sir Brian

The push-pull regulator was a GN thing. Other railways used it but they were in the minority. The trouble with GN push-pull regs is that the regulator rod moves axially through its gland and it has a tendency to creep open, hence the need for a pin to hold it firmly in the closed position. Quite a few locos have set off of their own accord when the pin hasn't been put in!. Gresley modified his design of regulator handle to a pendulum arrangement where the rod rotated throuh the gland, a feature found on the surviving A3's, A4's and the K4. Peppercorn went back to a standard quadrant lever for his K1. The surviving A2 has a Melesco multiple valve regulator situated in the smokebox and this lends itself to a pendulum regulator. BR generally perpetuated the pendulum style but moved the stuffing box to outside the cab, adjacent to the dome, as on the Bulleids. They are by far and away the most user friendly.

The only American locos I've seen all had push-pulls but they were essentially of the GN style and had the continuing drawback of tending to open themselves.

[karlrestall]

Moving away slightly from locos, really the LNER didn't get a look in for much BR standards, apart from the afore mentioned goods stock. Locos were mainly LMS design as was BR MK1, corridor and open stock. However BR seemed to use LNER design for non-corridor stock i.e the suburban CL.

Regards

Karl

[Tom Quayle]

slightly converlouted way of looking at it but the LNER operated WD 2-10-0's designed by riddles some features must mave been carried over into the 9F don't hold me to it though